By Karen Armstrong, DAWN, 21 June 2002LONDON: On July 15 1099, the Crusaders from western Europe conquered Jerusalem, falling upon its Jewish and Muslim inhabitants like the avenging angels from the apocalypse. In a massacre that makes September 11 look puny in comparison, some 40,000 people were slaughtered in two days. A thriving, populous city had been transformed into a stinking charnel house. Yet in Europe, scholar monks hailed this crime against humanity as the greatest event in world history since the crucifixion of Christ. The Crusades destabilized the Near East, but made little impression on the Islamic world as a whole. In the West, however, they were crucial and formative. This was the period when western Christendom was beginning to recover from the long period of barbarism known as the Dark Ages, and the Crusades were the first cooperative act of the new Europe as she struggled back on to the international scene. We continue to talk about crusades for justice and peace, and praise a crusading journalist who is bravely uncovering some salutary truth, showing that at some unexamined level, crusading is still acceptable to the western soul. One of its most enduring legacies is a profound hatred of Islam. Before the Crusades, Europeans knew very little about Muslims. But after the conquest of Jerusalem, scholars began to cultivate a highly distorted portrait of Islam, and this Islamophobia, entwined with a chronic anti-Semitism, would become one of the received ideas of Europe. Christians must have been aware that their Crusades violated the spirit of the Gospels. Jesus had told his followers to love their enemies, not to exterminate them. This may be the reason why Christian scholars projected their anxiety on to the very people they had damaged. Thus it was, at a time when Christians were fighting brutal holy wars against Muslims in the Near East, that Islam became known in Europe as an inherently violent and intolerant faith, a religion of the sword. At a time when feudal Europe was riddled with hierarchy, Islam was presented as an anarchic religion that gave too much respect and freedom to menials, such as slaves and women. Christians could not see Islam as separate from themselves; it had become, as it were, their shadow-self, the opposite of everything that they thought they were or hoped they were not. In fact, the reality was very different. Islam, for example, is not the intolerant or violent religion of the western fantasy. Prophet Mohammed (PBUH) was forced to fight against the city of Makkah, which had vowed to exterminate the new Muslim community, but the Quran condemns aggressive warfare and permits only a war of self-defence. After five years of warfare, Prophet Mohammed (PBUH) turned to more peaceful methods and finally conquered Makkah by an ingenious campaign of non-violence. After the Prophet’s death, the Muslims established a vast empire that stretched from the Pyrenees to the Himalayas, but these wars of conquest were secular, and were only given a religious interpretation after the event. In the Islamic empire, Jews, Christians and Zoroastrians enjoyed religious freedom. This reflected the teaching of the Quran, which is a pluralistic scripture, affirmative of other traditions. Muslims are commanded by God to respect the people of the book, and reminded that they share the same beliefs and the same God. Prophet Mohammed (PBUH) was simply bringing the old religion of the Jews and the Christians to the Arabs, who had never had a prophet before. Constantly the Quran explains that Prophet Mohammed (PBUH) has not come to cancel out the revelations brought by prophets Adam, Abraham, Moses, or Jesus (peace be upon them all). Today, Muslim scholars have argued that had Prophet Mohammed (PBUH) known about the Buddhists and Hindus, the native Americans or the Australian Aborigines, the Quran would have endorsed their sages and shamans too, because all rightly guided religion comes from God. But so entrenched are the old mediaeval ideas that western people find it difficult to believe this. We continue to view Islam through the filter of our own needs and confusions. The question of women is a case in point. The Quran gives women legal rights of inheritance and divorce, which western women would not receive until the 19th century. y The Quran does permit men to take four wives, but this was not intended to pander to male lust, it was a matter of social welfare. It enabled widows and orphans to find a protector, without whom it was impossible for them to survive in the harsh conditions of 7th-century Arabia. There is nothing in the Quran about obligatory veiling for all women or their seclusion in harems. This only came into Islam about three generations after the Prophet’s death, under the influence of the Greeks of Christian Byzantium, who had long veiled and secluded their women in this way. Veiling was neither a central nor a universal practice; it was usually only upper-class women who wore the veil. But this changed during the colonial period. Colonialists such as Lord Cromer, the British consul general of Egypt from 1883 to 1907, like the Christian missionaries who came in their wake, professed a horror of veiling. Until Muslims abandoned this practice, Cromer argued in his monumental Modern Egypt, they could never advance in the modern world and needed the supervision of the West. Yet again, westerners were viewing Islam through their own muddled preconceptions. We can no longer afford this unbalanced view of Islam, which is damaging to ourselves as well as to Muslims. We should recall that during the 12th century, Muslim scholars and scientists of Spain restored to the West the classical learning it had lost during the Dark Ages. We should also remember that until 1492, Jews and Christians lived peaceably and productively together in Muslim Spain – a coexistence that was impossible elsewhere in Europe. At the beginning of the 20th century, nearly every single Muslim intellectual was in love with the west, admired its modern society, and campaigned for democracy and constitutional government in their own countries. Instead of seeing the West as their enemy, they recognized it as compatible with their own traditions. We should ask ourselves why we have lost this goodwill.-Dawn/The Guardian News Service. ————————–Islam Muslim Islamic banking finance insurance marriage clothing fashion software qurban Makkah & Madinah.

It is one of the great ironies of our world today that the very same headscarf revered as a sign of ‘holiness’ when worn for the purpose of showing the authority of man by Catholic Nuns, is reviled as a sign of ‘oppression’ when worn for the purpose of protection by Muslim women.Women in Islam Versus Women in the Judaeo-Christian TraditionThe Myth and The RealityBy: Sherif Abdel Azim, Ph.D.- Queens University, Kingston, Ontario, CanadaPART 15 – THE VEIL ?Finally, let us shed some light on what is considered in the West as the greatest symbol of women’s oppression and servitude, the veil or the head cover. Is it true that there is no such thing as the veil in the Judaeo-Christian tradition? Let us set the record straight. According to Rabbi Dr. Menachem M. Brayer (Professor of Biblical Literature at Yeshiva University) in his book, The Jewish woman in Rabbinic literature, it was the custom of Jewish women to go out in public with a head covering which, sometimes, even covered the whole face leaving one eye free. 76 He quotes some famous ancient Rabbis saying,”It is not like the daughters of Israel to walk out with heads uncovered” and “Cursed be the man who lets the hair of his wife be seen….a woman who exposes her hair for self-adornment brings poverty.” Rabbinic law forbids the recitation of blessings or prayers in the presence of a bareheaded married woman since uncovering the woman’s hair is considered “nudity”. 77 Dr. Brayer also mentions that “During the Tannaitic period the Jewish woman’s failure to cover her head was considered an affront to her modesty. When her head was uncovered she might be fined four hundred zuzim for this offense.” Dr. Brayer also explains that veil of the Jewish woman was not always considered a sign of modesty. Sometimes, the veil symbolized a state of distinction and luxury rather than modesty. The veil personified the dignity and superiority of noble women. It also represented a woman’s inaccessibility as a sanctified possession of her husband. 78The veil signified a woman’s self-respect and social status. Women of lower classes would often wear the veil to give the impression of a higher standing. The fact that the veil was the sign of nobility was the reason why prostitutes were not permitted to cover their hair in the old Jewish society. However, prostitutes often wore a special headscarf in order to look respectable. 79 Jewish women in Europe continued to wear veils until the nineteenth century when their lives became more intermingled with the surrounding secular culture. The external pressures of the European life in the nineteenth century forced many of them to go out bare-headed. Some Jewish women found it more convenient to replace their traditional veil with a wig as another form of hair covering. Today, most pious Jewish women do not cover their hair except in the synagogue. 80 Some of them, such as the Hasidic sects, still use the wig. 81What about the Christian tradition? It is well known that Catholic Nuns have been covering their heads for hundreds of years, but that is not all. St. Paul in the New Testament made some very interesting statements about the veil:”Now I want you to realize that the head of every man is Christ, and the head of the woman is man, and the head of Christ is God. Every man who prays or prophesies with his head covered dishonours his head. And every woman who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonours her head – it is just as though her head were shaved. If a woman does not cover her head, she should have her hair cut off; and if it is a disgrace for a woman to have her hair cut off or shaved off, she should cover her head. A man ought not to cover his head, since he is the image and glory of God; but the woman is the glory of man. For man did not come from woman, but woman from man; neither was man created for woman, but woman for man. For this reason, and because of the angels, the woman ought to have a sign of authority on her head” (I Corinthians 11:3-10).St. Paul’s rationale for veiling women is that the veil represents a sign of the authority of the man, who is the image and glory of God, over the woman who was created from and for man. St. Tertullian in his famous treatise ‘On The Veiling Of Virgins’ wrote, “Young women, you wear your veils out on the streets, so you should wear them in the church, you wear them when you are among strangers, then wear them among your brothers…” Among the Canon laws of the Catholic church today, there is a law that requires women to cover their heads in church. 82 Some Christian denominations, such as the Amish and the Mennonites for example, keep their women veiled to the present day. The reason for the veil, as offered by their Church leaders, is that “The head covering is a symbol of woman’s subjection to the man and to God”, which is the same logic introduced by St. Paul in the New Testament. 83From all the above evidence, it is obvious that Islam did not invent the head cover. However, Islam did endorse it. The Quran urges the believing men and women to lower their gaze and guard their modesty and then urges the believing women to extend their head covers to cover the neck and the bosom:”Say to the believing men that they should lower their gaze and guard their modesty……And say to the believing women that they should lower their gaze and guard their modesty; that they should not display their beauty and ornaments except what ordinarily appear thereof; that they should draw their veils over their bosoms….” (Quran 24:30,31).The Quran is quite clear that the veil is essential for modesty, but why is modesty important? The Quran is still clear:”O Prophet, tell your wives and daughters and the believing women that they should cast their outer garments over their bodies (when abroad) so that they should be known and not molested” (Quran 33:59).This is the whole point, modesty is prescribed to protect women from molestation or simply, modesty is protection. Thus, the only purpose of the veil in Islam is protection. The Islamic veil, unlike the veil of the Christian tradition, is not a sign of man’s authority over woman nor is it a sign of woman’s subjection to man. The Islamic veil, unlike the veil in the Jewish tradition, is not a sign of luxury and distinction of some noble married women. The Islamic veil is only a sign of modesty with the purpose of protecting women, all women. The Islamic philosophy is that it is always better to be safe than sorry. In fact, the Quran is so concerned with protecting women’s bodies and women’s reputation that a man who dares to falsely accuse a woman of unchastity will be severely punished:”And those who launch a charge against chaste women, and produce not four witnesses (to support their allegations)- Flog them with eighty stripes; and reject their evidence ever after: for such men are wicked transgressors” (Quran 24:4)Compare this strict Quranic attitude with the extremely lax punishment for rape in the Bible:” If a man happens to meet a virgin who is not pledged to be married and rapes her and they are discovered, he shall pay the girl’s father fifty shekels of silver. He must marry the girl, for he has violated her. He can never divorce her as long as he lives” (Deut. 22:28-30)One must ask a simple question here, who is really punished? The man who only paid a fine for rape, or the girl who is forced to marry the man who raped her and live with him until he dies? Another question that also should be asked is this: which is more protective of women, the Quranic strict attitude or the Biblical lax attitude?Some people, especially in the West, would tend to ridicule the whole argument of modesty for protection. Their argument is that the best protection is the spread of education, civilised behaviour, and self restraint. We would say: fine but not enough. If ‘civilization’ is enough protection, then why is it that women in North America dare not walk alone in a dark street – or even across an empty parking lot ? If Education is the solution, then why is it that a respected university like Queen’s has a ‘walk home service’ mainly for female students on campus? If self restraint is the answer, then why are cases of sexual harassment in the workplace reported on the news media every day? A sample of those accused of sexual harassment, in the last few years, includes: Navy officers, Managers, University professors, Senators, Supreme Court Justices, and the President of the United States! I could not believe my eyes when I read the following statistics, written in a pamphlet issued by the Dean of Women’s office at Queen’s University:In Canada, a woman is sexually assaulted every 6 minutes,1 in 3 women in Canada will be sexually assaulted at some time in their lives,1 in 4 women are at the risk of rape or attempted rape in her lifetime,1 in 8 women will be sexually assaulted while attending college or university, andA study found 60% of Canadian university-aged males said they would commit sexual assault if they were certain they wouldn’t get caught.Something is fundamentally wrong in the society we live in. A radical change in the society’s life style and culture is absolutely necessary. A culture of modesty is badly needed, modesty in dress, in speech, and in manners of both men and women. Otherwise, the grim statistics will grow even worse day after day and, unfortunately, women alone will be paying the price. Actually, we all suffer but as K. Gibran has said, “…for the person who receives the blows is not like the one who counts them.” 84 Therefore, a society like France which expels young women from schools because of their modest dress is, in the end, simply harming itself.It is one of the great ironies of our world today that the very same headscarf revered as a sign of ‘holiness’ when worn for the purpose of showing the authority of man by Catholic Nuns, is reviled as a sign of ‘oppression’ when worn for the purpose of protection by Muslim women.Courtesy: IslamiCity.com————————–Islam Muslim Islamic banking finance insurance marriage clothing fashion software qurban Makkah & Madinah.

Maulana Kalbe Sadiq , a well-known Shia scholar, has never shied away from courting controversy. His open advocacy of gender equality, literacy/property rights and family planning have won him much admiration among Muslim masses, especially the youth. The Maulana, who is also vice-president of All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB), spoke to Manjari Mishra:Your approach to Eid led to much confusion this year.Let me make it very clear, the Qur’an nowhere makes moon-sighting mandatory for fixing the Eid day. Deciding the issue by spotting the moon in the sky is a man-made tradition based on total misconception of the maulvis. I speak this with full responsibility.Muslims, as a community, lag behind others in human development indices. What do you think are the reasons?The failure to develop an academic culture and scientific temperament, I think, has been the bane of the Muslim community. Somehow these two issues have been consistently overlooked. We will remain where we are till the time people learn to give importance to these two issues.Who do you blame for the Muslims’ socio-economic backwardness?I totally blame the community and its leaders. It is neither rational nor just to point an accusing finger at the government every time. The government is not expected to do everything.The community must learn to take care of its problems. Unfortunately there is a paucity of true leaders among Muslims.What are your views on dowry and the practice of triple talaq?Do you know that banks in Iran don’t give loans to the bride’s family? Only the groom’s father or the groom himself can apply for a marriage loan. Islam has no place for dowry as the groom is expected to bear all marriage expenses from meher to maintenance.However, the real changes in marriage laws or celebrations will become effective the day the ulema set an example by following right traditions during family weddings. Fortunately, Shia community does not recognise triple talaq. It needs to be discouraged.Women have always been denied their rightful place in the name of Islam by orthodox maulvis. Is there a way out? No other religion is as gender friendly as Islam. It is the first religion that accorded equal pro-perty rights to women. According to Qur’an, if you offer namaz in a house where a female claimant has been denied her share, your prayers will not be answered. Similarly, Qur’an nowhere asks women to wear a veil. The stress is on modesty, not form.The law banning domestic violence, I would say, could bring about a major change to the plight of women. Though personally I think the punishment should have been more stringent. I have repeatedly maintained that until a woman gets due respect, a society can’t improve or prosper.[]Courtesy: the Times of India————————–Islam Muslim Islamic banking finance insurance marriage clothing fashion software qurban Makkah & Madinah.

Some Indonesian bloggers still talk about Eid ul-Fitr, or something to do with it, days after it passed for various reasons. Agus Setiawan at Blogonesia, for example, discusses the recent fatwa (religious decree) made recently by Nahdlatul Ulama (NU), the largest Indonesian Muslim organisation, in which it stated that watching gossip program on TV is considered haram or ‘unlawful’.

Agus Setiawan agrees to such fatwa on the ground that (a) 80 percent of Indonesians are Muslim and (b) that doing or listening to gossip news are clearly forbidden or highly discouraged in Islam. Besides, he observes, that watching such program is highly time-wasting and unproductive.

Most commenters in the particular post agree with his statement but Hartanto who thinks that gossip culture is as old as human existence; so let it be as human are made of angel and evil:
Biarkanlah gosip, yang sudah ada sejak manusia ada… Kalo gosip dilarang, kasian mahluk yg berasal dari api, susah cari celah…
Muhammad Ali, an Indonesian student in Honolulu, Hawaii in the meanwhile, enjoys the Eid celebration in what he calls as a ‘Multifaith Lebaran Feast’, as he celebrates Eid this year along with his brothers and sisters from other faiths. Says he:
For Muslims in Hawaii, a multifaith, multiethnic and multinational lebaran feast (concluding the fasting month of Ramadhan) is not something unusual. As you can see in the pictures, they are mostly Muslims, but some probably Catholics, Protestants, Hindus, Buddhist, Confucians, Agnostics, spiritualists, and possibly atheists too, joined the Indonesia’s lebaran feast on Saturday, October 28th, 2006, organized by PERMIAS-H.
He rightly observes that such practice of tolerance needs to be preserved and sustain for better understanding among people from different community:
This practice of a multifaith lebaran is truly enlightening. It is indeed revealing to the fact that most people have interacted with others regardless of religions, ethnicities, nationalities, etc, and the lebaran feast tradition seems to be a good opportunity for them to share sympathy and ask and give forgiveness, in case they have acted or said something hurting or insulting others, consciously or unconcsciously. People say “human errs”, but the best human is the one who asks and gives forgiveness and then try not to repeat the same errors.
Juwono Sudarsono, Indonesian Defence Minister, made “happy Eid” statement not through posting; rather he changes his blog skin appearance with brighter colour with a “Eid Mubarak” in the header.

As far as Juwono’s latest posting, he prefer to talk about his favorite topic i.e. politics in which he wrote about “Democracy, Poverty & Radical Politics.” An interesting post and a must-read one for those who are interested in Indonesia, politics and Islam in the largest Muslim country.