Ikram Hawramani's Blog, page 27

How to change corrupt cultures

How do we change something bad that is deeply practised in a culture? Like a culture that encourages corruption,graft,bribery and etc. Besides that,is it possible that countries that rarely get struck by natural disasters make its citizens lazy and indolent?

According to social scientists, individualism is highly correlated with non-corruption. Almost all of the world’s populations are becoming more individualistic, so this process is likely to help reduce corruption. Individualist citizens demand respect from their governments and public servants, and this is going to increase their opposition to corruption.

Speaking of Muslims specifically, besides the increase in individualism, the increase in literacy and education is also likely to help reduce corruption. Educated Muslims are going to appreciate Islam’s ideals more and will likely try harder to implement these ideals in their lives. Educating Muslims about Islam is therefore likely to greatly help in spreading its ideals.

As for natural disasters, that is entirely wrong. Western Europe might be the safest place in the world when it comes to natural disasters. Whether it is earthquakes, floods, or hurricanes, Western Europe rarely suffers any of these.

How to start studying philosophy

How do I start with philosophy? What is suitable for beginners?

There are many beginners’ books that you can start with, such as:

Philosophy: A Very Short IntroductionAn Intelligent Person’s Guide to PhilosophyA Short History of Modern Philosophy: From Descartes to Wittgenstein

Hijabis, Niqabis, and Religious Liberties in the Secular State

When I was fourteen, my new geometry teacher paused while taking attendance on the first day of class to inform me that she didn’t allow hats in the classroom. “We’ll have to do something about that,” she added, referring to my headscarf.

Sitting at my desk in the back, I gaped like she’d slapped me, while she easily moved onto the next student. “Did you hear her?” I asked my seatmates indignantly, but I guess they chose not to hear me either, because none of them reacted, and class went on that day like math was all that mattered. The teacher ultimately decided to make me write an essay about why I wear the hijab to prove my commitment. Apparently dressing like a nun every day at my public high school wasn’t commitment enough.

I’ve been wearing the hijab since age eleven, a personal decision that took me a lot of pleading my parents to get permission to make at such a young age, and since age eleven, I have been exposed to the overwhelming extent of misunderstanding folks in the West have about the hijab. For the past fourteen years, I’ve had friends express their disapproval of the way I dress, men yell at me on the streets of Boston at night, and somehow worst of all, fellow Muslims completely miss the point of the hijab as they speak out or strive against it in a misguided attempt to assimilate into the West.

Still, my experiences as a hijabi in America have been largely positive, alhamdulillah; for every unpleasant confrontation, I’ve been blessed with so many supportive friends, strangers, and fellow sisters and brothers in Islam. I have also been afforded that great Islamic privilege that is the purpose of the hijab: control over my body and image, the reclaiming of my worth from the objectifying gaze of entitled men, that essential empowerment that modesty offers women. And as grateful as I am for my hijab, I am grateful I live in a place where people are open-minded enough to accept my uncommon attire, where I can talk about it and be met with respect and even enthusiasm. As problematic as the American government’s treatment of Muslims has been, there could be more hostile places for a Muslim to call home.

Places like Quebec.

As the daughter of Iraqi immigrants and as a Muslim woman who has grown up in America during the War on Terror, I believe pressuring minorities to assimilate is a form of cultural oppression, and in light of Quebec’s recent ruling to ban various public servants from wearing “religious symbols,” I feel compelled to attempt yet again, as has been my life’s work, to fight for the beautiful philosophy that is the hijab.

*

Let’s examine the ruling in question, the so-called “religious symbols” ban that clearly targets hijabis, of whom there are many in Quebec. Bill 21 was passed on June 17 in an effort to “respect the secularity of the state,” and it applies to a variety of government employees from teachers to police officers. The separation of church and state is meant to prevent the government from enforcing religious laws within a population of diverse beliefs; ironically, preventing citizens employed by the state from practicing their own faith achieves essentially the opposite, as it is literally the forceful imposition of legislators’ beliefs on their citizens. Of course, secularism is in itself a belief, and any stance, when imposed on individuals, becomes an authoritarian one. Since the bill impacts the ability of individuals to practice their religion, it would seem that the interpretation of a secular state according to the government of Quebec is not merely a state that is not associated with any religion, but rather a state whose employees are not associated with any religion. This refusal to distinguish between the state and the people who work for it is at the heart of the controversy. It’s the source of the human rights violation.

Beyond the flawed premise of the bill, it’s also important to push back against its categorization of the hijab as a religious symbol on par with a cross. I sometimes like to wear a pendant around my neck that has an Arabic inscription of God’s name. This piece of religious jewelry could be considered the Muslim version of wearing a Christian cross; the hijab, however, is not. For legislators to place the hijab into the same category as a cross necklace is unacceptably ignorant or else dismissive of the hijab, which Islam requires every woman to wear.

Though I think even banning a cross necklace is too restrictive on an individual’s personal freedoms, I would remove my pendant, a mere accessory, with no issue if I really had to, but my hijab? I’d sooner die. Since the hijab is part of a Muslim woman’s modesty, asking her to take it off is not unlike asking a woman to disrobe; in fact, it is exactly that. While the hijab is indeed a visible indicator of a woman’s Islam, classifying it as a religious symbol is as reductive as referring to a five-star meal as edible. The hijab is the essence of many Muslim women’s approach to life, and to not allow them to wear one at work is to put them out of a job.

But horrifyingly enough, we have yet to discuss an even more loathsome aspect of Bill 21: the denial of public services for people wearing face coverings. Under this increasingly appalling new ruling, Muslim women wearing the niqab are no longer entitled to receive health care or use public transportation. The inability to regard women as worthy of such basic human rights unless they can be seen has a disturbing implication: they are only worth as much as their appearance. Admittedly, a covered face makes a person harder to identify, and the government justifies the niqab ban for security purposes, but I’ve witnessed niqabis at the airport lifting up their face covering for officers with no problem. The manner and extent to which they are singled out in this bill is an evident display of French Canadian officials’ distaste for the cloth. No doubt many supporters of the bill, owing to their ignorance of a widely misunderstood topic, consider the niqab to be an affront to feminism. But legislation enforcing a dress code upon a woman’s life is about as anti-feminist as a law can get, and it’s a delusional man who believes that threatening to withhold a woman’s rights and quarantining from society any woman who doesn’t dress to his approval could ever be framed as feminist.

The part of the bill about niqabis is additionally disturbing because it extends the application of its extremist secular policies from public servants to civilians, so the already paper thin argument that the bill is simply enacting the separation of church and state falls apart altogether, as civilians by no stretch of the imagination represent the state. The concept of the separation of church and state exists not to make practicing one’s faith illegal or impossible, but to prevent faith from getting involved in legislation, which citizens are compelled to follow. Well, the legislators of Quebec clearly have a belief system of their own, one they have no qualms about threading through their laws to suppress the civilians with whom they disagree. If the ban of “religious symbols” wasn’t obvious enough, the face covering rule speaks louder than diplomatic wording ever could: Bill 21 is nothing short of a big “screw you” from the Canadian government to its Muslim citizens.

*

We shouldn’t have to explain ourselves or justify what we wear to get “permission” for doing so, yet here we are. It’s a familiar disappointment, but to Muslims reading these words and to minorities in general and those who stand with us, I say: don’t mind the hateful. Aim for the ignorant, and let peaceful, informative outreach be your weapon. Recently, I found the letter I’d written over ten years ago for my geometry teacher, simply titled “My Reasons”:

“[Teacher], I don’t wear my head covering to be cool or rebellious. I don’t wear it because somebody ordered me to. I don’t wear it to be different or to stand out. I wear my veil because God asks this of me…

I would like to be valued for more than just my beauty. I’ve found that [when I cover up], the part of me that people remember and enjoy is my talkativeness (sometimes that bothers them, though), my sense of humor, my intelligence, my kindness, and other positive assets I possess…

Please understand that I don’t mean to be rude when I say that I will take my veil off for no one. And my intentions are pure. It’s not like I wear it because it’s the latest fashion. I used to have nightmares of showing up at school naked… But soon after the start of sixth grade I began to have nightmares of being at school without my veil. Those silly bad dreams actually mean a lot to me now, since they are a sign that wearing a hijab has become a part of me.”

After I turned in my essay, my teacher didn’t give me any more trouble. I realize the government of Quebec is a steeper mountain to summit. My sisters, I ask Allah to grant you the strength to overcome the bullies who wield temporary authority over you. May you never have to compromise, or choose between your faith and your livelihood. But if you do, then above all else, I pray you never feel compelled to remove your hijab, that you wear it proudly, and that more of you put it on as a result of this ruling, just as the Christchurch shooter whose goal was to spread hate lead so many to convert to Islam. I write these words lovingly, from a Muslim woman to the West, the only world I’ve known as home: stop telling us how to dress. Don’t waste your breath.

On fearing loss of faith in a non-Muslim country

Assalamualaykum. I’m a bit worried now. I’m applying for an internship in a non-muslim country. Even I already lived there for a year, but the worries still there. It’s all about how can I survive as a Muslim in a secular society who tend to think logically about everything. I used to hear a question like, why you and your friend have a different way to practice Islam? She doesn’t wear hijab but you do. Etc I lost my words to explain. I also don’t want to judge anyone tho. Do u have any advice?

Alaikumassalam wa rahmatullah,

Throughout life we get thousands of chances to become misguided, and thousands of chances to go back to Islam and hold firm to it. So if your heart is pure and if you constantly ask God for guidance, then He will guide you. There is no need to worry about suddenly becoming cut off from Islam. That does not happen. When someone is distanced from Islam, it is because they chose that again and again for years on end.

If you have trouble answering some questions about Islam, simply increase your knowledge by reading more. Research the topics people ask you about so that you can answer them next time.

There is nothing dangerous to Islam about people thinking logically. I am an extreme rationalist, empiricist and skeptic myself, I constantly question things, and since my childhood I have never had a servile respect for figures of authority. If Islam is truly from God then it must stand up to all criticisms and all challenges. And that is why I continue to hold on to Islam. I have read more science books than most atheists. My favorite novelist is Terry Pratchett, an atheist, and I have read 40 novels by him, and I continue to be completely devoted to Islam.

So increase your knowledge, and realize that God does not abandon the believer. Whenever something troubles you, ask God for guidance and He will guide you one way or another.

And when My servants ask you about Me, I Am near; I answer the call of the caller when he calls on Me. So let them answer Me, and have faith in Me, that they may be rightly guided. (The Quran, verse 2:186)

And your Lord has said, “Call on Me, and I will respond to you.” (From the Quran, verse 40:60)

Best wishes.

Misquoting Muhammad: The Challenge and Choices of Interpreting the Prophet’s Legacy (Book Review)

Get it on Amazon

Jonathan A. C. Brown is a well-known American scholar of Islamic Studies, who is currently an associate professor at Georgetown University’s Edmund A. Walsh School of Foreign Service.

He has written several books, related to Islam: Slavery in Islam, Hadith: Muhammad’s Legacy in the Medieval and Modern World, Muhammad: A Very Short Introduction, The Canonization of al-Bukhari and Muslim, and Misquoting Muhammad: The Challenge and Choices of Interpreting the Prophet’s Legacy (Oneworld Publications, 2014), which is the subject of the present article.

The book tries to explain in a simple way the rich intellectual legacy of Islam. Although he focuses more in the Sunni tradition, as being an Islamic majority that possesses a wide variety of sources and explanations for those interested to study it, he was still able to mention the view from other groups like Shias and Sufis.

Brown recounts history: from traditional scholars scattered throughout the Muslims shortly after the demise of the Prophet Muhammad PBUH, to recent events, like the coup d’etat that took place in Egypt in 2011.
He also focuses on the main controversial aspects of Islam by discussing how they originated and providing enough material to ponder their doubted or criticized validity:

MartyrdomWomen as rulers of statesThe sources of knowledge on which laws are basedHadiths, their importance for interpreting the Quran and their chains of narratorsThe origin of the madhabs or schools of thoughtReason as a source of knowledgeThe Quran as a revelation from God compared with other monotheistic scripturesThe relationship between Muslims and non-Muslims, including the often cited and controversial verse of the Quran that supposedly allows the killing of unbelieversJihadMarriage with small girlsThe conflict between Sunni and Shiite IslamHonor killingsThe death penalty for apostasyFabrications by people and the manipulation of scripture to attain personal goals that are in no way related to the true objective of the religion.

The author explores these controversies from many points of view without leaving a school of thought aside, and even includes a Western perspective in each of them.

The comparison and contrast between the Quran and the Bible gives a hint to the reader of the manipulations involved with this issue; religion is subjected to the interests of those in power, who can change, add, or hide things if needed to make “legal” their actions. The Ottoman empire is an example of this, where certain rules pretended to legalize things explicitly forbidden in Islam like drinking alcohol, and even promiscuous behavior. In Christianity, this has been evidenced as well, when the Roman Catholic Church removed books from the Old Testament, and the surprising fact that the concept of the Trinity was not mentioned in the original versions of the Books of the Bible.

The most controversial section is in chapter 4, “Sex with little girls: interpreting scripture amid changing norms,” that deals with one of the most difficult topic in Islam to deal with, even for Muslim scholars: the marriage of the Prophet Muhammad SAWS when he was 50 years old to Aisha, who was said to be approximately 10 years old. The author, to explain this issue, mentions that economic difficulties inflict this type of marriage, taking into account, at the same time, that it is not widely accepted in Muslim countries. Sometimes this type of marriages can also be found around the world without having the same harsh media coverage that has existed regarding the Muslim case. Countries like India, the United Kingdom, and even in the USA, “in some US states, such as Georgia, the legal age of consent for woman was as low as ten well into the twentieth century.”

It should be noted that respected scholars have challenged the traditionally accepted age of Aisha based on a re-analysis of the sources, as detailed in our essay: A Hadith Scholar Presents New Evidence that Aisha was Near 18 the Day of Her Marriage to the Prophet Muhammad.

Brown mentions the dilemma experienced by scholars regarding these controversial issues. He asserts that the case of this controversial marriage, which may have been acceptable according to the norms of 1400 years ago, should not be judged according to the views and beliefs of the 19th and 20th centuries.

But the objective of the author is by no means to increase the controversy: rather he seems to try to reconcile the misinformation that we have in the West towards Islam, thus he uses comparisons in order to help the reader understand the background of these issues, the misunderstandings to which it has been victim (in some cases due to our own scholars) and the complexity of language that can bring wrong translations of the original texts in Arabic.

The book, after analyzing all these aspects in the light of the Quran, the Sunna, the opinions of scholars and other views, ends by talking about the issue of lying for noble causes, especially as it related to the use of unauthentic narrations by preachers who believe that the noble teachings present in this narrations outweigh the fact that may have been entirely fabricated. Brown discusses the ethical issues surrounding changing sayings or statements in order to accommodate them to a specific reality or to avoid aversion from people that lack the knowledge needed to understand it. Brown states,

A population that believes stories merely because they are useful or warm the heart places expedience toward an end above a commitment to demonstrable truth as a common reference meaningful to all individuals regardless of their religious beliefs. A community that accepts Noble Lying wholeheartedly is likely to drift into gullibility, uncritical of what it is told and vulnerable to manipulation.

Misquoting Muhammad is a good resource for understanding the historical background of issues that can be subjected to misunderstandings and tergiversations. Without telling the reader what to think, it provides them with the necessary tools to see the two sides of the issue and then leaves the conclusion to the reader.

Brown strives to make the concepts clear: the comparison of both worlds; Eastern and Western, enables wider understanding. As such, this book is a good present to those who try to understand the essence of Islam and the potential misunderstandings that surround it.

Can a Muslim woman leave her house without the permission of her husband?

Assalumalaikum Can a woman leave her house without the permission of her husband? Is the Hadith forbidding this authentic?

The Islamic family functions according to the principle of qiwāma, which refers to the fact that the husband is the ultimate authority in the household. Women are free to seek divorce or threaten divorce, but while remaining married to a man, they are required to respect the fact he is the chief of the household. If her husband is a tyrant and refuses to let her leave the house, she should seek the help of her family, his family, religious authorities, or should threaten divorce. In Islam the man and the woman are equal as humans and have equal human rights. Neither is allowed to oppress the other. The husband’s higher authority is similar to a CEO’s authority over his employees. He does not consider him employees lesser humans, he knows they are his equals when it comes to their human rights, but he is given a higher authority so that the business can function more effectively.

This is merely the theoretical framework. In the real world, Muslim husbands and wives, just like Western couples, agree with each other on what is acceptable behavior and what is not. So regarding your specific question, the husband’s permission does not mean that she should ask him whether she can go out every time she wants to (like a school child in a classroom). It means that her activities should be with the general knowledge and approval of her husband. So if the husband accepts the fact that she usually goes out for grocery shopping, or for work, or for medical appointments, then his acceptance is the “permission” that is meant.

So in the real world things are just like any other marriage. Needing her husband’s permission simply means that she should not do things that he finds unacceptable. She should not randomly go to a concert without first finding out whether her husband agrees with her going to that concert. But when it comes to ordinary daily activities, then she can do whatever is normal without requiring her husband’s specific approval, since he knows about these activities and approves of them.

References:

Fatwa from the European Council for Fatwa and Research (Arabic PDF)

Is it permissible for a woman to be the head of state in Islam?

Assalamualaikum I wanted to know if it is permissible for a Muslim woman to be the head of an Islamic state. Many people quote a Hadith from Abu Bakrah, one of the companions of the Prophet (PBUH) ,that indicates it is not permissible.Is that Hadith authentic?

Alaikumassalam wa rahmatullah,

There are different opinions on this question. The highly respected scholars Muhammad al-Ghazali and Yusuf al-Qaradawi believe that it is permissible for women to be leaders of state and consider the evidence of the Quran (which portrays the Queen of Sheba as a good leader) to be more important than the evidence of hadith.

The hadith of Abu Bakra that you referred to is the following:

During the battle of Al-Jamal, Allah benefited me with a Word (I heard from the Prophet). When the Prophet heard the news that the people of the Persia had made the daughter of Khosrau their Queen (ruler), he said, "Never will succeed such a nation as makes a woman their ruler."

Sahih al-Bukhari 7099

I decided to conduct a study of all existing chains of this hadith to find out its level of authenticity based on my hadith verification methodology. Below is a diagram of the result:

The result of my computations is that this hadith has a 24.3% authenticity score, which makes it fall below the 30% needed for ṣaḥīḥ. This means that this is a relatively low-quality hadith whose authenticity is inherently doubtful (even without this computation, all hadiths that come from a single companion, such as this one, are inherently doubtful). Therefore this hadith has no power to form the basis of judgment on such an important issue.

The opinions of al-Ghazali and al-Qaradawi is therefore to be preferred. Since we do not have any strong evidence against the leadership of women as heads of state in the Quran or Sunna, the matter is left to the judgment of the people themselves.

References:

Article that mentions al-Qaradawi’s opinion (Arabic PDF)

Is it forbidden to sleep after the asr prayer?

Assalamualaikum brother. Is it forbidden to sleep after salat al ‘asr صلاة العصر ? Is there any hadits?

Alaikumassalam wa rahmatullah,

There is no authentic evidence that sleeping after the asr prayer is forbidden or disliked. Some of the early scholars disliked it, but they explained it based on their own reasoning, not based on Quranic or hadith evidence.

References:

Fatwa from the Qatari Fatwa Authority (Arabic PDF)

Can a woman take off the hijab for an online suitor?

Salam alaikum. Brother, what are your thoughts on a man who found a woman in an online dating site, whom wants to get to know of her, felt good connection after few conversations because they have lots in common, but asks her to take off her hijab before any agreements for marriage? He didn't force her, but he asked if she might consider his request. This happens to me and I don't know what to do, except sending you this question. Thank you for your time.

Alaikumassalam wa rahmatullah,

It is permissible for a woman to take off the hijab for a suitor. However, to protect her dignity this should be done with the permission and involvement of her family, although according to a fatwa by the Qatari Fatwa Authority the permission of her family is not technically required, while Ibn Baz (representing a Salafi opinion) says that it should not be done in private, meaning that a family member must be present. The taking off of the hijab should only be done once, and when the man has seen her, she must continue to wear the hijab before him afterwards.

As for how much of the body she can show, there is some disagreement among the scholars, but the common opinion appears to be that she can show him what she can show to her own family members (maḥrams).

References:

Fatwa from the Qatari Fatwa Authority (Arabic PDF)Fatwa from Ibn Baz (Arabic PDF)

Is it permissible for Syeds to marry non-Syeds?

Assalamualaikum There are many people in South Asia who claim to be Syeds. Whether this claim is true or not is a different thing, but some of them say that it is haraam for a female Syed to marry a non-Syed boy. They say that Syed girls have the status of mothers (and according to some, sisters) of non-Syeds. I believe that Islam doesn't accept caste-based discrimination, but I want proofs from the Quran and Sahih Hadith to correct them.

Alaikumassalam wa rahmatullah,

That has no basis in Islam. Syeds claim descent from the grandsons of the Prophet PBUH, and we know that the daughters of these grandsons married people unrelated to the Prophet’s family PBUH. If that was acceptable for them, it should be acceptable for all descendants of the Prophet PBUH. There is nothing in the Quran or Sunna that prevents the descendants of the Prophet PBUH from marrying non-descendants.