51. The false scholar: a muezzin whose fingers are stuck.

muezzin : One who is calling Azhan loudly, clearly, and usually in a beautiful voice.

One simple interpretation: a sign of a false scholar is one who does not listen but speaks a lot.

There are different levels in every possible thing, and in this as well. Before our ego gets carried away we should realize that this contention should not imply that the scholars need to take orders from laymen, like you or I.

Yes, indeed, above every knower… there is a knower. So everyone accomplished is listening to someone in one way or another.

The true Wali’s and scholars eventually begin to hear completely differently than what we may expect, they begin to watch and listen with the hearts ear. When one achieves that… well, MashaAllah.

At the same time we need to realize where it is we stand, and whether we are listeners or talkers. Just a few lessons I took from this contention.

Continuation of my Contentions Series.

Link to Sheykh Abd al Hakim Murad’s Contentions part 1

50. The recipe for chaos: the qat‘i grows until the zanni is almost abolished.

Key Terms:

qat’i = definitive
zanni = speculative

An interesting contention considering some of the concerns towards what we call “Traditional Islam” presented by some of our more liberal minds.

I think this contention is another example of a sentiment that exists well within the traditional understanding of Islam: literalism and definitiveness is something that when applied to the exclusion of an interpretive tradition, leads to disaster.

One of the key aspects of our understanding of all aspects of the religion, the Sacred Law, and the science of spirituality is the possibility to find multiple conclusions on subjects within a certain boundary.

Of course, the need for the qat’i is just as important as the zanni. Without definitiveness in certain matters, the religion becomes completely liquid, and unable to assume the responsibilities of managing the lives of people who are under the control of their own nafs.

The nafs is a tricky thing, at one level it wants to find a definitiveness to everything. In Islam this essentially means finding a meaning to something and deciding why it alone can be correct to the exclusion of all other possibilities. This approach creates an inflexible person. The shaykh above interestingly describes this very rigid, yet stable situation as “chaotic”, and it is indeed the case.

If more than one person takes this rigid approach and reaches different conclusions we suddenly achieve total chaos, bickering, and eventually violence. On the other hand, an understanding that some things are speculative in nature opens us to the possibility that the “other” may just be correct as well.

At the same time, it is probably an important reminder that the nafs at another level wants to find a speculitive nature in every possible thing, and therefore allowing it the freedom to pick-and-choose a religion much like Build-A-Bear.

49. Literalism is the laziness that masquerades as courage.

My Interpretation:
The literalists of our community are often those that are proud of their literalist interpretation. They hold that there is nothing that can bring them closer to Allah than their literalist behavior and interpretations. In fact, since it seems so extraordinarily ‘out-of-place’ in regular society, they are able to wear this literalism as a badge of courage. They proclaim, if not silently, “We are a beacon of what Allah desires for us, and we have faired through hardship due to our choices to follow Allah alone.”

“Mashahallah” we all say when they pass by, but what the Sheykh is pointing out here is that such literalism is easy. It is infinitely more easier to believe that one can toss aside deep meanings and begin to interpret Islam through the narrow lense of literalism.

Actually, it is an elevation of ones intellect if one is able to grasp the concept that there is more to a story than its apparant meaning, even if we are not able to determine that hidden meaning on our own.

Instead of viewing literalism as a badge of courage, it really is a badge of foreit. Where we decide to abandon additional thought on any subject, it is our own minds which have shrunk.

Shrunk back, most probably, from the fear of what the hidden could mean to us.

48. Text without context is pretext. ‘He withdraws knowledge by withdrawing the ulema.’

Definition:
pretext: something serving to conceal plans; a fictitious reason that is concocted in order to conceal the real reason

Interpretation:

Masha’allah!

We all know today the movement dedicated to the belittlement of the ulema of Ahl ul Sunnah Wa’l Jamma’. Frankly, many Muslims today continue to be unaware of the names of the greatest of scholars of our history.

Sure, it certainly is an appealing argument of theirs. “Why do you pray as you do? I have a hadith here which says this, or a hadith here which says that. Now, come, pray like me and forget what your father taught you, and what his father taught him.”

This is invariably followed by quoting some ayat directed towards the kuffar and applying it to Muslims. These are ayats which we are all familiar with, which deride the Kuffar for blindly following in their father’s footsteps.

This is an interesting tactic, and it works -so- very well.

That is, until one begins to contemplate on a few matters. First and foremost, a Muslim father’s, and his father’s father source of knowledge is directly available. And quite unlike the Kuffar, it is firmly grounded in Quran and Sunnah, regardless of whatever hadith the reformers have found and interpreted to support their personal opinion.

If one cares to study and determine it, the sources of fiqh are quite detailed in their explanations on all aspects of religious ritual and beyond. These detailed fiqh manuals which the knowledgable ulema taught to our forefathers still exist to this day. While these books may not be easily accessible to you, and the author’s names unmentioned in your household, nevertheless they exist and existed… Fortunately for us, these sciences continue today with those who spend their lives in the ulema’s tradition of excellence.

The key point that I derive from this Contention is that the usage of text’s (Quran, Hadith), in this above manner, without the context of the sciences and knowledge of the great personalities within the study of Sacred Knowledge, becomes merely a means to conceal one’s own personal desires and agenda under the cloak of religion.

The second part is under quotes, though I could not find the direct reference to it. If anyone can help me with that it would be appreciated.

The quote reinforces the idea expressed by the previous sentence since it associates knowledge, not with the source texts, but with the people have the capacity to memorize, understand, and apply the source texts.

Link to Sheykh Abd al Hakim Murad’s Contentions part 1

47. The dietary laws are an opportunity to fast.

The dietary laws we ‘struggle’ with include: not eating pork, not consuming alcohol, eating Zabihah, etc. Often, we may begin discussing with others, ‘why’ we follow these dietary restrictions.

I’m a firm adherent to the concept that trying to explain the ‘why’ of a command which has come from Allah, Most High is near sacrilegious. This is quite clear when one has a very clear sense of tauheed, since one can understand that to attempt to fit God’s purpose into a neat little box of human rationality is literally impossible. It either involves elevating our minds to the level of the Divine, or bringing down the Divine’s level to our own. Both of which are concepts that I am not too keen on.

What the Sheykh does here is give us an additional perspective. Why do we fast? Like I discussed in the Ramadan posts, we are fasting to follow His Command, and by doing so earn favor from Allah. Although we all love Ramadan for all of its opportunities to gather blessings and forgiveness, we should also realize that some of our standard dietary laws also exist as a form of fasting.

We say “no” to that cheeseburger, not because there is some deep social consequence to eating it, but because, in a way, we are always fasting now, in this life. We are fasting from certain things to earn the same type of favor and blessings that we try to achieve when we fast from food completely.

The way that the Sheykh is reminding us to look at dietary laws is not as a chain of restrictions, but rather a chain of opportunities.

Link to Sheykh Abd al Hakim Murad’s Contentions part 1

46. In the measure that we accept the Prayer it is accepted by God.

Interpretation:

I was a bit put-off by the use of the term “In the measure that”. For me, the best way to understand it was “In as much as”, so to be more simpler version of the Contention might mean:

“Prayer is accepted by God as much as we accept the Prayer”

Certainly, from the outward fiqhi sense, if we meet our obligations the prayer should be accepted.

So how can we ‘accept the Prayer’, and what does it mean to ‘measure’ our acceptance of it? It seems that this is not ‘acceptance’ in its external meaning, but rather ‘acceptance’ similar to how one might accept their destiny: it has different levels.

I think this comes down to the spirit of Salat, where we start to come to terms with our understanding of the ritual prayer.

While Salat is a uniquely distinguishing factor for all the Muslims, each Muslim approaches prayer very differently.

For some, Salat is something generally ignored, practiced occasionally due to social circumstance. For others, it is accepted as a practiced burden. And yet for others it is a unique opportunity to have an intimate relationship with God. I am sure there are even more categories than that, but this is a good way to begin.

What the Sheykh seems to be saying is that it is helpful to consider how you view your prayer in determining the worth of that prayer in the sight of Allah, Most High.

In other words, if you view prayer as a burden to be fullfilled, well, it may just be that your reward will be handed to you with the same consideration, just fullfilling a contract of obligation and reward. On the other hand, if you treat prayer as something special, well you may find you are specially treated as well.

I can say with confidence that the Sunnipath classes on the Essentials of Hanafi Fiqh have been extremely helpful for me to develop my own relationship with Salat. Knowing many of the details of fiqh of Salat help in creating a sincere understanding on how to fullfill the obligation, and how to take it a step further from obligation to opportunity (and beyond).

The “Spirit of the Sunnah” Sunnipath class may be even better in this regard!

45. Salat is the zakat of time.

Salat – Muslim ritual prayer

Zakat- Muslim ritual, yearly charity

Interpretation:

Pretty straightforward, in my opinion. Zakat is a form of sacrifice, a sacrifice of ones wealth for charity, for the sake of God.

Salat, is in the same way, a sacrifice from ones time, for the sake of God.

—

Update: I thought this comment deserved a bump onto the main text.

Abu’l `Ula al-Hindi writes:

The root of zakat is purification… prayer is the purification of the moments of one’s life…

“Prayer prevents lewdity and wrong…”

44. Have Christianity and Islam exchanged views of each other?

One thing to keep in mind here is that the Sheykh mentions “Christianity” and “Islam” having ‘views’ of each other, rather than Christians and Muslims. I can’t wrap my head around what that means exactly, if anything.

So one way to approach this contention is to think of it in terms of views of each group towards each other. To understand this contention I think it’s best to write down how both groups viewed each other early on and then consider how they view each other today.

This article by Soumayya Ghannoushi, “Western view of Islam: A troubled history” is useful in this respect:

She writes:

To medieval Christianity, Islam was the point of intersection of all these categories, the Other par excellence: a corrupted Judaism, perverted Christianity, and wild natural paganism all at once, both the enemy within and without
…
To the reformists, Islam was synonymous with the whole deviation and moral corruption of the papacy: pride, greed, violence and lust for power and possession. But in order to demonize the new ideas of its enemies, who were rapidly growing in popularity, the Roman Catholic Church could not find a worse charge than Muhammadism.

Now that the Muslims are in a much less imposing position, it seems that the Sheykh’s contention rings true. The attributes of pride, greed, violence, and lust for power and possesion have all been recalled within Muslim hearts when thinking of Christiandom. This is especially in light of the war in Iraq and other actions taken to protect oil interests.

We now need to determine what was the view of Muslims towards Christianity. Without having any direct sources in this subject, I would throw out some suppositions. I believe the early Muslim view towards medieval Christianity would have been one of “lacking enlightenment”, “misguided due to error”, “backwards”.

This is certainly a view which has exchanged positions as well.

Feel free to share other ideas in this regard.

Link to Sheykh Abd al Hakim Murad’s Contentions part 1.

43. Our God is too generous to require an ‘economy of salvation’

From The History of Christian Thought by Paul Tillich

“There is an economy of salvation, the building of the different periods which finally led to the new man. This idea of the new man, or new creature, or new being, as the aim of the history of salvation, is an important contribution of these theologians.

This economy, this periodic preparation, is already present in the Old Testament. So Ignatius says: “Judaism has believed towards Christianity.” Here again we have the relationship towards fulfillment. The Christ, the new man, has appeared. He is perfect. The disruptedness of the old man is overcome and death is dissolved. This leads to Christology.”

Interpretation:
The main idea that is being put forth here is that while Islam believes Allah sent Messengers of importance and weight to guide all of mankind, the ‘economy of salvation’ of the Christians holds that none of that was relevant to salvation until Jesus (AS) came.

Someone holding to the belief of the ‘economy of salvation’ believes the difference between people born before Christ and those after Christ is, in a way, the similar to people born poor and those born wealthy in today’s economy.

Sheykh Abdal Hakim puts, as evidence against this concept, God’s generosity, in which there are no poor and no wealthy. Guidance is provided to all levels of humanity (part of it being innate), and is not temporally bound by the appearance of a certain Prophet. For individuals who were never provided explicit guidance, forgiveness still reaches them.

Link to Sheykh Abd al Hakim Murad’s Contentions part 1.

42. Juda-yi Ism: the absolutizing of a people.
Edom: the absolutizing of a person.
Islam: the absolutizing of God.

First it is important to realize what the Sheykh mean by “absolutizing”. Something “absolute” is defined in certain terms, it is not changing in its nature. To apply it to verb such as ‘absolutizing’, we can take ‘absolutizing’ to mean to ‘make absolute, to define certainly’.

Next we have to look at the terms used:

Juda-yi Ism: the absolutizing of a people
Juda-yi Ism – This is a play on the word of Judaism. But what is the Sheykh hinting at here by changing its spelling/organization? What the Sheykh has done here is emphasize the fact that Judaism is a religion of a people, as Juda references an ancient kingdom in which Jerusalem was its center. In this way the Sheykh is drawing a connection between Judaism as a religion of a people of the kingdom of Juda.

This part of the contention is telling us that Judaism has an emphasis on a people and an identity, and is centered around that fact.

Edom: the absolutizing of a person.
Edom – What the Sheykh swiftly does here is bring Jesus (AS) to the realm of manhood, in a two ways.

1) In the Old Testament Edom was another name for Esau (Similar sounding to Isa(AS)), the brother of Jacob.

2) According to some forms of Christianity and modern scholars, another Jacob was the brother of Jesus (AS)

So [Torah] Edom -> [Torah] Esau -> brother of [Torah] Jacob
and [New Testament] Jacob brother of -> Isa(AS) -> pronounce as Esau -> Edom

All this fancy connection does is firmly establish that Isa (AS) was certainly a man who even had a brother.

This second part is saying that Christianity’s focus is that of a man.

Islam: the absolutizing of God

I think this one speaks for itself!

Link to Sheykh Abd al Hakim Murad’s Contentions part 1.

41. The liberal theory of religion is homeopathic. (The more you water it down, the stronger it will become.)

Interpretation:

I first viewed this contention differently than I do now. First it made me think that the Sheykh was saying something to the extent of “reacting to liberalism is making Islam stronger”, but I have since changed my mind and below is my reasoning why.

First we must understand what is meant by “the liberal theory of religion”.

In terms of religion liberalism is defined as: the movement away from traditional orthodoxy often in an attempt to harmonize biblical teachings with science, humanism, or other secular fields. Liberal forms of religion are often viewed as “watered down”, similar to what the Sheykh is saying up above.

Next, I somewhat understood homeopathy as a “natural” healing form of medicine, but to my surprise I found that is not the case:

“Contemporary Western homeopathic medicine, based on the work of the German physician and chemist Samuel Hahnemann some 200 years ago, aims to stimulate the individual’s innate healing processes through the administration of minute “homeopathic” dilutions of specific remedies. Derived from the Greek homeo, meaning same, and pathos, meaning suffering, homeopathy essentially treats “like with like”. The patient describes his or her symptoms in detail, with equal emphasis placed on both physical and psychological symptoms. The practitioner then prescribes very small, nontoxic doses of a selected substance that, at higher doses, would produce the same symptoms in a healthy person. – www.camreports.hs.columbia.edu/diseases.html“

So here we find that homeopathic medicine is based off the idea of using small amounts of a substance to make it a strong cure for the illness (second part of contention).

The next thing to establish is how homeopathy is generally viewed. Well, most people I know would not consider the above to be true medicine at all.

We can now put together the pieces of this contention. With the “watered down” aspect of the contention, the Sheykh is asserting that liberalism is a watered down version of Islam.

In summary, the Sheykh is indicating that the liberals in religion are following the homeopathic principle which is to believe that the more you water it down, the stronger it is as a cure.

As a final conclusion, one could consider that homeopathy, although it may have had a fevered adherence for some time, was not a very successful form of medicine in the long run. So the relationship may be drawn here to the failure of homeopathy and eventual failure of liberalism in religion.

Link to Sheykh Abd al Hakim Murad’s Contentions part 1.

40. The Paraclete was indeed the Comforter. We were in a state of ascetical panic about ourselves.

Terms: Paraclete

From the Catholic Encyclopedia:

Paraclete, Comforter (L. Consolator; Gr. parakletos), an appellation of the Holy Ghost. The Greek word which, as a designation of the Holy Ghost at least, occurs only in St. John (xiv, 16, 26; xv, 26; xvi, 7), has been variously translated “advocate”, “intercessor”, “teacher, “helper”, “comforter”. This last rendering, though at variance with the passive form of the Greek, is justified by the Hellenistic usage, a number of ancient versions, patristic and liturgical authority, and the evident needs of the Johannine context. According to St. John the mission of the Paraclete is to abide with the disciples after Jesus has withdrawn His visible presence from them; to inwardly bring home to them the teaching externally given by Christ and thus to stand as a witness to the doctrine and work of the Saviour.

This contention is again in the theme of Chistianity, as Paraclete was the term found in the New Testament which Muslims such as Shaikh Ahmad Deedat held referred to Muhummad (S). I remember that Shaikh Ahmad Deedat often referred to this reference of “Paraclete” in his pamphlet/books as well as speeches.

Although I have learned since that discussing the polemic debate over what such things actually reference is somewhat futile with Christians, but it is definately good to be aware of as a Muslim. I find that sincerity and iklhas, not such debate, is usually the best Dawah, as the other post from Sheykh Abdal Hakim Murad shows.

The second sentence of the contention indicates that the Parcalete, in our case Muhummad (S), was a comforter of a phase of an “ascetical panic“.

I find that asceticism and “panic” are two contrary words, since one often views asceticism in terms of patience, self-denial and self discipline. So one word naturally denies the other, most ascetics wouldn’t be “panic-prone”, in my opinion.

So if we take it a level above, then it may be that it is the result of their panic over the nature of God’s instructions for us that led the religious people of the time to an extreme lifestyle of asceticism, celebacy, etc.

So in this way, Muhummad(S), can be viewed as a comforter for us that he indeed brought a sense of calmness to our nature, allowing Muslims to live worldy lives with religious meaning.

39. Christianity was providential as preparatio evangelica.

preparatio evangelica – As far as I could discover its origins are from a book of early Christian historian, Eusebius. Translating to “The Evanglical Preperation”

From http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/jackson2/04_eus.html

“The object of this work, which is in fifteen books, is to predispose the thoughtful to receive the Christian religion by dissipating their pagan prejudices. The first six books are employed in demolishing the pagan systems of religion, which the author shatters by his learned elucidations. The pure and reasonable character of the Christian theology and the blessings which the faith has brought to the world are set forth in contrast with the absurd teachings of polytheism….
-snip-
From all this the author concludes that Christians are right in abandoning a false theology in favor of that of the Jews.”

This is a great introduction to the early Christian writings which may have envisioned a Christianity much more similar to Islam and Judaism in theology.

As far as the Sheykh’s contention, I believe it is simply indicating that the discussion of Christianity within this text is representing (at some level) the divinely sent religion of Isa (AS).

Link to Sheykh Abd al Hakim Murad’s Contentions part 1.

38. Annunciation vs. enunciation: the word is best made word.

Terms:

Annunciation- a festival commemorating the announcement of the Incarnation by the angel Gabriel to the Virgin Mary; a quarter day in England, Wales, and Ireland

Enunciation- the articulation of speech regarded from the point of view of its intelligibility to the audience

Interpretation:

The first part pits two like-sounding words against each other.

“the word is best made word”

This part seems open for the most interpretation. If we relate the first reference of “word” to “Annunciation”, and the second reference of “word” to “Enunciation”, then we begin to see something form here. I feel its legitimate to replace them as I do, since both refer to forms of speech or announcements/pronouncements.

“The Annunciation is best made Enunciation”

A verse to keep in mind here is, Sura 3:59 Translated as:
“The similitude of Jesus before Allah is as that of Adam; He created him from dust, then said to him: “Be!” And he was.”

We might understand this contention better if we associate “enunciation” as the reference to this concept of “Be!”. Obviously wary of the fact that enunciation could be miscontrued as a bit anthropomorphic so I wonder if this is really where the Sheykh was going with this.

So.. finally, I would understand this as:

“The announcement of Isa’s (AS) birth (Annunciation) should best be understood through the acknowledgement of Allah’s ability to say “Be!” (enunciation), and it is. “

Perfect time to remind everyone that I’m no expert and I have never even met Sheykh Abdal Hakim Murad, so any interpretations you have, feel free to post about them.

37. Some religions out-narrate others.

Short but sweet.

My interpretation:

A few possibilities.

One interpretation could be that the Sheykh is discussing direct narrations of the founders of each religion. This brings out the point that Christianity is sprinkled with some sayings of Jesus (AS) in the New Testament, but in comparison to the narrations of Muhummad (S) present in Islam, it is minor. I’m unfamiliar with the amount of direct narration within Judaic tradition.

The other meaning could be in terms of narrations as stories or traditions to learn from. In this case, the number of traditions is equivilant to their place in history. For example, Jews accept the narration of the Old Testament alone, Christians accept the narrations of the Old Testament and New, Muslims accept (different versions of) those same stories, along with the tradition of the Prophet (S) and the Companions (Ra).

Another meaning could be the emphasis placed on accuracy and the sciences involved with narration, within each religion.

36. The ‘universal’ religion is not merely the religion that claims to be for all; it is the religion that claims that God has always been for all. There can be no Muslim ‘scandal of particularity’

Terms:

Scandal of particularity

Dr. David Adams defines it in his essay, “”The Anonymous God: American Civil Religion, the Scandal of Particularity, and the First Table of the Torah”

The scandal of particularity is a still broader notion, for it includes the understanding that God is at work is certain very specific times and places and ways to accomplish His will. The Christian faith is not a religion of spiritual truths, of moral or inner principles by which one ought to (or even may) live. It is the claim, radical in the ancient world and still more radical today, that God has reached into human history to do those things necessary to restore the relationship between Himself and us that our first ancestors shattered, and which still divide us from Him. This scandal of particularity is at the heart of the claims of the Bible to historicity, and make it fundamentally different from every other religion on earth.

What the Sheykh is highlighting with this contention is the ‘return to the truth’ aspect of the Islamic message, he then further contrasts it with the Christian ideology of ‘here is the truth’.

Islam is one of the few religions which understands that it’s understanding of God was the knowable ultimate truth from the creation of man. This is due to a few factors including the belief of a natural knowledge of God present within mankind, as well as the series of Prophet’s and Messengers sent throughout history.

Obviously, we Muslims believe that certain fundamentals of the Divine Law were different for each community (as each revelation was directed to that community), but we believe of the identity of God and fundamental trait of Oneness of God were present throughout all time, for all people to know.

In this way, Islam is a ‘universal religion’ that is described in the contention.

On the other hand, Christianity holds firm in the belief that the true nature of God (Trinity) was something inaccessible to man until the coming of Jesus (AS). Furthermore, according to Christians his ‘sacrifice’ affected the nature of the relationship of God to mankind from that point forward. As a religious concept the ‘scandal of particularity’ keeps Christianity from legitimately existing amongst humanity before the coming of Jesus(AS).

Link to Sheykh Abd al Hakim Murad’s Contentions part 1.

35. Liberal Protestantism: God is no longer the Father, but an occasional and indulgent Grandfather.

Liberal Protestantism – Wikipedia Definition

• “It maintains that, while God remains immutable, theists relationship with, and understanding of God change through history, and therefore that no theological truths are necessarily fixed, as each person’s experience can reveal a novel aspect of God. “

First, we need to establish what ‘Father’ is being discussed here. Everyone should be aware of traditional Christianity’s view on God as a Trinity of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. In general I find that in my conversations with real Christians the ‘person’ they have in mind when they pray is “the Father” personality of the trinity.

The other thing to reflect on here are the different roles of a father and a grandfather. A father to a child can be a source of discipline and respect, as well as love and guidance. A grandfather is hardly ever a disciplinarian, in fact the “occasional and indulgent” understanding of a grandfather is one who provides gifts to the grandchildren when he sees them on the occasional holiday or vacation. Consider that type of relationship when thinking about this contention.

In my opinion what is being said here is that Liberal protestantism has added a layer of impersonalization in terms of a real relationship with God. This is taken to the point where God is not an authority in how to live ones life. For the liberal Christian, God, while providing certain spiritual comforts in times of need, is largely irrelevant to the day-in and day-out aspects of life.

Link to Sheykh Abd al Hakim Murad’s Contentions part 1.

34. Judaism and Islam have resisted Christianity through eros and thanatos. Hence the magnitude of their victory.

Terms:
Eros - From the Freudian theory of the duality of human nature, Eros represents the drive towards attraction, reproduction, life, love and sexuality.

Thanatos – From the same theory, Tahanatos represents the drive towards aggression, repulsion , death.

Interpretation:

The first thing I noticed in this contention is the application of Freudian concepts of human nature applied to a religion. This is a very unique way to personify Christianity, and to categorize what we have seen as far as its nature.

This exposure of the duality of Christianity is really intresting, as Christianity definately has had its moments of Thanatos exposed through periods such as the Inquisition, the Crusades, and some might say the political-oriented evanglists of today. In the same way Muslims and Jews have also felt the Eros of Christianity in their preaching of Divine love, sacrifice, etc. Today, the emphasis of save-a-child type programs as well as humanitarian missions (Mother Teresa), also represent this attractive quality of Christiandom.

My opinion is that the Sheykh is raising the point that Muslims and Jews have both managed to survive the aggressive nature of Christianity and the subtle beckonings of the softer side throughout history, and it is quite significant that they have done so.

Here is a sub-contention, has Christianity already used up all of its ammunition?

Link to Sheykh Abd al Hakim Murad’s Contentions part 1.

33. ‘Judaism is dead; but we are going to give it a magnificent funeral’. (Rabbi Zunz, fount of liberal Judaism.) Is Islam the reverse? And if so, what are the grounds for dialogue?

This contention reminds me of an event that occured when I was in my teens. I attended an interfaith dialogue with some members of the community, and as part of that we visited a Jewish center.

I got to speaking to the Rabbi there. He started his conversation with me by asking, “So… you believe in God?”, slightly incredulously. I followed up with, “Yes… why, don’t you?”

His startling answer was, “No!”

So here was a leader of a Jewish community who did not even believe in God. I was truly flabbergasted! As you may guess the conversation didn’t get much farther than that.

At that point I had not been truly exposed the various forms of Judaism including reform, liberal, orthodox. Although I knew such classifications existed, I had no idea that the differences ran so deep that one group did not even accept God’s existence.

Therefore, I find the comment from the Rabbi that Shaikh Abdal Hakim quotes to be quite spot-on, in the sense that Judaism has become much more of a racial identity than a faith for what seems to be a vocal majority of them.

Is Islam the reverse?

Judaism has thrived, in a worldly sense, when it has abandoned much of the particulars of its faith-based law. On the other hand, historically, Islam has seen great worldly success (as well as spiritual success), when it has remained true to the core principles of its traditional understanding. In this way, it seems to me that Islam is the reverse.

However, to truly determine the answer to that question we may want to look at groups within Islam that might mirror the relationship of some of the liberal groups to traditional/orthodox Judaism. The main question to ask is whether Islam could succumb to the same sort of liberalization that occurred within Judaism.

So far, the answer seems to be a resounding, “No!”. Movements such as “Progressive Islam” have not had much success within the Muslim community, though they have received much media attention.

Furthermore, Islam is protected inherently from becoming any sort of racial or cultural identity as it has already spread to a wide variety of humanity.

Grounds for dialogue:

My little attempt at dialogue, described above, failed miserably… But maybe Muslims can have a meaningful dialogue by appealing to the humanistic nature of reform/liberal Judaism, and also discussing the general issues that Islam has with humanism. It may help to discuss how Islam suggests a unified humanity and the problems that extreme tribalism (hence their emphasis on their racial identity) can create.

Link to Sheykh Abd al Hakim Murad’s Contentions part 1.

32. Hagar is the matriarch of liberation because, unlike Sarah, she fends for herself.

Another Contention dealing with Hajr (RA), the hand maiden and child-bearer for Ibrahim (AS). First thing is first, I find the name Hagar so much of mangling of the actual name I am surprised the Shaikh used it. There is so much beauty in the name Hajr, and I feel none of it when saying the name Hagar.

It is most likely a weakness in myself, and an important example of why we need to filter the media to our kids. My problem is that I can’t help myself associating the name with an idiotic cartoon that I read when I was a child in the Sunday newspaper. It is quite insulting and therefore I don’t want to repeat the name lest you suffer the same fate as me and recall it at every mention.

I’m a bit curious as to the actual Hebrew / Aramaic pronunciation of the name, and I wonder how far back does this mangling of the name go. I have a few friends who are knowledgeable in that area so I will ask.

On to the contention:

I delved a bit deeper into the meaning of the word matriarch, as I know how it is commonly used but I wondered if there was more to it. And there is! Within Christian and Jewish traditional teachings, Sarah (RA) is titled as the ‘First Matriarch’.

What the Sheykh, in my opinion, is reminding us about is that Sarah (RA) was a matriarch in the old sense of the word. Meaning, that her honor and title really comes from her continuing relationship with Ibrahim (AS).

On the other hand, Allah’s honoring of Hajr(RA) really began with her separation from Ibrahim (AS). She was forced to fend for herself in the desert, running from mountain to mountain looking for support, until Zamzam was untapped by the miracle of Allah through Ishmael (AS).

She remained separate from Ibrahim (AS) from that point and although (according to Sheykh Hamza’s Sirat tapes) Ibrahim (AS) did visit and maintain a relationship with Ishmael (AS), for a large part Hajr was ‘on her own’ in the raising of her son and maintaining her own welfare (and she was greatly successful in that manner).

The story of Hajr (RA) is significant in this way, as a liberation (from man) story, especially for western women who might tend to look to the holy books as forms of ‘male oppression’. So while Sarah (RA) is the “First Matriarch”, which is quite an honor, Hajr is a matriarch which today’s women would find more appealing.

Link to Sheykh Abd al Hakim Murad’s Contentions part 1.

31. Hagar, that ‘root out of a dry ground’, the most fertile woman in history.

Hagar (Hajr) is a reference to the hand-maiden of Abraham, and the mother of the Arab people.

Reference: Isaiah 53:2 “For he grew up before him as a tender root out of dry ground”

The verse referenced is from the old testament which is commonly used by Christians to indicate a reference to the Messiah, Jesus (Isa) (AS). Muslims see it as applying to the Prophet Muhummad (??? ???? ???? ? ???). Among the qualities of the person who is mentioned in the first verses of Isaiah are that “he” shall come from humble beginnings, and undergo tremendous suffering.

Certainly Christ-like.

The next few verses is what really does it for me, “Yet it was the will of the LORD to bruise him; he has put him to grief; when he makes himself an offering for sin, he shall see his offspring, he shall prolong his days… (cut) 12 Therefore I will divide him a portion with the great, and he shall divide the spoil with the strong; because he poured out his soul to death, and was numbered with the transgressors; yet he bore the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors. ”

These verses speak of the turn-around, where the suffering will become success, and it seems quite worldly in nature (ie) “divide the spoil with the strong”. This is certainly much more of related to Muhummad’s (??? ???? ???? ? ???) reality.

Back to the contention: My interpretation here is simply that the Sheykh is reminding us the story of Hajr, and how she bore a son to a very old Abraham. If one were to think about it, you may also realize that it was with her and her son that the well of Zumzum sprouted in the middle of the desert, so her fertility was not only in child-bearing but in building the community of Arabs around this oasis in the desert.

She brought fertility to an man who was unable to concieve with his wife, and then she brought fertility to the desert sand. Truly a remarkable quality and in this way she is certainly the most fertile woman in history.

Link to Sheykh Abd al Hakim Murad’s Contentions part 1.

30. The Abrahamic wandering, for us, but not for Levinas, is to polis, to umm al-Qura. It was Islam, not Judaism, which united Abraham and Odysseus.

Terms:

• Lévinas (wikipedia) – (Emmanuel Lévinas) – was a Jewish philosopher and Talmudic scholar from Kaunas in Lithuania, who moved to France, where he wrote most of his works.

  For Levinas, the Other is not knowable and cannot be made into an object of the self, as is done by traditional metaphysics (called ontology by Levinas). Levinas prefers to think of philosophy as the ‘knowledge of love’ rather than the love of knowledge. In his arrangement, ethics become an entity independent of subjectivity to the point where ethical responsibility is integral to the subject; because of this, an ethics of responsibility precedes any ‘objective searching after truth’. Levinas derives the primacy of his ethics from the experience of the encounter with the Other.

• polis – the Greek term for city-state, from which the term ‘politics’ is derived.
• Umm al-Qura – (wikipedia, oh what would I do without ye) Umm al-Qura signifies “the center of villages” in Arabic. Though it is not a proper noun, it is mostly often used to refer to Mecca, a major city of Saudi Arabia. It is name of university of saudi Arabia located in Mecca.

The Abrahamic wandering which the Sheykh speaks of we should be familiar with. Abraham’s stories of travel are well known, and they led a vast area to consider themselves to be the ‘children of Abraham’ (Arabs and Jews).

Abraham (AS) according to some translates to “Father of Many”, and his ‘wanderings’ across northern Arabia and elsewhere will be remembered until the end of time.

The first part of the contention seems to mean that Abraham’s (AS) journey’s led to the development of communities and of societies.

I did some digging to determine how Levinas thought of Abraham (AS) but I could not relate what I found back directly to this contention.

What I did discover is that as a Talmudic philosopher he seemed intent having the Talmud presented in Greek in order to have the Talmud “express in Greek what Greece cannot express.”

In other words, the central theme in Levinas approach is that the talmud is a source for a type of philosophy which the Western philosophers had not experienced or expressed. But with a casual reading of Levinas, one finds an almost antagonistic approach towards Greek thought and an inherent superiority towards the Talmudic ideals which precludes any type of integration between these two vastly different worlds.

So, knowing that, looking back on this contention you’ll notice that polis, a greek term is used next to umm al-Qura an Arabic term.

Furthermore, and quite more explicitly, we find that the Sheykh tells us that Islam united Abraham (AS) a Semitic ‘hero’, and Odysseus, a greek hero.

So, in terms of philosophy there is some discussion going on here about the unifying force of Islam, how Islam managed to integrate the best of the ideals of the Greeks and the Semitic religious philosophies.

So it was the Muslims who preserved the Greeks work, who debated their ideas intensely within, leading to some of the brightest scholars in Islam. One need not look any further than Hujjat al Islam, Imam Ghazali, who personified this unification as with one hand he was able to discuss deep philosophical issues with those expounding Greek philosophy (with their same techniques in writing), and with the other hand he was able to write one of the best works on tassawuf that Islam has known.

On the other hand Levinas’s technique of trying to apply Talmudic ideals, after-the-fact, in the greek language seems a rather pitiful attempt at accomplishing a similar type of Western-Eastern intellectual discourse which existed in the Islamic world.

29. Closet converts are the malamatiyya: they know, but are not known.

Definitions:
Malamatiyya – Those who “draw blame” or delibrately draw the contempt of others while preserving purity of heart, those who do not care if other Muslim accept their faith or actions as legitimate (ref http://essenes.net/sufi.html)

Comments:

By “closet converts”, I take it that the Sheykh is speaking about people who have accepted Islam but have not announced their faith or become active members of the Muslim community.

The Malamatiyya reference is interesting because the word seems to be used throughout Sufi literature as a state of sufistic perfection. Those that have totally divorced themselves from the world and people, and give no importance to the contempt that the world has for them.

Closet converts therefore are displaying an aspect of the Malamatiyya in that they do not need to display their faith or actions to others in order to feel satisified and complete.

“They know but are not known”: simple way to say the same thing. Such converts are aware of the knowledge of Islam but they are like strangers to others. They do what they need to do for themselves and in order to meet their requirements, and they do little to build their own ego.

This is interesting in another way because it brings back the discussion we had some time ago about convert stories. Maybe it is a reflection of this great characteristic of some converts to keep their story private.

28. British religious painting: why this indifference to the Passion?

I have no experience with British religious paintings, although the similarity of this contention to the criticism present in Contention #22 is interesting.

My impression (only gathered from this one line) is that British religious paintings must be rather dry.

The Fugger letters – “Reports from all over Europe and the ME on matters of interest to the banking house, often trifles, sometimes mighty events (the Armada), but always interesting and illuminating, and not seldom amusing, wherever read.”

“The Fuggers were a mercantile family in the Germanies in the 14th
or 15th century who posted agents all over Christendom whose duty was to report back. Along with business detail, the agents reported on burnings at the stake, local miracles, three-headed calves, gossip about the doings of the high and mighty, earthquakes, and so on”

Interpretation:

I think the interesting part here is possibility of admiration for the Turks/Muslims in the letter. The idea that the English can become one with the Turks during the 15th century is either an indication that they may be used for subterfuge or a reflection of admiration and hope for the English

Keywords:

Versailles – A city in north central France near Paris; site of the Palace of Versailles that was built by Louis XIV in the 17th century.

Augustinian – A Roman Catholic friar or monk belonging to one of the Augustianian mostaic orders

Hidcote – Hidcote Manor Garden that was created from 1907 onwards by Lawrence Johnston

Pelagian – Received its name from Pelagius and designates a heresy of the fifth century, which denied original sin as well as Christian grace.

–Officially Skipped!

I didn’t, and won’t have enough time to read about William law and the social gospel to make any meaningful conclusion. I will read up on this later.

24. Blake?s Job shows that repentance can never be paid for.

Interpretation:
Blake’s Job refers to William Blakes engraved illustrations of the Book of Job. I have not seen these illustrations. The story of Job is one of true patience. I suggest that by “repentance can never be paid for” the Sheykh is saying that the Mercy of God, the ability to be forgiven for our sins is something very precious and cannot be valued enough.

23. Converts: we must jump the gap without losing our clothes.

Interpretation:

Disclaimer, I’m not a convert so if any converts have any opinions please feel free to add them.

The western converts are in a unique situation in that they need to ‘jump over’ to the path of Islam.

The “gap” mentioned in the contention is the gap between Islam and the non-muslim environments. However, in the past, other cultures who have joined Islam have maintained their local identity very clearly, but expressed in an Islamic way. Similarly, Western converts need to accept Islam while bringing their local culture, values and knowledge into the Ummah. The word “clothes” is representing the local culture of the converted.

22. British Buddhism: who can abide this chinoiserie?

Keyword:
chinoiserie – Western imitations or evocations of Chinese art. The term is usually reserved for objects made in the 17th and 18th centuries.

Interpretation:

Not being a Britisher, I may be at a disadvantage! It seems to me that the Sheykh is suggesting that such Buddhism is a feeble imitation of the real Buddhism practiced in China.

It raises an interesting question that the Sheykh may also want to discuss. Why wouldn’t British Muslims be considered participating in a chinoiserie of their own, similar to the British Buddhists?

It seems to be that the global nature of the Islamic message to all people, and the fact that its meaning is not adjusted nor altered for the people it impacts makes it far from an imitation of an ‘Eastern’ religion, but an authentic application of a global message.