January 05, 2008
The Daily Star – “The Newspaper for the Heartland of New York”
In the name of Allah, the all Compassionate, all Merciful. He sent the prophets to us to guide us from this world back to where we came from. He created us, put us into these physical forms, and sent us to this world. He put divine laws on us for living and getting the benefit of the world, without damaging our selves. Our aim is to go clean from this world, back to our origin.
People are pleasing either the Lord or the self (ego). If we want to please the Lord of the heavens, our creator, then we have to live according to his laws, not according to our own ideas. If we say that we “don’t care,” we are living according to ego. Shaytan (satan) supports the ego.
Intelligence supports the spirit. Through intelligence, we can learn to work with spirituality to reach higher spiritual stations. From the first prophet, Adam (peace be upon him) to the last prophet, Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him)- 124,000 prophets came to teach one thing: “Turn away from the ego and from this world back to your Lord.”
Holy Prophet Muhammad said, “One who knows himself knows his Lord.” Through spiritual striving to approach the Divine Presence, first you find your identity: who you are and what you are about. Then you realize, “I am nothing. I am no one. Without Him, I have never been and I am never going to be.” Then you will know your Lord. He is the Creator and He is not like us- His creatures.
Only the spirit that He gave us makes us the most perfect of creatures. Without spirit, this body is nothing. As soon as the spirit leaves, the body falls down and doesn’t move. If we are not cleaned in the world, the body slowly disappears until the dirt cleans everything. We prepare ourselves to leave this world, entering the grave clean to be ready for Judgment Day. That is the sufi concept of “Marifat” – to die clean by getting rid of the wrong habits of the ego. We learn how through association with the inheritors of the prophets.
Look at how much difficulty Prophet Ayyub (Job) passed through until Allah cured him. People have lost that faith now. Mankind doesn’t know. The prophets knew; and the Friends of Allah (saints) know. Allah is teaching them. And He is saying: “When you don’t know something, ask from the People of Zikir.” (Zikir is a practice of remembering God by reciting His holy names). Allah doesn’t say, “Ask the scholars, the knowledgeable people.” He says, “Ask the people who are always remembering Me.” They know because one who is in Zikir all the time is with Allah all the time. If you ask them a question, they turn to the Lord for the answer. They don’t need computers and books for knowledge. They take from the Source and they give to people.
Everytime we declare our faith, Allah Almighty dresses the body with more Nur (heavenly light). If a believer’s light becomes apparent in this world, it can hide the sun. We must protect that light. Shaytan runs after it to steal it and to put the person into spiritual darkness.
We try to sit for some time every night in meditation. So many people run all night long; they play; they run after their ego in the night hours. Early in the morning, when the divine provision is raining, they sleep. Then they get up late, running again trying to find something. They cannot find anything.
People go to their jobs; but we are not only for this world. We prepare things in this world to make life easier. We can have good things in our house – couches, a nice bed, better this and that; but if we fall into comfort, it’s going to trick the ego. Then shaytan may fool us. Don’t worry so much for the world. Whatever is prepared for us is going to come to us. Believers are wise people. They look to see from where Allah is sending their daily bread, and then they go that way.
The days are passing. As one day is finished (sundown), the books are closed for this world and for whatever we sent to the hereafter. Anybody who ran for this world all day long collected worldly benefit. But we cannot bring property or money to the grave- only our physical form. The main priority to an individual is Life Hereafter. That life is going to be forever.
The new year begins on Jan. 9 (the first day of the lunar month of Muharram, year 1429). The best intelligence is to take time for our Lord in these holy days. Send something ahead to receive in the afterlife. Otherwise, the days and months come and go. These days are full with blessings. We should make them different, following the advice of the Holy Prophet and the Friends of Allah to win in the world and in eternity.
Sheykh Abdul Kerim al-Kibrisi is a Sunni Muslim and a Nakshibendi sheykh. He leads a sufi community in Sidney Center.
http://www.thedailystar.com/archivesearch/local_story_005041510.html
As an addendum I wanted to enter further into the topic of education.
It is said that my earlier words:
ignores the stewardship of humanity (and Muslims) on the Earth.
I say, stewardship in the hands of people who cannot see a world with different roles and responsibilities is one of confusion and lack of foresight and consequences.
It is often said that the ummah is in need of education, but the immediate response from my point of view has to be “what type of education?” Education is a loaded word, its been the holy grail for many for some time now, so let us qualify it.
Some possibilities of what type of education we could be discussing, keep in mind we are speaking now not of knowledge, but of a broad term of ‘education’ that requires literacy:
1) Secular (Science, Mathematics, etc)
2) Religious – Legal
3) Religious – Doctrine
The criticism of traditionalism was first focused on attacking my qualifications to speak on the issue. Secondly, the criticism was speaking about the need to obtain ubiquitous literacy in the Muslim world and apply at least 1, 2, and 3 into all Muslims life. This is what I will examine.
So let us say we gave you the power to impact some change right now, and immediately educate people. What would you educate them in first, second, last? What and who would you exclude and what and who would you include?
I would remind the reader about the realm of the discussion here. This is on the global scale, for the entire ummah.
Really, now, tell me what is the universal goal of mass literacy and education in its larger context? The truth is, as I said previously, the West has promoted this concept because it has been able to shift those working in jobs which need less education from the public eye. When they do enter the public eye, i.e. Katrina, they shake their head and say “They are just not making enough money because they are not educated!”.
Does everybody, and I mean globally, does every single person on the earth need a secular education right now? I personally don’t think so. Who will be the school janitor when everyone has written a thesis on the contemporary string theory of physics? Who will milk the sheep when everyone can be a professor of fine arts? Who will make the shoes when everyone can build computers? Who will be the waiter when everyone has their MBA to run the restaurant?
It might be said, I am discussing high levels of education and when we are speaking about basic education. Alhamdulillah, ‘basics’ are good, but again then, what are the basics to you and to me? What is the benefit of everyone having that basic secular education if it is not to lead us onward to higher and higher levels within the academic and professional system? People now say, casually that all that math they learned in class didn’t really help them at their professions, yet we don’t really consider the profoundness of that when we are force feeding that same education on families of children who don’t have the luxury of such use of time.
In the traditional days the Awliya would look at a community and help decide who was best suited to be a high scholar and who was best suited to be a porter.
It was wisdom, interpersonal relationships, knowing what people wanted for themselves and for others, knowing levels of ambition, and also necessity which brought whole communities together that made secular education *a useful tool* for the right people.
Today, without their guidance, the world has turned into a rat race of getting on the top of an educational ladder, those who fall by the wayside are only looked upon as having failed and essentially tossed aside for the wolves. In today’s day those ‘failures’ are punished by being priced out of food, not earning enough to cover the costs of an unseen education tax on the growing of their scientifically engineered bread. But in the past those people were content, generally those people lived and sought simple lives, with satisfaction.
In an Islamic context, you might actually know the name of the janitor who cleans your office, and he might have actually been respected.
The promise of modernity has all but erased the desire for a simple life from our lives. The Prophet (Sallalahu’alaiheewassalam) taught us contentment with what we have, contentment with destiny, contentment with our Lord, and what was taught was simplicity in practice, simplicity in lifestyle. This is what the modern ‘scholar’ has forgotten and rejected.
If they have understood the above about secular education they have become confused and applied the same rat race to the religion itself, and that is not only dangerous for the world but to the soul.
Let us continue with the different types of education and their roles.
Does everyone need #2, a legal education in Shariat? Let us realize the number of people who don’t even believe even in its application today personally. Will a mandatory class in understanding of Mukhtasar al-Quduri help save the souls of the world? Will studying the fiqh exposed through Sahih Bukhari in high school lead to a situation where more and more people feel they have the authority to argue on matters of legal permissibility? Most likely. That is what we are seeing today, and it is only creating more confusion.
Nearly all of the world doesn’t practice the Shariat in terms of public policies, and in the traditional understanding it took years before we considered someone satisfactorily studied in the aspects of Shariat in order to utter one word about it. Is a light ‘dose’ of information what we need? I think it would be better to focus and create respect for the scholarship which did exist, to keep alive the practical aspects of learning how to pray, how to fast, which are easily understood by consulting ones knowledgeable local imam. Furthermore, the basic respect for the madhabs and a very high level understanding of the methodologies could be summarized and conveyed in a simple 15 minute talk.
Does absolutely everyone need #3, doctrine? I think few people could read the works on aqeeda and say that every man, woman, son and daughter, needs to understand the principals and differences within the Ashari, Maturidi and Athari aqeedas. Like Shariat, there is questionable worldly and spiritual benefit to knowing exactly the necessary consequences on physics from understanding that Allah is the source of all causality. At the same time, understanding the basic creedal aspects of our religion is something very simple, again, understood in its necessity in a 15 minute talk.
Now let us begin to discuss the power of knowledge and ‘education’ that does not need mass literacy.
4) Religious – Spiritual (Tassawuf)
5) Religious – General, Basics, Dawah
6) Practical ‘On the Job’/Experienced-based Knowledge
Now we can begin to discuss what the Prophet (Sallalahu’alaiheewassalam) spoke about when he commended knowledge and its seeking.
Regarding spiritual knowledge: It is said our Grandshaykh Abdullah Daghestani was Ummi, he could not read nor write outside of the Quran. Yet, when he spoke he was able to speak of spiritual realities which ended moving thousands and thousands of people. Is everyone in need of such spiritual lessons? Yes, because this is what the Prophet (Salallahu’alaiheewassalam) poured into the hearts of people. Shariat was learned largely through his practice and example, and a few orders. But spiritual teachings and awareness of God was the content of our beloved Prophet’s (Sallalahu’alaiheewwassalams) words.
So everyone is in need of it, but yet we don’t see an absolute need of ‘literacy’ to learn it nor to speak about it.
The general aspects of Islam, #5, need to be retaught to many, many, many people who call themselves Muslims indeed. But again, is the reliance on texts or on the people to spread that knowledge?
The Muslim community may be in need of a light dose of Shariat, Aqeedah, etc. I say, those that want it can get a ‘light dose’ through numerous means. There never was a prerequisite of ‘literacy’ when it comes to the basics of the deen. When Saad bin Abi Waqqas (R) went to China, did he bring with him books or knowledge within his heart?
I think the time for dismissing and insulting the Muslims of villages as irrelevant and ignorant fools is long gone. Frankly, I think those are the places where one can still practice Islam and escape from this world with a clean heart. It is in Russia, where texts were eliminated, where people carried Islam within their hearts, through the knowledge of the heart. This was a time when even proclamation of your faith would land you in jail. Turkey, which experienced an elimination the actual Arabic script, escaped with a faith that has lead Islamists into democratic government. In Bosnia, few could name you six books of Hadith, but their faith carried most of them through a genocide.
I think emphasizing knowledge has to now to be prefaced with what type of knowledge exists, I think demeaning those who happen to be born in different conditions as being unable to achieve high levels with Allah is the real Bidaa.
Yes, we need education in this society to survive. The world demands it, as it is not being run by people with faith. But while we participate in this system, we can also keep alive in our hearts the reality and the goal of a simple life. Looking to spread the confusion within the very sciences of Islam is not the answer.
There is more to say, the Ottoman’s decision regarding the printing press, Imam Ghazali’s (R) encounter with those who were ready to eliminate all his books, etc. But I will leave it at this for now.
Both UmmZaid and Aaminah [1] [2] have written about Laleh Bakhtiar’s new ‘translation’ of the Quran. I am not a female, but I thought I would chime in anyway.
Someone recently asked me,
there are two memorizers of the qur’an
who is more blessed one who understands and increases in taqwa? or one merely recites w/ all other factors remaining constant?
This was probably a rhetorical question, as the answer might seem obviously to be the one who ‘knows more’ and ‘understands’. After a few years, for me, I have come to really understand this question in a very different light.
I responded (adjusted version):
The ones who recite without understanding are doing it with pure Hub and love of the Divine Source of the words, not looking to take anything for themselves in terms of mental satisfaction, but only looking for a tranquility in their hearts.
You asked me which one is more blessed. For me that is to judge something really for Allah. But if you press me to answer, I would say that those that go on certain paths to knowledge often fall into different traps of character. When they are without a guide they cannot find their way out of such traps.
Knowledge is good, but it needs to be tempered with character.
Promoting ignorance is really not my point, as what I am promoting is working on character as the highest priority, and determining the best means of that.
Knowledge should only be used as a tool for betterment of that character. It is not for everyone, and for those that it is for, it is important to have a guide.
The idea that one somehow has more taqwa than the one sitting next to him due to his ‘understanding a language’ is a real example of the problem really in the first place
Egoism from ‘knowledge’ is very fast.
How many people lived and died, holding only to the love of those sounds? Can we build that love first before feeling the need to ‘understand’ those words?
=====
So that is a preface for my understanding of the Quran. We forget that the highest blessings are found in the holy words, in its beautiful recitation and memorization. Those, especially in today’s world, those who are looking to establish a ‘meaning’ to the verse need to do so with clear knowledge and guidance.
Laleh Bakhtiar is, in this case, proud of her absence of that knowledge and guidance. I find the problem being that in general, she and others begin to treat the Quran as a text like any other.
On the other hand, the Quran is a combination of poetry, deep reflection, worldly guidance, and a gloriousness. All of which prompted A.J Arberry to write about his translation:
“Briefly, the rhetoric and rhythm of the Arabic of the Koran are so characteristic, so powerful, so highly emotive, that any version whatsoever is bound in the nature of things to be a poor copy of the glittering splendour of the original. Never was it more true than in this instance that traduttore traditore.
My chief reason for offering this new version of a book which has been ‘translated’ many times already is that in no previous rendering has a serious attempt been made to imitate, however imperfectly, those rhetorical and rhythmical patters which are the glory and the sublimity of the Koran. “
For your reference, traduttore traditore, meaning “translator, you are a traitor!”.
Later AJ Arberry says in his preface:
“The Suras themselves are in many instances – and this has been recognized by Muslim students from the earliest times– of a composite character, holding in them fragments received by Muhammad at widely differing dates; but I have disregarding this accepted fact, wishing to show each Sura as an artistic whole, its often incongruous parts constituting a rich and admirable pattern.”
The love and appreciation that AJ Arberry had for the Quran is quite clear. His acceptance (if one notes), of Muhammad (Sallalahua’alaiheewassalam) of ‘receiving’ Ayats is also substantial.
The goal of most books is to express certain ideas and concepts within peoples minds. The Quran however, is unlike any other book whatsoever and AJ Arberry recognized and appreciated that.
Let us compare this noble approach of a supposed non-Muslim to one of Laleh Bakhtiar:
“Unlike my 17th Century counterparts, however, I had the benefit of a computer, and I used it to create a database containing the 40,000 nouns and verbs of the Quran (known as the Arabic Concordance) and the 50,000 particles of speech. This helped me to be accurate and consistent.” (Lahleh Bakhtiar – Chicago Tribute Editorial)
Let us put aside the sheer lack of humility which is a definite requirement before approaching the Quran. With all these claims to accuracy and consistency, can one not taste the difference of approach here? Quite bitter.
MashaAllah, if there is anything more soulless and cold, it is a computer (I know, I work the field). What understanding of the heart can that computer bring to the verses of the Quran? What is this literalistic exactitude that can hope to give meaning to words based off of computer research?
If the fundamental issue is “dara ba” of the verse regarding spouses, then why not look to see how traditional scholarship has understood that verse? Is Laleh Bakhtiar suggesting that until her translation came along, Muslim men were interpreting this as ‘beat’ for permission of actual beating as is understood in domestic violence today? I think we are all quite aware of the traditional understanding of this verse involves symbolic gestures, and so forth.
The necessary focus on this verse and others is a sign of the problem, an abandonment of looking to tradition for actual explanations of the Quran in worldly and even spiritual matters. People are now unable to stop themselves from treating the Quran as an instruction manual, scientific textbook, atheist rebuttal, and so on, when it is first and foremost a means for a spiritual connection with your Lord.
Those looking to change cultural perceptions or change legal rulings through a translation rather than find a personal spiritual meaning need to realize that their actions have betrayed any of their good intentions.
Translating the Quran is a huge responsibility, the weight of which needs to be carried by people with wisdom, not people with agendas or special ideas on computer dictionaries. The Quran inspires, a translation should imitate that in all possible ways, all the while admitting its weakness.
Elevating the status of the words as we have received it is of primary importance, with that will come proper understanding of the nature of translations. Only then can one look to take the words, to translate them to give a general understanding of the themes.
If a supposed non-Muslim, AJ Arberry, is able to understand the primary importance of conveying the artistic, other-worldliness of the Quran, how sad a state is it when Muslims are looking to copy the techniques of the King James translation of the Bible?
“The method I used for this new translation of the Quran is actually the same method used by the translators of the King James Version of the Bible. ” -Lahleh Bakhtiar, Chicago Tribute Editorial
What we find is an attempt to focus on lexical accuracy, which inherently causes one to lose feeling. When compared to works of the past, and common sense, if we find that we did not accomplish accuracy, as agendas clouded it in the first place, what have we really gained?
Regardless, each translation must also be taken with a grain of salt, and we need to rely far more on our teachers and guides to find meaning, context, and history for those stories rather than our own limited understanding of a translation.
Muslims need to understand that it is the *tradition*, not paper or computers or ink or imagination, which is entrusted with the understanding of the Quran. Practice of real people, who are following others, becoming inheritors of knowledge and wisdom and Divine secrets.
When we think about how the Quran was revealed, do we not reflect that it was revealed over a span of over two decades?
Do we not reflect, that the Quran came to the Prophet (Sallalahu’alaiheewassalam) in different parts, often during times of sohbet with the Sahabi. He was explaining them in so many different ways in his Khutba’s, in his blessed talks. The knowledge regarding them was constantly being received.
Some people say, every time they read the Quran they find something new to take from it, a new meaning or benefit or spiritual secret or opening. Think of this: Our Prophet (Sallalahu’aliaheewassalam) knew of all those possibilities that you have found, and he poured them all to the Sahabi (R).
Yet, where are these explanations? Was everything self-evident to the Sahabi (R)? Not at all, their many questions regarding the verses are whittled down to only a few hadith.
Frankly, a bigger question should be, why is only really one final sermon of the Prophet (Sallalahu’alaiheewassalam) written down and distributed when today we find Khutbas from regular folks being recorded with great precision?
No one really asks these questions anymore, as they don’t like to think that an answer may be that true meanings will be found at the foot of someone who received this knowledge heart to heart, instead of ink to eye.
The New York times has come out and written an article full of lies for those who have the facts and an article full of truth for those who know how to find it amongst such deception.
NY Times: Leaving Stony Brook to Follow a Sheik by JULIA C. MEAD
The article attempts to take you, the reader, on a journey of a few family conflicts that eventually lead to some men living ‘the simple life’ at the dergah in upstate NY with Sheykh Abdul Kerim al-Kibrisi. Alhamdulillah, what a journey it is, but unfortunately the article is scattered with specific lies, misinformation, and a complete lack of the context which comes from having an Islamic background.
My specific objections to this article:
1) Having a title that insinuates that people did not complete college and left for a farm, when in fact two of three mureeds discussed here are graduates of Stony Brook. Everyone eventually has to ‘leave’ Stony Brook.
2) It has no central theme and raises incompatible accusations. An example is saying that Sheykh is taking people away from high paying careers and making them lowly clerks, while at the same time Sheykh is accused of being solely interested in their money.
Which is it? Answer: none of the above.
3) Completely unsubstantiated accusations of ‘mind control’ and ‘cultish’ behavior ( “Rita Skeeter”-style ). Tactics of using words to emphasize “mind-control” by describing each mureed “looking to Sheykh hesitantly” before speaking a word. This is ignoring the fact that most of the interview with the mureeds occurred when Sheykh left the room (audio tape available).
Proper manner and the relationship between the mureed and Sheykh is completely ignored. Hundreds of years of Islamic Naqshbandi history and culture are unmentioned.
4) Ignoring freely available audio from Sheykh Nazim al-Haqqani, the worldwide leader of the Naksibendi Hakkani order, followed by hundreds of thousands who addresses Sheykh Abdul Kerim directly giving him permission (ijazat) to build and run the dergah and invite people to tariqa. (excerpt/links in the main response below)
5) Having a complete lack of context of the Islamic world. For example, no context is provided as to what is common practice for a Muslim convert (adopting an Islamic name). This is presented as something strange and new. Muslims and non-Muslims at large are concerned about the credit economy and Muslims are seriously concerned with the concept of interest.
6) While openly acknowledging that there are hostile groups (Wahabi’s) to sufi’s such as Sheykh Abdul Kerim, the same groups are quoted to determine the tariqa’s authenticity.
Please email NY Times about retracting this article at nytnews@nytimes.com
————–
Let’s dissect this article piece by piece.
Other parents should know that one day, their kid could be a student at Stony Brook, and the next day he’s changed his name to Salih Haqqani and is no longer their son,” said Jeanne Marie Malley. Her son moved to Sidney Center in January 2005.
MashAllah, bringing someone to Islam, something beautiful is treated as something foreign and dangerous. To a Muslim, however such a thing is far from dangerous, in fact, it is safety from true danger.
The article’s title, “Leaving Stonybrook to follow a Sheik”, combined with this reference to Stonybrook by Jeanne Marie Malley gives the reader the illusion that we are discussing Salih leaving Stonybrook.
However, one should realize that this quote from his mother doesn’t say Salih ‘left’ anything, in fact Salih completed his degree months before moving to the dergah. He now is studying to become a complete hafiz of the Quran.
On its Web site, Mr. Fuat’s group says that he is a deputy of Grandshaykh Muhammad Nazim, the spiritual leader of the worldwide Naqshbandi-Haqqani Sufi Order. But Abdul Haqq, a spokesman for that order in North America, said he is not.
“He has made his own group,” Mr. Haqq said.
Where does this come from? Sheykh Abdul Kerim speaks to Grandshaykh Nazim on a regular basis. Recently on Hajja Meryem’s (Sheykh Abdul Kerim’s wife’s) 2005 trip to meet Sheykh Nazim, a special message was even recorded for Sheykh Abdul Kerim, and it is available for all to read (translated from turkish) or listen to the original Turkish.
Maulana Sheykh Nazim says in this message to Sheykh Abdul Kerim (addressing him by name), for all to hear:
“The service that you do is beautiful, with their baraka continue that service. Bringing a person to Islam, iman, tarika is more valuable and rewarding than acquiring all of America in your hands. Continue it. Do not look at what people say. May you have no business with gossip. You are with permission, look at your job. If someone interferes then I will interfere. I have given you the permission. “
Although Peter Sazanoff (Abdul Haqq) chooses to expose some internal politics in the Naqshbandi order to the world, the truth is plain and clear from Sheykh Nazim’s message. What more needs to be said?
Mr. Haqq added that while “shaykh” the Turkish equivalent of the Arab word sheik is a formal clerical title among Sufis that can be bestowed only by the grandshaykh, the word is also a common informal term of respect.
What shoddy journalism! Is there no “h” in the Arabic version? Probably not, since it doesn’t use the English alphabet!
Both words are transliterations from the Arabic… The author, Julia C. Mead, is definitely not familiar with even the basics of the Islamic world. Attached to this post is audo of Sheykh Maulana Nazim calling Sheykh Abdul Kerim with the title ‘Sheykh’.
“Islam is not about leaving your family,” said Ahmet Kahyaoglu, whose son Erdem moved to the farm eight months ago. “It’s about making a strong family.”
Again, bringing a personal family squabble into the public, the NY Times reporter fails to provide any quotes from Erdem himself about his feelings regarding the situation. Erdem did distance himself from his father, as he is the one student who has not yet graduated. In fact he said to me:
“I was under constant psychological and verbal abuse from my father everyday. I had about a semester left to graduate but I could not focus on studies while living at home.”
The next line speaks the truth:
Mr. Fuat said in an interview that, far from telling the three men to isolate themselves, he had encouraged them to finish school and to remain close to their families. But he acknowledged that many of his followers’ families object strongly to their involvement in his group.
Absolutely. This is why two of three of the mureeds mentioned are actually graduates of Stonybrook, contrary to what the article insinuates , and most other mureeds have very close relationships with our family. Those families who are irreligious or non-Muslim continue to try to attack Shaikh, but alhamdulillah, being attacked for such things is actually a blessing.
Mr. Fuat, 49, is a naturalized United States citizen who once owned a Turkish restaurant in Manhattan. While visiting Turkey in 2001, he was arrested and charged with illegally preaching Sufism in the country, which has elaborate laws regulating religious activity. Human-rights groups protested the arrest. After six months in jail, he was acquitted, and he returned to New York.
Yes, Shaikh spent six months in a Turkish prison, not well known for their hospitality. That incident is summarized in a different article from the Associated Press:
http://www.wwrn.org/article.php?idd=10022&sec=33&con=54
“Fuat, 44, faces six months in prison if found guilty of establishing an illegal religious congregation. In Turkey, only state-appointed clergymen can lead people in Islamic prayers. ”
Mashahallah, being put in jail under such circumstances is really a sign for those who understand.
Mainstream Muslims disown Mr. Fuat and his group. “They do not belong to any Naqshbandi order,” said Nayyar Imam, the president of the Islamic Association of Long Island, whose Selden mosque is attended by many Stony Brook students. “They have created their own thing.” Mr. Imam is also a Suffolk County human rights commissioner.
On what authority does Nayyar Imam speak about Naqshbandi’s? Again, I reference Maulana Sheykh Nazim’s words provided earlier. Or does Mr. Imam have the audacity to say Maulana is not Naqshbandi either?
*UPDATE*: Nayyar Imam and his mosque are involved in a sexual abuse scandal:
http://www.yursil.com/blog/2008/07/long-island-ny-imam-accused-of-sexually-abusing-13-year-old/
Noting that the parents of the three men “are very ambitious for their children,” Professor Chittick speculated that Mr. Fuat’s profession of Sufism may play a role in how upset they are: “One day their kid suddenly announces he’s not going to become an engineer or a doctor, but is moving to some farm to pray. So they’re outraged and they call it blasphemy.”
Professor Chittick absolutely speaks the truth here, this is a case of parents consumed with ambition for their children. It is important to note that most mureeds don’t ‘live on a farm’, and that most of the mureeds live in homes around the mosque and have jobs.
Clint Henderson, who followed Mr. Fuat for 15 years, said he and his wife broke away three years ago because Mr. Fuat’s group had become “a full-blown cult.”
“I gave every last dollar I could possibly give” Mr. Henderson said, adding that, like other followers, he gave $100 a week for years. “But it got so ludicrous that I could not kiss his hand without putting a $20 bill into it.”
This is just a lie, from a very disgruntled man.
Although there are existing problems in this article, such as talking about ‘leaving Stony Brook’, now we can begin to see the article unraveling itself -completely.
Isn’t the false premise of this article that the Sheykh tells people to isolate themselves, give up high-educated careers, and live on a farm earning no money?
Then I ask, where did all these alleged $100 and $20 bills came from?
Inside the chickens?
The use of the offensive word “cult” is absolutely derogatory and unacceptable. Although throughout my years I have encountered various definitions for “cult”, the general idea is of that of a closed religious group which is secretive, using ‘brain control’, as well as an organization which is difficult to leave.
To the point of whether the tariqa is secretive: do “cults” allow NY Times reporters to spend entire nights with them, interview them on every detail?
Do “cults” also allow people like Mr. Henderson to just pack his bags and go? Did it take him 15 years to realize the Sheykh is leading a “cult”?
Among the lawyers contacted was Robert J. Gaffney, the former Suffolk County executive and a former federal agent. He said Mr. Fuat’s group seemed to be a typical cult, preying on vulnerable young people yearning for spirituality, and the fact that it happened to espouse Muslim beliefs had little relevance.
Alhamdullah, Sheykh does not have approval from this lawyer. Again, the idea of a “cult” is baseless yet propagated.
“Cults” and Islam is a very interesting topic which was discussed online some years ago. I particularly enjoyed Dr. Fariduddien Rice’s comments on the subject (link here) where he said,
“Even with this new definition, during the Prophet’s time, Islam was a
“cult,” since it was a “newly formed religious group with a living
charismatic or messianic leader.” Probably the majority of the major
world religions (eg. Judaism, Christianity, Buddhism) were at their
beginning “cults” (according to the above definition), since at its
beginning most major world religions were “newly formed religious
groups with a living charismatic or messianic leader.”"
Shariah is a set of Islamic Laws that prevent abuse and allow one to conduct marriage, divorce, and financial transactions in-line with Islamic tenants. Has Sheykh implemented anything else in his life other than these Islamic tenants? This article doesn’t give any example, in fact it reinforces his application of the Shariah and Islam in his personal life as being something ‘strange’.
Finally, the article closes on pitting Sheykh against education. The article is forced into this since obviously, no one has yet been demonstrated to leave Stony Brook in the entire article.
But Abir Rahman, one of Mr. Fuat’s followers, said in an interview that he quit law school after Mr. Fuat advised him that paying interest on a loan, even a student loan, would violate Islamic teaching. He said he now works in a mall as a salesclerk.
This is actually a blatent lie, Sheykh encouraged Br. Abir to finish law school. The interview tapes are available.
In fact, even though Abir didn’t wish to go to graduate school, Sheykh encouraged him to complete law school and make his parents happy. This agreement between Abir and his parents involved Br. Abir moving to Michigan (per their request), where they would support his education. At this point the parents backed out on their part of the bargain and Br. Abir chose not to enter into mountains of debt for a profession he did not enjoy. The topic of interest never even came up in the discussion.
Again the article is falling apart, on one hand it says Sheykh doesn’t support education for high paying jobs, on the other it insinuates that the Sheykh is seeking money. How can both be true? The answer is none of it is true.
The article continues with at least three references of “looking at Sheykh” before speaking, all of which are obviously written to insinuate that the mureeds were under the “Sheykhs control”. But why is it not mentioned that most of the interview with the mureeds occurred when Sheykh wasn’t even in the room, which he deliberately choose to leave to avoid any misunderstanding?
Ms Malley (Salih’s mother) is described now:
Mr. Monosson recalled driving by the farm one day and seeing a blonde woman standing at the farm entrance. “She looked despondent,” he said. “And she didn’t look like she belonged there.”
The woman was Ms. Malley.
despondent= without or almost without hope
The article does not mention that Salih comes from an troubled family with an alcoholic father (who is ignored in the article) and his mother has mental issues as well resulting from that relationship. Wandering around the dergah property is good enough evidence for that indeed. That the Sheykh supported his finishing of school and now getting even more islamic education is actually an excellent thing.
Note that the other parents have visited the dergah and come and go as they please.
Then Mr Stavato is used to conclude the article:
Mr. Stravato said. “The shaykh doesn’t seem to be well read, not grounded in the Koran, often misquotes it and shows a lack of knowledge.
Alhamdulillah, this is while Sheykh teaches his mureeds to be grounded in the Quran, making them hafiz of Quran.
When I left him this morning, Sheykh was continuing to read, “A Peace to End All Peace: The Fall of the Ottoman Empire and the Creation of the Modern Middle East (a book described by reviewers as “not for beginner’s”).
And alhamdulillah, it was Sheykh who opened his laptop computer, read it sometime before fajr time on Sunday, and invited us to read the article for ourselves. I don’t know many Islamic scholars who are even comfortable with computers today, much less not-well-read ones.
I too invite you to read this article, invite Sheykh Abdul Kerim into your homes by listening to this story. Sheykh doesn’t have permission from the New York Times, doesn’t have permission from the Turkish Government, and doesn’t have permission from other enemies of Islam.
But alhamdulillah, Sheykh continues his work with the permission of Maulana Sheykh Nazim.
Please email NY Times about retracting this article at nytnews@nytimes.com
Leave comments on this blog to support our Sheykh!
Sheykh Nazim is also being attacked by government authorities, please support his petition.
Podcast: Play in new window | Download (2.2MB)
the truth on 
m.a.kidwai,CME/IND.RLY.(retd.) on 
