A few days ago I posted a new animated banner to the top right of this blog, and I hope that all of my readers noticed. It, as well as this post, was meant to serve as my contribution to promoting Shaykh Gibril F. Haddad's latest book, The Refutation of Him (Ibn Taymiyya) Who Attributes Direction to Allah. This is the most recent effort by not only Shaykh Gibril, but many other scholars as well, who are striving to stem the contemporary tide of theological anthropomorphism that self-proclaimed "Salafis", backed by petrodollars, are actively spreading.
In light of the fact that these well-funded activists, craftily hiding under the guise of their deceptively false claim of being the true Ahl al-Sunnah, are having a negative impact on Muslim communities throughout the globe, a translation of this key tract is very timely. Just as it was necessary for a scholar who was a contemporary of Ibn Taymiyya to pen a response to his glaring errors, having a translation of this key work available for those wanting to avoid the errors of those who take their 'aqidah from Pharaoh is of paramount importance in well.
The book in question is a translation of a "short theological tract, Fi Nafi al-Jiha, or On Denying Direction to God, by the Ashari theologian and celebrated Shafi’i jurist, Qadi Ibn Jahbal (d. 733/1333), is a clinical rebuttal of the controversial fatwa, the Aqida Hamawiyya, penned by his legendary contemporary, Ibn Taymiyya (d. 728/1328). It is considered, rightly, a classic manifesto of anti-literalism, which will be an indispensable reference for advanced students of Islamic theology, other professional theologians, and modern academics needing primary source materials in English or a source book on the controversies surrounding Ibn Taymiyya’s theology." The Forward to The Refutation of Him (Ibn Taymiyya) Who Attributes Direction to Allah is written by the honorable Shaykh Muhammad Afifi Al-Akiti and the Table of Contents has been made available on-line as well.
While on the subject of Ibn Taymiyya, I'll mention that I'm currently reading, and very much enjoying, the newly released Cambridge Companion to Classical Islamic Theology. Unsurprisingly, the editor Tim Winter (a.k.a. Abdal-Hakim Murad) has something to say about Ibn Taymiyya in this fascinating intellectual and theological history. After recognizing (on page 7) that "the three great Sunnî theological schools"—yes, that's three and not two—consist of "Ash'arism, Mâturidism and Hanbalism" and mentioning (on page 9) that "extremist Hanbalites" might not necessarily be representative of this theological school as a whole, the noble Shaykh later (page 10) goes on to mention the most well-known proponent of this "extremist" view, Ibn Taymiyya:
"Certainly, it is intriguing that the Hanbalî alternative in most places represented no more than a small fringe, just as the Hanbalî definition of Sharî'a remained the smallest of the rites of law. The iconic hard-line champion of this school, Ibn Taymiyya…is not conspicuous in the catalogues of Islamic manuscript libraries; his current renown is a recent phenomenon. Ibn Taymiyya was, indeed, imprisoned for heresy, a relatively unusual occurrence, and it would be hard to imagine Muslim society, or its rulers or scholars, punishing more philosophical thinkers like Ghazâlî, or Razî, or Taftâzânî, in the same way. 'Hard' Hanbalism offered a simple literalism to troubled urban masses, and occasionally won their violent, riotous support, but the consensus of Muslims passed it by."
This criticism of the "simple literalism" and "corporealism" of the "extremist Hanbalites" needs to be understood in the context of maintaining the "original collective spirit of sancta simplicitas" (page 8), and one also needs to recognize that "Monotheism, however, is never as simple as most of its advocates would wish" (page 6). For anyone familiar with the editor's Contentions 8, his description of "false Salafism" as "an unsuccessful flight from complexity" might well be brought to mind!
I was excited to see that a forthcoming title, edited by Mohammed S. Ahmed and Yosef Rapoport, entitled Ibn Taymiyya and His Times (Oxford University Press, 2008) was referenced...so we'll be looking forward to that, insha'llah.
Those wanting a brief discussion of the theological issue that Shaykh Gibril F. Haddad's new book addresses in detail, please see Allah Exists Without Place or Direction at Sunni Answers...an invaluable resource for responses to the neo-Salafi heresy.
The first title, Our Master Muhammad the Messenger of Allah (ASWS): His Sublime Character & Exalted Attributes, is a translation of a work by Imam ‘Abdallah Sirajuddin al-Husayni of Aleppo, Syria. The book, which is described as "incredible expression of Prophetic love," is translated by Khalid Williams, contains an introduction by the great Shaykh Muhammad b. Yahya al-Ninowy, and is the second publication by Sunni Publications (in cooperation with Marifah.net). The author of the Arabic original, Imam ‘Abdallah Sirajuddin al-Husayni, was "not only a Hafiz, a leading scholar of Hadith and exegete of the Qur’an, but also a true Saint, referred to by scholars as ‘The Pole of Prophetic Love of our Times’. His book is the product of true scholarship and virtue." Preview chapters of this heartfelt work of Islamic piety can be found here and here.
The second book, A Portrait of the Prophet: As Seen by His Contemporaries, is a translation of Imam Muhammad ibn 'Isa at-Tirmidhi's famous Ash-Shama’ilal-Muhammadiyya—and, yes, this is the same Imam at-Tirmidhi (died 209 AH) who compiled the canonical hadith collection known as Sunan al-Tirmidhi. The present work, usually known simply as Ash-Shama'il, is published by Fons Vitae, translated by Muhtar Holland, contains a forward by Hamza Yusuf, an introduction by Kenneth Honerkamp and calligraphy by Mohamed Zakariya...so need we say more? No doubt, a quality translation of Ash-Shama'il is long overdue since it contains "a famous and a most indispensable collection of authentic traditions (ahadith), listing the main texts from which to glean the beautiful attributes, both moral and physical, of the Holy Prophet"—salla Allahu ‘alayhi wa salam. This is a book that every English-speaking Muslim should have in their home library, since it's an indispensable tool for not only learning more about the Prophet—salla Allahu ‘alayhi wa salam, but instilling love for him as well.
I recently obtained a copy of Al-Muhaddithat: The Women Scholars in Islam, by Muhammad Akram Nadwi, which provides a great deal of detail on contributions made by women in the field of the hadith sciences and other areas of Islamic scholarly endeavor. So far I've only flipped through it, but that was enough to show me that it's a book that all scholarly-minded sisters will want to add to their libraries.
In addition to that, I was recently made aware that Gorgias Press has published an English translation of Bint al-Shati's The Wives of the Prophet. The original Arabic work was written by Aisha Abdel-Rahman (1913-1998), whose pen name was Bint al-Shati', back in 1959, so it's nice to finally have an English translation...albeit one that's a bit pricey. I was unaware of this translation until a few months ago, when a renowned scholar that I know recommended this book to someone who wanted to read a biography of the wives of the Prophet—salla Allahu 'alayhi wa salam, and based on the description of the book, I can see why. As described by the publisher, this book "is an account of the family life of the Prophet Muhammad, concerning the noble ladies who lived in his house. The author tries to visualize the life of each of the women, their relationships with the Prophet, and their roles as wives and women. The work is based on authentic Islamic sources such as Tabari, Waqidi, Ibn Ishaq, and Ibn Hisham. The author concentrates on the life of Muhammad among his wives, and on his treatment and discipline of them. This text gives an insight into the life of women at the beginning of the Islamic Era."
Professor Sherman A. Jackson (Professor of Arabic and Islamic Studies, Visiting Professor of Law, The University of Michigan. Ph.D., University of Pennsylvania; M.A. University of Pennsylvania; B.A., University of Pennsylvania) has produced yet another piece of intellectual fruit to be savored:
Just like the introduction to his translation of Imam al-Ghazali's Faysal al Tafriqa, entitled On the Boundaries of Theological Tolerance in Islam in English, and his rebuttal to Khaled Abou El Fadl in his essay entitled Islam(s) East and West: Pluralism between No-Frills and Designer Fundamentalism (published in September 11 in History: A Watershed Moment?), this short paper is also chock-full of wisdom. As usual, the synthesis is amazing, as is the light that he sheds, from an Islamic perspective, on oft-overlooked points.
For those who haven't read On the Boundaries of Theological Tolerance in Islam, well please know that the world would be a much better place if every Muslim read and reflected upon this small tome. Likewise, if you're looking for a vision on where Islam in America should be going and how to fix some of the major problems that Muslims face in this country, look no further than Dr. Jackson's Islam and the Blackamerican: Looking toward the Third Resurrection...but don't forget to read the article. Although the latter book discusses the history and dynamics of "Blackamerican" religion, the advice Professor Jackson gives very much applies to Muslims of all backgrounds.
Since I've had it posted as my Book-of-the-Month for some time now, I was determined to write something about The Attributes of God: Ibn al-Jawzi's Daf' Shubah al-Tashbih bi-Akaff al-Tanzih, which has recently been published by Amal Press, before yet another month rolls around. I've been excited about the publication of this book ever since receiving an advanced copy of it to review early in 2006, so I want to do what I can to ensure it gets wider recognition.
This book is much needed in our age and should serve as a treasure for those contemporary Muslims who have been confused by "Salafi"/Wahhabi propaganda efforts. The intent behind the original Daf' Shubah al-Tashbih bi-Akaff al-Tanzih, written by Ibn al-Jawzi roughly eight hundred years ago, was to show the tenuousness (if not outright ridiculousness) of the anthropomorphic 'aqidah that some (but not all!) of his Hanbali contemporaries had fallen into. Insha'llah, this excellent English translation by UstadhAbdullah bin Hamid Ali will fulfill this same purpose in our age. I just hope that enough copies of this finely presented book find their way into the right hands, since I sincerely feel that there are plenty of truth-seeking minds and honest hearts out there in our communities that have simply been duped by the Saudi-backed calls of "returning to the creed of the Salaf" when in reality they're spending their petrodollars in an attempt to get Muslims to adhere to a creed, spread by a small but vocal group of Hanbalis, which was rejected by the large majority of Muslims scholars. Here's one of my favorite excerpts from The Attributes of God (pages 89-90):
The Twenty-Fourth Hadith
Bukhari and Muslim related in the two Sahihs that Ibn Mas'ud said that, "A Jewish scholar came to the Prophet—salla Allahu 'alayhi wa salam—and then said, 'O Muhammad! Surely God will hold the Heavens on the Day of Resurrection on a finger, the Earth's on a finger, the mountains and the trees on a finger […]' In another narration the wording is "[...] and the water and the soil on a finger. Then He will shake them." So the Messenger of God—salla Allahu 'alayhi wa salam—smiled and then he said: “And they have not considered God according to His true worth (Qur'an 39: 67).”
I would answer this by stating that the apparent reason for the Prophet's smile—salla Allahu 'alayhi wa salam—is [to show his] disapproval [of the Jew's statement]. The Jews liken God to His Creation, and the revelation of the verse is proof of the Messenger's condemnation of such beliefs. Similar in meaning to this hadith is his saying, "Verily the hearts of the children of Adam are between two of the fingers of the All-Merciful One. He turns them about however He pleases." Since the heart between two fingers is tractable and subdued, this indicates that the one who turns them about subjugates hearts. But, Qadi [Abu Ya'la] said, “It is not wrong to hold and understand the report according to its outward meaning in affirming fingers as Attributes that refer back to the Divine Essence, since we do not affirm fingers that are limbs and parts.”
This is the statement of a confused person, because he is either to affirm limbs or he is to interpret it. As for understanding and holding them on their outward meanings, their outward meanings are limbs. Then he says, “But they are not parts.” So this is the statement of one who stands while sitting down. So the comments of whoever states this are spoiled.
Yes, this is the statement of “one who stands while sitting down” indeed, so hopefully reading and reflecting on this text will help some of our contemporary Muslim brothers and sisters—those who have bought into the so-called "Salafi" claims without ever hearing the view of the mainstream Ahl al-Sunnah wa al-Jama'ah—see through the misinformation and confusion.
The biography of Ibn al-Jawzi, the author of the Arabic original, is given as follows: "Ibn al-Jawzi al-Qurashi al-Taymi al-Bakri al-Baghdadi al-Hanbali (509/510-597) was, with Shaykh 'Abd al-Qadir al-Gilani, the Imam of H.anbalis and foremost orator of kings and commoners in his time, whose gatherings reportedly reached one hundred thousand, a hadith Master, philologist, commentator of Qur'an, expert jurist, physician, and historian of superb character and exquisite manners." The text in question, Daf' Shubah al-Tashbih bi-Akaff al-Tanzih, is actually a shorter version of his much more detailed Kitab Akhbar As-Sifat, which has also been translated into English and published as: A Medieval Critique of Anthropomorphism: Ibn Al-Jawzi's Kitab Akhbar As-Sifat. However, as with most texts published by Brill Academic Press, this book is prohibitively expensive since it lists at $169! For the sake of accuracy, please be aware that it is actually 446 pages in length, not 2229 as shown on Amazon.com—which I know since my local university library has a copy.
I should also mention that Ustadh Abdullah bin Hamid Ali has an outstanding lecture which discusses and critiques the flawed methodology of contemporary so-called "Salafis", especially in regards to their approach to fiqh (jurisprudence) , which is now available on CD from his Lamppost Productions website. I encourage anyone who is unaware of the methodological shortcomings of "Reformist" and "Do-It-Yourself" Islamic movements to purchase a copy of this reasonably-priced CD.
In the above clip, author and Middle East policy expert Robert Satloff discusses several stories in which North African Muslims helped Jews hide from and escape persecution by the Nazis during the Second World War. It's not well-known in the West that some North African countries, especially Morocco, have large Jewish populations due to the fact that they had to flee Christian persecution in Europe—especially Spain during the Reconquista. Unfortunately for them, Adolf Hitler decided to invade North Africa, thus extending his plan to exterminate the Jews (i.e. The Holocaust) across the Mediterranean.
Discouraged by some of the rather narrow-minded and misinformed comments that I read, several days ago I submitted the following response on Joee Blogs - A Catholic Londoner. Since my somewhat detailed comments, which were posted in regards to the question "Do Catholics and Muslims worship the same God?", are still yet to show up on Joee Blogs, I've decided to post them here (slightly modified and updated):
As an American Muslim, and former Christian, here's what I have to say in regards to this important question. While I agree with Andrew's statement that "God does not give conflicting revelations", it seems this is poses a problem for Christianity, not Islam. To explain: since Muslims believe in the same non-Trinitarian and unadulterated monotheism as Abraham, Moses and Jesus—peace be upon them all, it is Trinitarian Christianity that is thus guilty of theological innovation and burdened with a new fangled creed...which is certainly not the pure Semitic monotheism that Muslims and Jews adhere to. Indeed, by focusing on the unambiguous statements about the nature of God both in the Tanakh (a.k.a. Old Testament), Synoptic Gospels and the Qur'an, a well-intentioned and unbiased person who has their theological priorities in order can see a very consistent theology. This is why the Islamic belief that God's message via all of His prophets was consistent in regards to basic beliefs not only makes sound theological sense but can be supported from the Bible as well. On the other hand, Christians have to contend with the fact that believers in the Old Testament were clearly non-Trinitarian—and if you doubt this coming from a Muslim, try reading some Jewish refutations [(1)(2)(3)] of Christian misuse and misinterpretation of the Old Testament—while after the time of Jesus many (but not all) Christians became Trinitarians. It's probably worth mentioning that Trinitarian Christianity was largely rejected by the Jews, who were about the only religious community in the Middle East that placed strong emphasis on monotheism, thus the concept of a Triune God found fertile ground largely spread in the pagan communities of the Near East, amongst whom concepts like divine incarnation, triune gods, etc., were not a problem. An astute exposé of Trinitarian thinking entitled Trinitarians: Searching for Evidence of Divine Plurality, can be found here.
As far as crucis3's comments, without discussing in detail his weak grammatical formulations, I'll just say that it seems he's just uncritically accepted what the hate-mongers have spewed out. Unfortunately for him, the same accusations of (alleged) pagan origins can be shown for the words used in the Bible for "God" and "god"—in the original Biblical languages of Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek. Please see my detailed blog posting Accidental Paganism Based on a Name? for a detailed refutation of such ideas. For those lacking the courage to read the entire article, I'll just mention that even the English words "God" and "god" are of pagan German origin...not that it really matters, since Jesus didn't speak English (which may come as a surprise to some people). Indeed, the word for "God" in Jesus' native language of Aramaic was "Alaha", which is obviously much closer to the Arabic word "Allah" than the English word "God".
In regards to Mark Durie's article...well he does a great job of demonstrating that he doesn't know much about the Qur'an or Islamic theology, which seems about par for the course as far as the Christian missionaries that I've come across. However, the most nonsensical reply that I found above was where "by their fruits" linked to an article which informs us that some Muslims murdered an Assyrian Christian priest in Iraq—as if an entire religion is to blame for the actions of a few of its misguided followers, especially when their actions contradict the teachings of the religion thus being attacked. As I've often pointed out, if religions were proven false by the misguided actions of some of its followers, then Christianity would have been proven false long ago. Ignorance is bliss, thus it seems that some Catholics need to reflect on Matthew 7:3, since not only did their co-religionists massacre the entire city of Jerusalem when they "liberated" it for Christ back in 1099, but there are many other examples of massacres carried out by Christians that I could reference. And regarding the treatment of Christians in Muslim lands, one should feel compelled to ask: How did Christian communities manage to survive in every Middle Eastern country for the past 1,400 years if Muslims were commanded to annihilate them? The answer should be obvious to anyone with a single active brain cell and a decent sense of fair play. However, this is not to say that Muslims have always lived up to the high ideals of their religion when dealing with non-Muslim minorities, but they generally did a much better job in this regard than Christians the pre-Enlightenment West. If you doubt this, read [(1)(2)(3)(4)(5)] about how heretics, Jews and other non-Christians were treated in Europe, not by a few misguided fanatics, but by the large majority of the population often urged on by the dictates of the Papacy and the likes of (Saint) Augustine of Hippo.
Speaking of (Saint) Augustine, who along with (Saint) Thomas Aquinas and Martin Luther was one of the most influential theologians in all of Christian history, it should be pointed out that he was very much a pre-Enlightenment figure who didn't have much sympathy for humanist concepts such as freedom of conscious and religious tolerance. Protestants should take note that Augustine's views aren't just another example un-Biblical Catholic dogmas, since he got them right out of the New Testament. Indeed, in the Parable of the Great Banquet, found in Luke 14, the master tells the servant: "Go out into the highways and hedges, and compel them to come in, that my house may be filled" (Luke 14:23). The metaphor here, based on the word "compel", is rather clear: When necessary, it is permissible to force people to enter the church. Indeed, it was based upon this parable of Jesus that Augustine of Hippo justified his principle of Cognite Intrare (i.e. "compel them to enter"), which justified using force to bring heretics and the unconverted into the church. This principle would be used throughout the Middle Ages by the Roman Catholic Church to convert non-Christians, suppress dissent and deal with heretics. If you doubt these facts, or feel that I'm misinterpreting this towering figure of Catholic Theology, take a look at Paragraph 24 of (Saint) Augustine's A Treatise Concerning the Correction of the Donatists starting where he asks: "For what else is the meaning of 'Compel them to come in'...?"—which is a very good question. After reflecting on that, please also take note of the fact that The Catholic Encyclopedia, in their rather lengthy article on the Donatist heresy, proves itself untrustworthy and deceitful by omitting these ugly details, which leads one to justifiably assume that this was a premeditated attempt to preserve the image of (Saint) Augustine in the minds of its Catholic readers.
Anyway, based on many years of studying comparative religion; reflecting on the teachings of Judaism, Christianity and Islam; being disturbed by misinformed and simplistic articles on Islam meant for popular consumption; and being involved in heartfelt interreligious dialogues; what I see in this debate over whether "Allah" is the same God that Jews and Christians worship, especially the misguided attempts to portray "Allah" as some pagan god, is an attempt by Christians to divert attention from tough questions about their own Trinitarian theology. Indeed, when faced with the pure Abrahamic monotheism of Islam, instead of trying to address troubling questions about the shaky Biblical foundations of Trinitarian theology and the influence that Greek thought had on both its initial and later formulations (i.e. Thomas Aquinas"blended Greek philosophy and Christian doctrine..."), Christians instead try to poison the well. By this I mean they attempt to portray Islam as foreign and pseudo-pagan religion that worships "a different god" in order to keep Christians from doing some unbiased research about this viable alternative to their faith. While this might be an effective (albeit dishonest) tactic when it comes to keeping your average uninquisitive pew warmer in-line, it doesn't work so well on those who are informed, educated and know how to think for themselves. This is one reason that many former Christian converts to Islam are not only highly educated, but well versed in comparative religion. As a life-long truth seeker, I'd personally recommend learning about a religion from those who adhere to it, not from those who despise it. Such an approach would thus dictate that if you want to learn about Christianity, don't ask an atheist or a Hindu, but ask a believing Christian. And if you want to know whether Muslims worship the same God as you do, ask a Muslim (to which they should respond with a resounding, "Yes!") or, short of that, try reading the Qur'an with an open mind, if not an open heart (since it repeatedly makes it clear that the God of Abraham, Noah, Moses and Jesus is the God of Muhammad—peace be upon them all—as well). Although such an approach would seem to be rather obvious, many people apparently think they can get a religious education by watching FoxNews or listening to conservative talk radio shows. Unfortunately, such people seem to be well represented in the comments above. Hopefully these comments will make them feel the need to hold their gross double-standards in check and then set about trying to actually learn something before they post further misinformed comments...but God knows best.
Although I didn't mention it in my original comments, there's a nice article by David B. Burrell, an ordained Roman Catholic priest and Professor of Philosophy at Notre Dame University, called Naming the Names of God: Muslims, Jews, Christians. One interesting thing that is worthy of note in this article, as well as his book Knowing The Unknowable God, is that these great Jewish, Christian and Muslim thinkers (i.e. Maimonides, Thomas Aquinas, Ibn Sina and al-Ghazali) didn't waste their time engaging in idiotic debates about whether they all worshipped the same God. Rather, taking it for granted that they obviously did, they debated about the correct theological understanding of God, since it's on this level that the three world religions that claim Abrahamic roots have some profound and subtle differences (although some strong and obvious similarities as well).
As something of a coup de grâce, I'll mention that there's an article linked to above entitled Estimates of the Number Killed by the Papacy in the Middle Ages and Later[MS Word format], just in case anyone missed it. Any Roman Catholics out there who are still feeling the need to point an accusing finger at Islam in regards to present manifestations of murder and mayhem in the Muslim World should take a good hard look at this article first. Then, for even more balance, try reading The Myth of "The Myth of Moderate Islam", which presents a lot of facts and figures which prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that when it comes to killing, Christians remain second to none. I hope that readers don't find this posting overly harsh, since when one is dealing with ignorant and slanderuos polemics, the unadulterated truth just needs to be told...and God knows best.
Remembering the Veterans of "The War to End All Wars"
Last year around this time, I posted an entry called Remembering the WWI Vets Who Are Still Alive, which focused on an article, The Race to Remember, which brought attention to the few surviving British veterans of the First World War. Yesterday, while listening to NPR (Yes, them again!) I happened to hear a story about the fourteen surviving American veterans of the so-called "War to End All Wars" which I found to be quite fascinating. For the past couple of years, The WWI Living History Project has been making an effort to interview all of the surviving American veterans of World War One—including two who actually served in the infamous trenches. You can listen to NPR's program about Recording the Living History of WWI Veterans by clicking here—and the entire two hour program is scheduled to air today on selected radio stations.
I admit that I was a little surprised that so many veterans of World War I were still alive, since if they were born in 1900—which would have made them seventeen when America entered the war—they'd be at least 106 years old today. As it turns out, the youngest of these men is only 105 years old, since he lied about his age in order to join the U.S. Army at sixteen. What I really find staggering is trying to fathom the amount of change these men witnessed during their relatively long lives—lives which have spanned the most technically dynamic era in human history. Consider that these men were born just prior to the invention of the airplane and lived to see not only the advent of nuclear weapons and the Internet, but man going to the moon. Amazing!
In spite of all this technological change, I think the societal changes that these former soldiers and sailors witnessed probably were more challenging, disturbing and unexpected. Consider that these young men were born during the final years of the rather overly optimistic, idealistic and innocent Victorian Era, but now they're sharing our post-Cold War planet with Generation X and the so-called New Silent Generation. Not only that, but they managed to survive one of the most bloody and ghastly wars in human history—a war in which over eight million human beings lost their lives.
Since the eleventh hour of the eleventh day of the eleventh month is now upon us, I wanted to take this opportunity to draw attention to the sacrifice and suffering of veterans of the now almost forgotten Great War of 1914-1918. In the United States, this public holiday is called Veterans Day, although prior to the end of the Second World War it was simply known as Armistice Day—in commemoration of the end of the First World War. It's known as Remembrance Day in the United Kingdom, Canada and other Commonwealth countries, all of who made great sacrifices in human lives during this conflict. Names like the Somme, Verdun, Vimy Ridge and Gallipoli were well-known to all British, French, Canadian and Australian youths of previous generations—although I doubt many of today's young people (especially the Americans!) would recognize any of these names. So to assist any of our readers who might not be too familiar with these great slaughter grounds of The Great War, I'm filling this post full of links so that you can take the time to educate yourself. I couldn't think of a more appropriate thing to do on this day in which, 88 years ago, the so-called "War to End All Wars" came to an end.
Please note that at least one Canadian Muslim took the time to remember the veterans today, since Abdiel has a nice posting called A Remembrance Day Prayer—in which he mentions the uncle he lost in World War Two. No posting about Canadians who served in the Second World War would be complete without taking the opportunity to mention the sacrifices made during the debacle at Dieppe or on the beaches at Normandy (and watch Saving Private Ryan if you want a small taste of what went on there), in which Canadian troops played a significant role. I'll also take the opportunity to mention that my great uncle (i.e. my maternal grandmother's brother) was killed during World War Two as well. Although I have quite a few older relatives who served during this war, he was the only one that was killed—while leading a counterattack against advancing Wehrmacht forces during the initial stages of the Battle of the Bulge in December 1944. I clearly recall learning about him when I was a young boy and always remember missing not having him around to be the great uncle that I'm sure he would have been—since not only was he into working out, captain of his college boxing team (at the same all-male, at least back when we attended, military college that I graduated from), but a genuine war hero as well.
I also want to point out the fact that Muslims were quite involved in this great conflict, not only because the Ottoman Empire fought on the side of the Central Powers, but many troops from then colonized Muslim countries served with great distinction in the armies of Britain and France as well. In one of many books I read about the First World War while a young military officer, I recall learning about how the Germans really feared the French Colonial troops from Senegal and other West African countries...so let's not forget their sacrifice. If you're interested in learning more about the unbelievable ferocity of the war in the trenches, I have an Amazon Listmania! list called Great Books on The Great War which includes the best books that I know of on the subject. Ever since reading The Price of Glory: Verdun 1916 about twenty years ago, with the mind-boggling number of casualties that it presents, and seeing some before and after photographs depicting the horrific impact that artillery fire had on the area around the village of Paschendale, I've been fascinated by the First World War.
On a more contemporary note, even though I'm a former officer in the U.S. Marine Corps, I have to say that I disagree with some of the remarks President Bush made yesterday at the dedication of the National Museum of the Marine Corps. During his speech, he said: "And years from now, when America looks out on a democratic Middle East growing in freedom and prosperity, Americans will speak of the battles like Fallujah with the same awe and reverence that we now give to Guadalcanal and Iwo Jima." Without really addressing the fact that if the Middle East ever ends up being "democratic" and enjoying "freedom and prosperity" it'll be in spite of George W. Bush, not because of him—I will say that I don't accept the parallels he drew between the battles of Fallujah [1, 2] and the battles of Guadalcanal and Iwo Jima. I sincerely hope that in years to come, when the smoke of battle, fog of propaganda and haze of disinformation has cleared, Americans will be able to clearly see what distinguishes these battles. Suffice it to say that Guadalcanal and Iwo Jima were fought during a war that was not only both legally and morally justified, but took place between the armed combatants of two standing armies. This is in clear contradistinction to the attack on Fallujah, which was the domestic residence of thousands of Iraqis whose homeland had been illegally invaded based upon trumped-up charges. This offensive action, which was characterized by the overwhelming use of U.S. firepower, was dishonestly portrayed not only as a battle against "terrorists", in spite of the fact that attacking the military forces of an invading army isn't considered "terrorism" by any recognized definition of the word, but was also widely considered within the U.S. military as an (unofficial) act of revenge for the (un-Islamic) killing and mutilation of four American private military contractors (i.e. well-armed mercenaries). So instead of going into Fallujah with a justified rallying cry that was akin to the "Remember Pearl Harbor!", of World War Two, many U.S. Marines entered the fray will propaganda-filled heads that were convinced that not only were Iraqis somehow involved in the 9/11 attacks, but laboring under an outlook in which Iraqi civilians had been dehumanized and anyone carrying a weapon was deemed a "terrorist". This is why such things as the cold-blooded execution of a wounded Iraqi insurgent were brushed-off and even justified by many Americans, both civilian and military (and we only know about it because it was caught on videotape by an NBC reporter—otherwise, more than likely, it would have never come to the public's attention).
Indeed, without this state-of-mind, which was reinforced, if not encouraged, by the generally hateful and dehumanizing rhetoric found not only in the mainstream media at that time, but which was issuing forth from key members of the Bush Administration as well, I think such incidents would have drastically reduced. Indeed, without such a twisted and self-righteous moral environment, how could a military investigation determine"that the Marine was acting in self-defense" when he shot a wounded man who had taken refuge in a mosque? I'll take this opportunity to request that all of the hypocrites out there ask themselves how they would have reacted had the situation been reversed? Had an enemy soldier done such a thing to an American soldier, especially one wo had taken refuge in a church, at no time in our history would most Americans accept it as "acting in self-defense." Which just goes to show you that it's not only some Muslim extremists out there that are not only ethically and morally confused—since this obviously goes up to the highest levels of the U.S. government—but plenty of Americans are wallowing deep in a sewer of double-standards as well.
All of this brings to mind what was for me one of the most memorable images of the 2003 invasion of Iraq. This occurred when a reporter briefly spoke with a young U.S. Marine—who was decked out in his kevlar helmet and expensive flak jacket—who exclaimed, regarding the trapped "terrorists" his unit was then engaged with: "I wish they'd come out and fight like men!" Well, I thought, if you'd ask the two M1A1 tanks, which were busily blasting away at the building, to withdraw along with the attack helicopters and F/A-18 fighters that were also pounding the place, maybe the Iraqis would come out and "fight like men." I also couldn't help but thinking that such misguided and delusional sentiments were probably shared by the British redcoats back in 1775, when they were engaged in fighting American "rebels" who practiced the then-considered-cowardly tactics of hit-and-run attacks and shooting from behind walls and trees. Ironically enough, one of the first things British troops reported from the battles of Lexington and Concord, was that American colonial militiamen had a knack for mutilating the bodies of dead British soldiers. I'm sure that'll be a tough pill for many bigoted pro-Bush Americans to swallow...but I hope they manage to force down this piece of the painful truth (which I'll summarize as: Human beings are human beings, so please treat all of their lives—regardless of race, creed, nationality or religion—with equal sanctity).
On that note, I'll remind my readers that "terrorism" is generally understood to be "violence committed against civilians," thus the U.S. forces that forcibly entered Fallujah are much more deserving of that ominous label than any of the civilians, both combatant and non-combatants, who were in the city—regardless of the grotesque crimes that a few of them may have been guilty of. Thus I'll call on President George W. Bush to refrain from comparing the attack on Fallujah with any battle in which U.S. soldiers fought honorably and tenaciously against the well-trained and determined soldiers of the Imperial Japanese Army. Those who are too lazy or uninterested to read about this in book form, can head to theatres to watch the film Flags of Our Fathers, which was recently released, or pick up a copy of the already mentioned Saving Private Ryan. However, for the bibliophiles out there, I'd recommend Guadalcanal: Starvation Island and Guadalcanal: The Definitive Account of the Landmark Battle (which includes Japanese accounts), if you want to read about a battle in which isolated and outnumbered U.S. Marines handily defeated a numerically superior enemy force in fighting that involved plenty of hand-to-hand combat in harsh jungle conditions.
On a final note, since the title of this post almost forces one to think about it, I'll recommend A Peace to End All Peace to all those who want to learn more about the lasting impact that the First World War had on the contemporary Middle East...so please read it.
I just want to let our readers know that not only is this weblog back in business in regards to new postings, but we've added about fifty new links to our Links Page, removed a couple of dead links from it, refined our Blog Roll, and added a few new Reading Lists on the side bar as well. Expect to see a lot more of these Reading Lists in the near future, insha'llah. I've got most of them almost built—or ready to be built—and hope to have them completed soon. We've also uploaded our new OPML file, which allows you to quickly subscribe to all of the RSS/Atom feeds on our Blog Roll—and we've pasted an OPMLicon for this near the bottom of our side bar as well.
For those of you who are new to all of this, the purpose of an OPML file is to make it quick and easy to subscribe to a bunch of blog feeds, which is done by importing the OPML file into an RSS Feed Reader (a.k.a. News Aggregator). One of the great things about this is that once you've got your RSS (or Atom) Feed Reader—and NewsCrawler is the one I use—installed and configured, then you no longer have to waste time checking your favorite blogs one-by-one to see if they've been updated. Rather, by simply launching your RSS Feed Reader, you'll receive automatic notification of which blogs have been updated—and there are web-based RSS/News Aggregators which can do this as well, such as Bloglines.com and NewsGator.com. Most RSS Feed Readers work for podcasts as well, so make sure you subscribe to the Alhambra Productions and Zaytuna Institute podcasts so you can keep up with their latest audio and video releases.
Moving along...I've selected Truth and Fiction in The Da Vinci Code, by Bart D. Ehrman, to be our new Book of the Month—although due to our lack of activity over the past few months, maybe I should call it the Book of the Quarter. However, we'll try to remain optimistic and determined in regards to how much time we'll have for blogging...so hopefully such a long posting famine won't happen again.
The reasons that I chose Truth and Fiction in The Da Vinci Code this month are twofold: 1) the much acclaimed release of the film based on Dan Brown's blockbuster book; and 2) a couple of ill-informed and potentially embarrassing articles that I read, which were written by some Muslim doctors, demonstrated to me that some members of our Ummah are in dire need of a history lesson. In the not too distant future, insha'llah, I plan to post an angry tirade exposing the numerous factual errors and ignorance contained in these articles, since the slanderous and sloppy claims which they put forward are totally inexcusable...so please be on the lookout for that.
And by the way, for anyone who wants to know what Dan Brown got right in The Da Vinci Code and what he got wrong—whether by design or otherwise, Bart Ehrman's is the best book on the subject that I've found. Truth and Fiction in The Da Vinci Code is relatively short, written for the layman, and—due to its academic perspective—relatively free from bias and an overt agenda. This stands very much in contrast to many, although certainly not all, of the responses written by Roman Catholics, Evangelicals and other Christians...not to mention those on the other side who try to lend credence to some of the themes in Brown's book in order to serve their own ulterior motives.
You also might want to drop by this blog again in order to read some responses I've written in regards to following one of the four traditional madhhabs...or not. I had a lot of pent up ideas, as well as some older writings that I've done, on this subject, some of which I released in a rather lengthy comment that I posted the other day on Higher Criticism—which is a blog that I hold in very high regard. I hope to have the new pro-madhhab rants posted soon, insha'llah, so keep an eye out.
Also, please don't forget to visit our Links Page, since I admittedly get a bit frustrated when there aren't a lot of hits on it after all of the trouble that I've gone to. And because in the past some people seemed to have missed the point of the somewhat cryptic format of our Links Page ...I'll explain that you're not necessarily supposed to know what all of the links go to. If the site's logo inherently makes it clear what the website's name or purpose is, I certainly don't fight it or try to hide it. However, in the case that it's just a logo that doesn't really tell you what the site is all about...well do some exploring and find out for yourself. That's the real purpose of the Mere Islam links page: To encourage exploring to various websites which are largely, but not exclusively, related to traditional Islam. For those who just want our "A-List" of useful links, well that's always on the sidebar of our blog pages in the cell entitled Website Links.
We thank all of our readers for their continued support. Please read, reflect, comment, enjoy and...Deen on.
In recommending books for English-speaking aspiring Sufis, I recently heard an eminent shaykh recommend that murids stick to reputable and reliable translations of the well-known classical texts—and thus avoid modern texts that often suffer from New Age, perennialist and other un-Islamic influences. In that regard, the shaykh mentioned "al-Suhrawardi" as the author of one of these classical texts. Although my notes from this particular lesson don't indicate whether the shaykh mentioned the actual name of the text, I realized that he must have been referring to Kitab Adab al-Muridin, by Abu al-Najib al-Suhrawardi.
My knowledge in this regard was due to the fact that a few months prior I had became somewhat confused when I heard a mainstream Sunni shaykh mention that a certain "al-Suhrawardi" was a great Sufi master and guide. The reason for my confusion was that, in my ignorance, I was only aware of one eminent Muslim by the name al-Suhrawardi—and that would be Shahab al-Din Yahya al-Suhrawardi. Since this figure is, to say the least, rather controversial from a mainstream Sunni perspective, the shaykh's statement prompted me to do some research. I was already somewhat familiar with the Islamic philosopher named al-Suhrawardi due to purchasing Seyyed Hossein Nasr's Three Muslim Sages: Avicenna-Suhrawardi-Ibn Arabi a few years ago, coupled with the fact that I had seen a translation of one of his major works that had been recently published. However, further research helped quell my confusion since I soon learned, with the help of Wikipedia, that although this Shi'a founder of the Illuminationist School (Hikmat al-Ishraq) of Islamic Philosophy is probably the best known of Muslims bearing the the name al-Suhrawardi, he's quite a different person than Abu al-Najib al-Suhrawardi—who was very much a mainstream Sufi of the Ahl al-Sunna, being Ash'ari in 'aqida and Shafi'i in fiqh.
For those who are interested, in order to avoid confusion in the future, there are three Muslim sages who bear the name al-Suhrawardi, also spelled al-Suhurwardi, that one should be aware of:
Shahab al-Din Yahya al-Suhrawardi (born 1155, died 1191 CE) was a Shi'a philosopher of Kurdish origin, and founder of the School of Illumination (Hikmat al-Ishraq)—one of the most important doctrines in the history of Islamic Philosophy. His life spanned a period of less than forty years in the middle of twelfth century CE, produced a series of highly assured works that established him as the founder of this new school of philosophy. His teacher was Majd al-Din Jaili who was also the great Sunni Imam Fakhr al-Din al-Razi's teacher. Shahab al-Din al-Suhrawardi was unique in his deep insights into the origins of Iranian and Greek philosophy, as well as his treatment of Islamic teachings.
Arising out of the peripatetic philosophy developed by Ibn Sina, al-Suhrawardi's illuminationist philosophy is critical of several of the positions taken by Ibn Sina, and radically departs from the latter through the creation of a symbolic language. The fundamental constituent of al-Suhrawardi's philosophy is pure immaterial light, of which nothing is more manifest, and which unfolds from the light of lights in emanations through the descending order of the light of ever diminishing intensity; through complex interaction, then in turn give rise to horizontal arrays of lights, similar in concept to Platonic Forms, which govern the species of mundane reality.
Shahab al-Din al-Suhrawardi also elaborated the idea of an independent intermediary world, the imaginal world ('alam al-mithal). His views have exerted a powerful influence down to this day, particularly through Mulla Sadra's adoption of his concept of intensity and gradation to existence, wherein he (i.e. Mulla Sadra) combined peripatetic and illuminationist descriptions of reality. He is sometimes given the honorific title Shaykh al-Ishraq, or "Master of illumination", as well as being called "The Master of Oriental Theosophy". In his writings, he attempted a synthesis of Zoroastrian, Platonic, and Islamic ideas. The "Orient" of his "Oriental Theosophy" is the symbolic Orient, the East and the dawn as the symbol of Spiritual Light and Knowledge. He taught a complex and profound emanationist cosmology, according to which all creation is a successive outflow from the original supreme Light of Lights (Nur al-Anwar).
He was executed in 1191 on charges of cultivating Batini teachings and philosophy, by the order of al-Malik al-Zahir, son of Saladin, and sometimes is called al-Maqtul (i.e. "the Slain"). A critical edition of his Hikmat al-Ishraq was recently (2000) translated into English and publshed as The Philosophy of Illumination by Brigham Young University Press.
Abu al-Najib al-Suhrawardi (born 1097, died 1168 CE) was an Iranian Sufi and founder of al-Tariq al-Suhrawardiyya. He was a Sunni scholar, staunchly Ash'ari in creed, who studied Islamic law in Baghdad, then set up a retreat by the river Tigris where he gathered disciples. At the age of about twenty-five, he left his academic pursuits in order to dedicate himself to a life of tasawwuf and eventually became an esteemed murid of Ahmad al-Ghazali—the brother of Imam Abu Hamid al-Ghazali. In 545 A.H. he was appointed to teach Shafi'ifiqh at the prestigious Nizamiyya academy, but was later removed for purely political reasons. Both before and after this appointment, he continued to teach fiqh, hadith and tasawwuf at his own madrasa, and he was considered to be an authoritative mufti as well. After his lifetime, his paternal nephew, Abu Hafs Umar al-Suhrawardi, went on to spread and expand the Suhrawardiyya order, of which he was a co-founder. Although he was known to have written a number of books, his Kitab Adab al-Muridin seems to be the only one to have survived to the present day. He is also sometimes known as Diya al-din Abu 'n-Najib al-Suhrawardi.
Abu Hafs Umar al-Suhrawardi (born 1144, died 1234 CE) was an Sufi who expanded the al-SuhrawardiyyaSufi order, by obtaining the support of the caliph, that he co-founded with his uncle Abu al-Najib al-Suhrawardi (mentioned immediately above). He authored a Sufi text entitled 'Awarif al-Ma'ârif, a translation of which is due to be published by Fons Vitae as Knowledge for Encountering God.
In the end, knowing the biographical details of all three of these well-known al-Suhrawardi's might not do away with all of the confusion, since many articles and books—including the various transtions—simply list the author as "al-Suhrawardi" without specifying which one!
By the way, Abu al-Najib al-Suhrawardi's Kitab Adab al-Muridin was ably translated into English back in 1975 by Menahem Milson and published by Harvard University Press. Last year I was able to track down a used copy that was still in great shape. I didn't have my hopes very high, since I was expecting the book to contain a hypercritical and rather hostile introduction, complete with a host of faulty conclusions that one expects to find, as a matter of course, in books on Sufism produced by Western Orientalists.
However, I found Milson's translation to be a pleasant surprise. Not only was his translation seemingly sound—although since the Arabic text isn't included, I have to reserve final judgement—but his introduction was balanced, informative and relatively free from bias. I certainly felt that he treated the subject matter in a fair manner—and much better than your typical hostile Orientalist. Indeed, he clearly demonstrated that Sufism was not (and is not) some sort of antinomian Muslim sect that was somewhat aloof of the shari'a and in opposition to orthodox Sunni beliefs—misinformed myths that some Muslims and non-Muslim "experts" continue to propagate to this very day. Not to deny that Milson's introduction couldn't be knit-picked on a few points, I hope that the following excerpts will demonstrate the refreshing nature of his clarifications:
"To be sure, this does not suggest that those persons neglected the divine law. Quite the contrary. Being painfully aware of human imperfection, they held that man could not possibly go too far in attempting to carry out God's orders. Hence, one of the characteristics of those early Muslim pietists was their utmost scrupulosity (wara') in observing the rules of the shari'a in ritual and social matters" [pages 2-3].
"The question of the origins of Sufism has long been debated by Western scholars, most of whom, until the last generation, held that the essential ideas of Islamic mysticism had origin- nated from alien, non-Islamic sources. Admittedly, Sufism absorbed a considerable number of heterogenous elements; the influence of Neoplatonism was especially significant. It should be recognized, however, that the primary sources of Sufism are Islamic, the Quran being first and foremost among them" [pages 3-4].
"Since the fifth century A.H., Sufism has attracted a large following in all strata of society. This development appears to have resulted from the need which many Muslims felt to enrich emotionally their religious life. Such need was ex- perienced not only by the uneducated, who were naturally debarred from the intellectual satisfaction that could be de- rived from juristic and theological studies, but also by many of the religious scholars ('ulama')—guardians of the divine law of shari'a. Layman and 'ulama' alike adopted Sufism to satisfy that need" [page 6].
"Yet Sufis did not constitute a sect; with few exceptions they remained within the fold. They have always regarded them- selves, and have been regarded by most other Muslims; as part of the orthodox (sunni) community, a concept which is expressed in the Arabic idiom ahl al-sunna wa-'l-jama'a- 'those who adhere to the tradition and the community.' Indeed, the Sufis held that they were the very core of that community. This idea is expressed in one of the best known Sufi compendiums in these words: 'The most excellent of the Muslim community, who keep their respiration with God and safeguard their heart from the intrusions of heedlessness, have singled themselves out with the name of Sufism; and this name has become famous in reference to these great men before the year two hundred A.H.'" [pages 6-7 - and the "Sufi compendium" just mentioned refers to al-Qushayri's al-Risala, which has also been reliably translated into English by Barbara Von Schlegell].
The remainder of Menaham Milson's introduction to his translation of Kitab Adab al-Muridin, which is actually entitled A Sufi Rule for Novices, goes on to discuss Sufi doctrine and practices in more detail, provide a fairly detailed biography of Abu al-Najib al-Suhrawardi and then offer an insightful overview of the text itself.
The actual translation of Kitab Adab al-Muridin, which spans from page 27 to 83 in the book, includes 208 points, in a somewhat abridged form, which relate to proper Islamic adab-which the author translates as "ethics". Accepting the fact that the Arabic word adab is a multifaceted word that is rather difficult to translate using a single English word, suffice it to say that Kitab Adab al-Muridin is essentially a "manual of ethics" that discusses everything from points of Islamic creed ('aqida) and the various states (ahwal) of the soul, to personal acts of worship ('ibada) and the proper use of a host of dispensations (rukhsa) within the Islamic shari'a. All of the diverse points of the original text are covered in fairly good detail, the only abridgement being that some of the detailed proofs from the Qur'an and hadith literature are omitted. In short, this is certainly a valuable book for aspiring Sufis who want to improve their knowledge by reading a translation of a classical text. Unfortunatley, A Sufi Rule for Novices has long gone out of print so I pray that Almighty God gives success to all those murids who try to find a copy.
When I first glanced at it on the bookstore shelf I thought it said Four Arguments for the Elimination of Wahhabism, obviously due to subconscious wishful thinking on my part after reading some of the articles ([1][2][3]) in the new issue of Islamica Magazine, thus my initial reaction was to think, "Why only four?!?" However, after a closer reading the actual title became apparent, thus I realized that this was the book that I've heard both Sidi Hamza Yusuf and Shaykh Nuh Ha Mim Keller recommend in some of their lessons and lectures.
So far, it's been a unique, captivating and informative read. Although the fact that it was first written in 1978 is rather apparent, it's still extremely relevant today and it's four arguments still stand. Not only do they still stand, but they are probably even more applicable to some of today's technology, such as video and computer games. In short, this book contains some pretty scary stuff that it behooves you to be aware of.
There are certainly more technologically up-to-date books that address the impact that our electronic and information age has had on not only society at large, but on the day to day lives of ordinary human beings. One of the best of this genre is supposedly A Is for Ox: The Collapse of Literacy and the Rise of Violence in an Electronic Age, by Barry Sanders, and I've heard Sidi Hamza and Shaykh Nuh recommend it as well. However, keep in mind that in spite of its age, Four Arguments for the Elimination of Television remains the classic "must read" for those of us in the 21st century who have become aware of some of the disastrous side-effects of information overload, our severance from nature and the manipulation of the masses by a corporate and government-influenced mass media.
On a certain level, Four Arguments for the Elimination of Television is something of an overkill for Muslims, since we only need one solid argument for not watching television: It's a big waste of precious time. Likewise, it should be understood that this book is much more than an anti-technology rant, since it really does qualify as a profoundly reflective work of modern philosophical thought...it really is that good.
Based on this, but mainly on the fact that Sidi Hamza and Shaykh Nuh have strongly recommended that Muslims—especially Muslim parents—read Four Arguments for the Elimination of Television book, I encourage them to do so as well.
