SHOWING THE RIGHT PATH

The Aphorisms of Ibn ‘Ataa’-illah (R.A) – First Aphorism

sufi786 — Wed, 07 Feb 2007 00:23:00 +0000

The Book of Wisdom
al-Hikam al-`Ata’iyya
First Aphorism

TRANSLATION AND COMMENTARY – Nuh Ha Mim Keller

Infinitude is the native land from whence Allah has brought the soul,
then summoned it again upon the tongue of His messengers (Allah bless
them and give them peace) from its exile. Traditional Islamic
spirituality deals with answering this summons, lifting the heart from
the narrowness of the self to the limitlessness of the knowledge and
the love of the Divine.

People have spoken and written much about Sufism, as the
discipline is known, but it is perhaps easiest understood in context,
so I have thought to begin translating the aphorisms of the Egyptian
Master Ibn `Ata’ Illah’s classic manual of spiritual development al-Hikam al `Ata’iyya or “Book of Wisdom” together with some commentary. He is writing Allah may be well pleased with him) for those who have a tariqa or actual path or sheikh, yet his words may interest others. He says:

1. One of the signs of relying on deeds is loss of hope when there are missteps.

The book begins with this key aphorism because it is of the adab or “proper way” of travelling the spiritual path path to focus upon tawhid of the “Divine Oneness,” which in this context meaning to rely upon Allah, not on works, since

“Allah created you and that which you do.”
(Qur’an 37:96)

The method of spiritual path ascent is threefold, consisting of knowledge (`ilm), practice (`amal), and the resultant state (hal) bestowed by Allah.

Knowledge here means everything conveyed to us by the Prophet Allah bless him and give him peace), which is the content of the Sacred Law or shari`a. The practice of this knowledge, inwardly and outwardy, with heart and limbs, is the spiritual path path or tariqa.
The resultant state, Allah’s drawing near to the heart that thus draws
near to Him, is the dawning of the Divine Presence upon the soul,
termed by Sufis “ultimate reality” or haqiqa.

Ibn `Ata’ Illah, as a spiritual path guide, is concerned in this
works with the second moment of this ascent, that of way and works, so
he begins his book by letting the traveller know that the matter of
one’s spiritual path progress is in Allah’s hands alone. Discouragement
at the inevitable mistakes one makes in the path is a sign of relying
on one’s deeds rather than on Allah.

Works, whether prayer, or dhikr or “remembrance” of
Allah, or jihad, or fasting do not bring one the desired end of the
path, but are merely proper manners before the majesty of the Divine
while on the path. Just as putting one’s net in the sea does not
produce fish, though one must keep it there so that if Allah sends fish
they can be caught, so too, works are a net, and their spiritual path
recompense is from Allah. Abu Hurayra Allah may be well pleased with him) heard the Holy Prophet
Allah bless him and give him peace) say:
“None of you shall be saved by his works.” A man said, “Not even
yourself, O Messenger of Allah?” He said, “Not even myself, unless
Allah covers me with a mercy from Him. But strive to be right.” 1

Imam Nawawi comments:

The outward purport of these hadith [n: Muslim relates several]
bears out the position of Islamic orthodoxy that no one deserves
recompense or paradise for his acts of obedience. As for the words of
Allah Most High “Enter paradise for that which you have done” (Q
16:32), and “That is paradise, which you have been bestowed for what
you did before” (Q 7:43), and similar verses that indicate that
paradise is entered by virtue of works, they do not contradict these
hadiths. Rather the meaning of the verses is that entering of paradise
is because of works, although divinely given success (tawfiq)
to do the works, and seing guided to have sincerity in them, and their
acceptability are the mercy of Allah Most High and His favour. 2

The true spiritual path path is one of gratitude. Abu Sulayman
al-Darani used to say, “How can a sane man be proud of his works, when
his works are but a gift from Allah and a blessing from Him that he
must thank Him for.” 3 And Abu Madyan says, “The crestfallenness of the
sinner is better than the exulting of the obedient.” 4

Ibn `Ata’ Illah in this aphorism is apprising the traveller not to be veiled from the true path by his own high resolve. While irada or “will” is presupposed by the way, indeed the word murid or “disciple” is derived from it, the path sublimates it into its opppsite through tawhid ,
disclosing it to a mere cause, conjoined with the soul’s ascent not out
of logical necessity but out of Allah’s pure largesse. For this reason
some sheikhs term a traveller of the former spiritual vantage a murid or “desirer,” and one of the latter a faqir or “needy.” The prophet Moses (upon whom be blessings and peace) said when he reached the land of Midian,

“My Lord, I am greatly needy of the good You’ve sent me down” (Qur’an 28:24)

This humble sincerity of slavehood, or we could say realism, enables
the genuine spiritual traveller to benefit from both his good and his
evil. He benefits from his good by not seeing it as from himself, for
as Abu Bakr al-Wasiti says, “The closest of all things to Allah’s
loathing is beholding the self and its actions,”5 that is, because it
contradicts tawhid for Allah says:

“Whatever blessing you have, is from Allah” (Qur’an 16:53)

And he benefits from his evil by his faith (iman) that it is evil,
which is itself an act of obedience; and by repenting from it, which
rejoices Allah Most High. Anas ibn Malik Allah bless him and give him peace) that he said:
Allah may be well pleased with him) relates from the Holy Prophet

Truly,
Allah rejoices more at the atonement of His servant when he repents to
Him than one of you would if he were on his riding camel in an empty
tract of desert, and it got away from him with all his food and water
on it, and he gave up all hope of finding it, so he came to a tree and
laid down in its shade, having despaired of ever seeing it again. While
lying there, he suddenly finds it standing beside him, and he seizes
its halter, and overjoyed, cries, “O Allah, You are my slave, and I am
your Lord,” making a mistake out of sheer joy”

6 (Muslim, 4.2104: 2747).

The secret of true repentance ( tawba ) in the
spiritual path is this divine rejoicing it is met with from Allah Most
High. Abul Hasan al-Shadhili, the sheikh of Ibn ‘Ata’ Illah’s own
sheikh, used to daily pray to Allah: “And when we disobey You, show us
even greater mercy than You do when we obey You” (Invocations, 27).

Ibn ‘Ata’ Illah made this the first aphorism of his Book of Wisdoms
to apprise the traveller that when failings happen, there is also work
to be done: to repent to Allah, to realize that Allah is generous, and
to hope for the best from the spiritual path. The mark of relying on
Allah is that one’s hope is undiminished. The mark of relying on one’s
self is that it soars until there is a misstep, when it plummets along
with its injured pride. Discouragement in the path is an
incomprehension of the Divine Omnipotence, while certitude in the path
and in one’s Lord is of the adab of those who know Allah.

Hasan of Basra (R.A) and the fire-worshipper

sufi786 — Tue, 06 Feb 2007 23:45:00 +0000

Hasan of Basra (R.A) and the fire-worshipper

Hasan
had a neighbour named Simeon who was a fireworshipper.

Simeon
fell ill and was at death’s door.

Friends
begged Hasan to visit him; he called, to find

him
in bed, blackened with fire and smoke.

“Fear
God,” Hasan counselled him. “You have

passed
all your life amid fire and smoke. Accept Islam,

that
God may have mercy on you.”

“Three
things hold me back from becoming a

Muslim,”
the fire-worshipper replied. “The first is, that

you
speak ill of the world, yet night and day you pursue

worldly
things. Secondly, you say that death is a

fact
to be faced, yet you make no preparation for

death.
In the third place, you say that God’s face shall

be
seen, yet today you do everything contrary to His

good
pleasure.”

“This
is the token of those who know truly,” Hasan

commented.
“Now if believers act as you describe, what

have
you to say? They acknowledge the unity of God;

whereas
you have spent your life in the worship of fire.

You
who have worshipped fire for seventy years, and I

who
have never worshipped fire—we are both carried

off
to Hell. Hell will consume you and me. God will pay

no
regard to you; but if God so wills, the fire will not

dare
so much as to burn one hair of my body. For fire is

a
thing created by God; and the creature is subject to the

Creator’s
command. Come now, you who have worshipped

fire
for seventy years; let us both put our hands

into
the fire, then you will see with your own eyes the

impotence
of fire and the omnipotence of God.”

So
saying, Hasan thrust his hand into the fire and

held
it there. Not a particle of his body was affected or

burnt.
When Simeon saw this he was amazed. The

dawn
of true knowledge began to break.

“For
seventy years I have worshipped fire,” he

groaned.
“Now only a breath or two remains to me.

What
am I to do?”

“Become
a Muslim,” was Hasan’s reply.

“If
you give it me in writing that God will not punish

me,”
said Simeon, “then I will believe. But until I

have
it in writing, I will not believe.”

Hasan
wrote it down.

“Now
order just witnesses of Basra to append their

testimony.”

The
witnesses endorsed the document. Then Simeon

wept
many tears and proclaimed the faith. He spoke

his
last testament to Hasan.

“When
I die, bid them wash me, then commit me to

the
earth with your own hands, and place this document

in
my hand. This document will be my proof.”

8
hasan of basra

Having
charged Hasan thus, he spoke the attestation

of
faith and died. They washed his body, said the

prayer
over him, and buried him with the document in

his
hand. That night Hasan went to sleep pondering

what
he had done.

“How
could I help a drowning man, seeing that I am

drowning
myself? Since I have no control over my own

fate,
why did I venture to prescribe how God should

act?”

With
this thought he fell asleep. He saw Simeon in a

dream
glowing like a candle; on his head a crown,

robed
in fine raiment, he was walking with a smile in

the
garden of Paradise.

“How
are you, Simeon?” Hasan enquired.

“Why
do you ask? You can see for yourself,” Simeon

answered.
“God Almighty of His bounty brought me

nigh
His presence and graciously showed me His face.

The
favours He showered upon me surpass all description.

You
have honoured your guarantee; so take your

document.
I have no further need of it.”

When
Hasan awoke, he saw that parchment in his

hand.“Lord
God,” he cried, “I know well that what

Thou
doest is without cause, save of Thy bounty. Who

shall
suffer loss at Thy door? Thou grantest a Guebre

of
seventy years to come into Thy near presence

because
of a single utterance. How then wilt Thou

exclude
a believer of seventy years?”

SACRIFICE OF THE LAMB

sufi786 — Tue, 06 Feb 2007 08:44:00 +0000

Just as the Prophet (S.A.W.), and his companions landed from their rides, and laid the loads down, it was decided that they would sacrifice a lamb for dinner.

One of the companions volunteered: “I will sacrifice the lamb.”

Another: “I will skin it.”

Third: “I will cook it.”

Fourth: ” I will….”

The Prophet (S.A.W.): “I will gather the wood from the desert.”

The group: “O Messenger of Allah, it is not becoming of you to discomfort yourself as such. You rest. We will be honored to do all this on our own.”

The Prophet (S.A.W.): “I know that you are eager to do it all, but Allah isn’t pleased with the slave who distinguishes between himself and his companions, and considers himself better than others.”

Then he went to the desert, and gathered some wood, and brought it to the group

Islam The choice of Thinking Women – CONCLUSION

sufi786 — Tue, 06 Feb 2007 08:14:00 +0000

By Ismail
Adam Patel
CONCLUSION

Islam forbids the one
thing
that modern men and women have excelled in: a laissez-faire society. In
contrast, Islam commends chastity, marriage, reproduction and
upbringing
of children, all of which the “modern, liberated women” has been
encouraged
to abandon, at her peril.

Sex, in Islam, is
permitted
only within wedlock, a measure which protects women from being used and
abused. This also puts sex into its proper place in relation to other
human
needs such as social comfort, security and companionship. In Islam, sex
is not the be all and end-all of life, but it is an important
ingredient
for a harmonious, caring and mutually supportive relationship between a
married couple. It is a means of deepening love, affection and
consideration
towards one another.

The prominent
feminist philosopher
Simone de Beauvoir considered the roles of wife and mother to be a
hindrance
to women’s freedom, and believed that women could only escape the trap
of femininity by assuming the role of a professional career women. But
it turns out that even the career woman cannot escape the cage of
femininity,
indeed she has it much worse because she faces pressure to appear and
act
feminine as well as to succeed in her chosen career.

Many feminists seek
to steer
women away from marriage and childbearing, as if women were unable to
find
happiness in these. It is a sign of arrogance on the part of feminists
to make such assumptions. Even worse, they contend that those women who
have found happiness and security in marriage are only fooling
themselves.

Although in the
early part
of the twentieth century, feminist efforts focused on the campaign for
women’s suffrage and its consequences, a much greater impact on women’s
lives came from changes that had less to do directly with the women’s
movement,
and everything to do with a loosening of morals and manners. After the
First World War, there was an increase in literature on female
sexuality
and premarital sex, which had an effect on society. Whereas it had
previously
been the males who were immoral, women now- instead of demanding moral
behaviour from the males – began to follow the male lead in immorality,
to the delight of many men. The feminist movement, which supposedly
liberated
women, gave men the greatest pleasure. Not only has feminism allowed
men
to satisfy themselves sexually, but they are now in a position to
demand
that women look the way they want them to, based on the fantasy
pictures
spewed out by the media. The effect of sexual liberation has far from
liberated
women. Rather it has become a snare into which women are led for the
greater
benefit of men’s sexual gratification and irresponsibility.

Islam, in
contrast, commands
humans to marry, which is first and foremost an act of piety. Marriage
further brings benefits of emotional and sexual gratification, cohesion
between families, and social stability. And among His Signs is this,
that
He created for you mates from among yourselves, that you may dwell in
tranquillity
with them, and He has put love and mercy between your (hearts): verily
in that are Signs for those who reflect.

[al-Rum
30:21]
It is He Who
created you
from a single person, and made his mate of like nature, in order that
he
might dwell with her (in love)…
[al-A'raf
7189]
And Allah has made
for you
mates (and companions) of your own nature, and made for you, out of
them,
sons and daughters and grandchildren, and provided for you sustenance
of
the best: will they then believe in vain things, and be ungrateful for
Allah’s favours?
[al-Nahl
16: 72]
(See
also al’Baqarah
2:187; al-Shura 42:11; al-Nisa ‘4:1)

There are feminists
who advocate
and eagerly anticipate technological advances that will replace the
woman’s
role in childbearing. No doubt their wait will be in vain, because even
if such technology were to be developed, it would surely be in the
hands
of men. Instead of becoming liberated, women would be rendered useless
and be placed at the mercy of males.

The feminists see
the main
causes of women’s oppression as lying in the political and legal
system,
especially English common law which has its roots in Christianity
(religion
in general); marriage, childbearing and the family. Islam’s response to
these concerns may be summed up as follows:

1. The
rise of feminism
in the West was due to the high level of social, legal, political and
economic
suppression of women. The first suffragette movement in Britain was
established
to address the political and economic inequality suffered by women,
especially
those who were married. Throughout the twentieth century, women have
fought
in the home, the workplace and the street for equal legal and political
status. Women in Islam, unlike their Western counterparts, did not need
to embark upon any such campaign. Every individual in Islam, male or
female,
is considered to be an independent person who is responsible and
accountable
for his or her own actions and is answerable only to Allah. A Muslim
woman
has equal status in business; if she commits a crime, her punishment is
no more or less than that of a man. If compensation is due to her, she
is dealt with on equal terms with a man in a similar case. Marriage
does
not affect her legal status, her property or earnings, or even her
name.
Thus the demands of the Western women, which have been only partially
won
after much bitter struggle, were handed on a plate, as it were, to the
Muslim women, fourteen hundred years ago.
2. Feminist
fears
surrounding marriage, childbearing and family as a means of oppression
have been discussed in the previous chapter. The following points may
be
noted by way of summary:

a) Marriage in
Islam is a
means of obtaining contentment, but if a union is not successful, then
the marriage can and should be dissolved. The Qur’an commends marriage
in several places (see al-Nisa ‘4:1; al-Nur 32-33; al-Rum 30:21). For
a Muslim who has freely accepted Islam and is a sincere believer,
marriage
entails rights and responsibilities, but is not seen as restrictive.
Individuals
who enter wedlock must comply with Qur’anic injunctions; any failure to
do so brings the threat of divine punishment in the Hereafter.
Professor
Lois Lamya’ al-Faroqi listed the purpose and benefits of marriage as
follows:!

b) In Islam, children
are
seen as a bounty from Allah, and their birth is a joyous occasion.
According
to the sunnah, the newborn infant should be given a good name
on
the seventh day; his or her head should be shaved and the weight of the
hair in gold or silver should be given in charity as a sign of
gratitude
to Allah. It is also recommended to sacrifice a lamb and distribute its
meat among the poor. The Qur’an explicitly states that children should
not be seen as reducing wealth or curtailing one’s freedom, and any
acts
such as abortion or infanticide are strongly condemned. (See
al-an
‘am
6:140, 150; al-Isra’ 17:31).
Children are considered to
be
the apple of our eyes. However, the Qur’an also warns against becoming
unduly proud and investing vanity and false hopes of security in one’s
children (see Al ‘Imran 3:14; al-Anfal 8:28;
al-Tawbah
9:69; al-Kahf 18:46; al-Mu’minun 23:55; Saba’ 34:35; al-Hadid 57:20; al
Taghabun 64:15; al-Qalam 68:14)
c) According to the
Islamic
view, the family extends beyond the “nuclear” circle of father, mother
and children to include grandparents, uncles, aunts, nieces, nephews,
and
all their offspring. Rather than being a burden and crushing a woman’s
independence, the extended family should act as a support and means of
building confidence. The Qur’an repeatedly enjoins kind treatment of
kinsfolk
and orphans (see al-Baqarah 2:177; al-Anfal
8:41;
al-Nahl 16:90; al-Isra’ 17:26).
In the light of Islamic
teaching,
some of the advantages of the extended family may be outlined as
follows:)

Family members
provide
diverse
company and intellectual stimulation, which fosters a broadly based
environment
in which children and adults may grow and develop.

3. Western women who
see
religion as the cause of their oppression are diametrically opposed to
Muslim women who have seen the teachings of Islam and the way of the
Prophet
as the greatest means of emancipation and attainment of equal status
with
men. Islam has given the Muslim woman a status which is far above that
to which Western women aspire. So Islam has become a haven for today’s
educated, thinking women. Muslim women consider their religion to be
their
greatest friend, not the enemy as their counterparts in other societies
see it.
At this point, the
practical
situation of some women in Muslim societies today needs to be
addressed.
It is an unfortunate and shameful fact that many rights, which have
been
afforded to Muslim women by Allah, have been denied to them by men.
This
is largely due to the fact that many Muslim men have embraced Western
culture,
extracted what suits them, and used this to oppress women. Many girls
are
denied the opportunity of an education and career, their marriage
rights
are ignored, their inheritance dues are consumed and their fate in the
event of a divorce is deplorable. If we are to restore social order -
and
for the Muslim that means Allah’s order – then Muslim men, with the aid
of competent, sincere Muslim scholars, need to implement the whole shari’ah
and
apply it equally to both males and females. Modesty and the dress code,
along with a thorough education about all the issues involved, need to
be implemented and applied to both men and women.

However, even with the
shortcomings
that exist today, what Islam has to offer women is far better than any
other options open to them. The comments made by Western women who
embrace
Islam are very interesting. A British researcher, Harfiyah Ball,
interviewed
a number of new Muslims and reported the following comments:

” [Before I
accepted
Islam]
I had no feeling of purpose, no sense of direction, proportion,
perspective.
My life was unsettled, no guidance, no certainty, no proper aim,
pointless
and empty”.

“My girlfriends were
always
looking for boyfriends; all I wanted was friends”.

Although there have been
many
improvements in the situation of Western women and the model of Western
liberated women has been promoted worldwide, many Western women have
expressed
dissatisfaction about attitudes towards women in their own societies.
Women
feel that they are expected to fend for themselves, to compete for
their
survival with men. Their society expects them to be self sufficient as
well as glamorous and domesticated. Many other pressures in Western
society
have seen the feminist bandwagon grind to a halt as women come to
realise
its impracticality and the restrictions it places on women’s freedom
and
happiness. Young intellectual women have found that feminism has failed
them, and they are now looking towards more prudent, sustainable
teachings,
such as Islam. In “The new Victorians: a young woman’s challenge to the
old feminist order”, the author Denfeld states: “Feminism is bogged
down
in an extremist moral and spiritual crusade that has little to do with
women’s lives and it has climbed out on an academic limb that is all
but
inaccessible”. Her sentiments are not surprising since surveys in the
USA
have shown that whereas in 1986, 56% of American women considered
themselves
to be feminists, by 1992, only 29% described themselves as such.

As the feigned concerns
of
the feminist are becoming apparent. The thinking women are waking up
and
searching for a more prudent ethos to conduct their way of life. It is
greatly regrettably that after one hundred years of feminist dictates,
women are as worst off in real terms as a century ago. Poverty is
increasingly
a women’s problem. Women are made to fend for themselves and their
families.
In certain areas of Britain a woman heads one in three families’ on her
own (compared with one in two hundred headed by men alone). Although
English
women represent 50% of undergraduates only a negligible few ever reach
the top of their career. Western women suffering from mental illness
and
depression is higher than their male counterparts. The woman in the
west
has been demeaned so much that her body is considered a public object
available
for man’s gratification by casually ‘watching girl’s go by’ to sale in
pornography, or as a sensual object for advertisers to use in promoting
merchandise and prostitution. The consequences of all these is that the
woman in the west is portrayed as an object of entertainment, valued
for
her beauty and a work horse stippling the male with sensual
gratification
and the capitalist system with surplus profit. The Western woman has
been
short
changed of her integrity, intellect and personality.

If the feminists are
genuinely
interested in the emancipation of women, they need to challenge the
present
Western system by uniting women and men of all races under the umbrella
of a logical and sustainable ideology that can be applied equally
across
the East/West and North/South divides and address the universal human
concerns
of child-care, equal opportunities, pregnancy rights, protection and
education.
One need look no further than the principles and teachings of Islam,
which
offer security, legal and financial freedom, emancipation from sexual
and
physical harassment, and equality of status. Islam has been portrayed
as
a misogynist villain in the West, because it threatens the existing
social
order of bourgeoisie, monetary ideology, sexual deviancy and
oppression.
Islam faces the opposition from parties with vested interests who have
a stake in denying women express their true identity. The greatest
tragedy
of Western women especially those in the feminist movement, is their
lack
of aspiration: they have aspired only to be like men, instead of re
evaluating
and reclaiming what women are best at. Western men and capitalist
society
have devalued the heritage of women. It is up to women to look to the
principles
and way of life that credits them for their being. This can only be
found
in Islam.

Islam The choice of Thinking Women – PART 4- THE FEMINIST MOVEMENT

sufi786 — Tue, 06 Feb 2007 08:12:00 +0000

By Ismail
Adam Patel
THE
FEMINIST MOVEMENT

It is very important
to
study and understand the feminist movement, because it claims to
represent
the emancipation and welfare of women in these times. A need to
appraise
its logic, practical implications and viability is required, all of
which
will be addressed in this chapter.

The word “feminism”
itself
is very subjective and has been used indiscriminately, which has led to
a certain measure of confusion and the existence of several
definitions.
Among the current definitions of feminism are:

Any
groups that
have tried to
change the position of women, or the ideas about women, have been
granted
the title of feminist.

Feminists must not
only work
towards the elimination of male privileges but the sex distinction
itself;
genital differences between human beings would no longer matter
culturally.
The tyranny of the biological family would be broken and with it the
psychology
of power.

The emergence of
feminism
in
the West was mainly due to the dual standards of law in favour of men,
which were based on the teachings of Christianity. The earliest
feminist
campaigners demanded an end to the double standard of sexual morality,l
but this did not mean that they sought an overall lowering of moral
standards:
the early feminists saw chastity not as oppressive, but as both natural
and necessary.

Until fairly
recently,
Western
political systems were open to men only (and there were restrictions on
precisely which men were allowed to take part, namely socio-economic
class).
Women had no say whatsoever. The suffragettes campaigned for women’s
rights
to vote and participate in the political process.

As late as the
nineteenth
century, oppressive marriage laws were still restricting women with
regard
to earnings. In the event of a divorce, women were further humiliated
by
being denied access to their children and being cut off from any source
of maintenance. The divorce laws were heavily biased in favour of men.

The development of
the
factory
system drew women out of the home, and the oppression perpetrated by
employers
who saw women as cheap labour led to the emergence of a women’s
movement
that demanded equal pay and fair treatment. The struggle for equal pay
lasted ostensibly until 1975, when a law was finally passed in Britain.
However, as women are still being exploited in the work place, and it
is
not unknown for women to be paid less than men for the same work, the
struggle
is clearly not yet over.

The existence of all
these
oppressive laws and practices led to omen coming together to demand
equal
rights and justice. However, as time passed, capitalism and men in
positions
of power diverted Western women onto a different track. The early
feminists’
attack on injustice evolved into a movement in which women looked at
and
accused themselves. So what began with a struggle to change society’s
(in
most cases, men’s) attitudes and laws ended up changing women, arguably
to the delight of men.

The feminist movement
has
become an academic quagmire which has spawned nearly a dozen schools of
thought. These may be grouped under the headings of Marxist (or
Socialist),
Liberal, Sexual and Radical feminism. These will be examined and their
theories and practical implications discussed.

MARXIST
FEMINISM

The socialist or
Marxist
tradition has its roots in the works of Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels.
However, the idea of socialism predates both, and had already been in
circulation
among philosophers, economists and politicians. The thought of Marx and
Engels is exemplified in the following quotation:

“As individuals
express
their
life, so they are. What they are, therefore, coincides with their
production,
both with what they produce and with how they produce. Hence what
individuals
are depends on the material conditions of their production”.’

Marx’s concept of
labour
and value may be summarised as follows: The value and power of labour
contained
within this product can be realized only if others want the commodity -
if it has an exchange value in the marketplace. In return for such
productive
labour, the worker receives a wage, which has within it two components
- one a measure of profit or the surplus value appropriated by the
capitalist,
and the other, the product of necessary labour, is used by the workers
to sustain themselves, their family and the next generation. Marx’s
depiction
of capitalism includes a further class, a group which is only tenuously
linked to the production process at any given time: the unemployed, the
immigrant workers, and the women (italics mine). This group
comprises
various parts of the reserve army of labour ready to be mobilised when
production needs to be expanded rapidly, and then demobilised during
times
of recession.

Marxist theory
emphasises
the idea that what makes us human is the fact that we produce our means
of subsistence. We are what we are because of what we do or, more
specifically,
what we do to meet our basic needs in productive activities. What is
distinctive
about Marxist feminism is that it invites every woman, whether
proletarian
or bourgeois, to understand women’s oppression not so much as the
result
of the intentional actions of individuals, but as the product of the
political,
social and economic structures associated with capitalism.

Prior to the
introduction
of industrial capitalism, the family or household was the site of
production.
Parents, children and relatives all worked together to produce whatever
was needed for the family’s survival. Women’s work – planting,
preserving,
canning, cooking, weaving, sewing, childbearing and childrearing – was
as essential to the economic activity and success of the family unit as
was the work of men. But with industrialisation and the transfer of
production
from the home to the factory or other public workplace, women who for
the
most part did not enter the public workplace, at least in the
beginning-
came to be viewed as “non productive,” in contrast to “productive” wage
earning men.

This is basically
Engels’
theory of the cause of women’s inferior status, which he blamed on the
capitalist system, the family and marriage. In order to bring about an
end to the oppression of women, Engels proposed extending legal
equality
to women and then introducing them en masse to the workplace.
Such
a move would be a prelude to the alliance of all women with the working
class to socialise the means of production, abolish private property,
and
usher in an age of monogamous sexual love.

It was thought that
women’s
primary oppression lay in their role as unpaid domestic workers. This
analysis
implies that the benefits to male wage earners directly offset the
disadvantage
inherent in their class position. This points to one solution: the
abolition
of housework as it is now known.

What angered Marxist
women
most about women under capitalism was the trivialization of women’s
work.
Women were increasingly regarded as mere consumers, as if the role of
men
was to earn wages and that of women was simply to spend them on “the
right
products of capitalist industry”.

A prominent Marxist
feminist,
Benston concluded that unless a woman is freed from her heavy burden of
domestic duty, including child care, her entrance into the workforce
will
be a step away from, rather than towards, liberation. Marxist women
therefore
worked towards moving the women onto the factory work floor and towards
earning a living of their own, as a means of proving independence and
equality.
Another socialist, Warrior, argued that in general, males benefit from
women’s labour and capitalist males benefit twice. Women are the source
of all labour in that they are the producers of all labourers. Their
labour
creates the first commodity, male and female labourers, who in turn
create
all other commodities and products. Men, as the ruling class, profit
from
this commodity through its labour. The male capitalist class makes a
profit
when it buys this labour power and then receives the surplus value of
its
visible economic production.

Marxist feminists
believe
that all women in the capitalist system are subordinate. Middle class
women
are subordinated in general to the men with whom they live and work,
but
as members of the middle class they enjoy material and social
advantages
over both male and female members of the working class. Working class
women,
on the other hand, bear the dual burden of their subordinate gender and
class identities. In the family, as wives and mothers, they are the
principal
reproducers of the labour power from which capitalism extracts its
surplus,
for which service they receive no payment. In addition, many of them,
even
mothers with children, are in paid employment, which permits the direct
extraction of surplus value, while the wages they earn serve to meet
family
needs, created in increasing number by capitalism itself, for which the
income of the male “breadwinner” no longer suffices.

Yet another theory
within
Marxist feminism suggests that it is not childbearing, physical
weakness
or any other presumed biologically determined differences that are the
basis of women’s subordination in capitalist societies; it is the
social
allocation to women of responsibility for children. The obstacles to
changing
this connection lie in the capitalist system of production.

In Capitalism,
the
family
and personal life, Zaretsky3 detailed Marxist feminist theory
regarding
public/private conceptualisation. She argues that patriarchal ideology
is vital in the reproduction of capitalism and further that the
illusion
of a private sphere wherein one’s “personal life” is conducted is an
integral
part of this philosophy. This introduces an entirely new factor: the
concept
of a personal life, a subjectivity that is self consciously seeking
personal
fulfilment. This had not been a factor in the analyses of non
capitalist
modes of production. Indeed, one of Zaretsky’s arguments is that this
search
is specific to capitalism.

Zaretsky has two main
arguments.
The first is that the rise of industrial capitalism promoted a new
search
for personal identity outside the social division of labour. The second
is that the expansion of this “personal life” beyond the place of work
created a new basis for women’s oppression, since the responsibility
for
maintaining a refuge from an impersonal society was given to women, or
at least to wives and mothers.

Zaretsky traces the
particular
process of the proletarianization of the pett) bourgeoisie, which gave
rise to a need for a search for personal identity outside the sphere of
work. This became increasingly so as capitalism required a rationalised
labour process undisturbed by community sentiment, family
responsibilities,
personal relations and feelings.

In 1973, Vogel
introduced
an idea that represented a shift from the original Marxist
understanding
of domestic work. Vogel wrote: “In short, domestic labour is neither
productive
nor unproductive… Women’s productive activity in the family does not
fall under the capitalist mode of production strictly defined. The
common
characteristic of women, that of being domestic labourers is
significant.
Thus women who perform domestic labour form a group whose labour is
appropriated
in a distinct way in capitalist society, in a mode of production whose
social relations differ from those of capitalist production. This means
that an autonomous women’s movement is necessary to represent the
oppression
which women share as domestic labourers”.

What Marxist
feminists
have
tried to highlight is how women’s domestic work is trivialised in
comparison
with wage-earning work, and how women are given the most boring and
low-paying
jobs.

Dallas Costa
published
an
article ‘The Power of Woman and the Subversion of the Community’ (1973)
which carried an introduction by Selma James and made the unorthodox
Marxist
claim that women’s domestic work is productive not in the colloquial
sense
of being “useful” but in the strict Marxist sense of creating surplus
value.
No women have to enter the productive labour force, for all women are
already
in it, even if no one recognises the fact. Women’s work is the
necessary
condition for all other labour, from which in turn, surplus value is
extracted.
By providing current (and future) workers not only with food and
clothes,
but also with emotional and domestic comfort, women keep the cogs of
the
capitalist machine running.

Given the view of
women’s
domestic work as productive work, a “wages for housework” campaign
painted
a picture of women who enter the public workplace as carrying a double
load which meant that the day started with paid, recognised work on the
assembly line and ended with unpaid, unrecognised work at home. The way
to end this inequity, suggested Costa and James, is for women to demand
wages for housework. They proposed that the state – not individual men
(fathers, husbands) – should pay wages to housewives.

The practical
application
of Marxism has itself dealt the death blow to its theories, for if
Marxism
truly intended to save women from oppression, then the people of the
Eastern
bloc countries would not have risen up as they did in recent years. The
failure of Marxism in Eastern Europe is sufficient proof against this
theory.
However, we should also look at some of the practical issues:

Wages for
housework
is an idea
that is neither feasible or desirable as a strategy for the liberation
of women. It is not feasible because if the state pays wages to
housewives,
it will only do so in a way that preserves its own interests. The state
would most likely impose a special tax on married men, which would be
used
to pay wages to their wives. Depending on how large a bite was thus
taken
out of the husband’s income – and there is reason to believe that it
would
be a hefty sum – the wife’s pay cheque would most likely represent
nothing
more than a rise in status, as there would be no real rise in the
family’s
real income. The housewife’s pay cheque would have the further,
undesirable,
effect of imprisoning women in the home.

To regard
childbirth
as the
production of people to be evaluated as a financial asset is a failure
to understand and appreciate the value of human beings. In chapter III,
we saw numerous ayat of Qur’an and ahadith which
indicate
the higher status of the female due to her gender and unique ability to
bring forth and nurture children. Islam has elevated women beyond the
narrow,
worldly concerns of the workplace and earning a wage, and has decreed
that
her production and nurturing of children gives her a status that
equals,
if not exceeds, that of men. If Allah and His Prophet have told us that
the value of a mother is even greater than that of a father, then the
status
of motherhood must be reinstated to its proper, elevated position.

The underlying
Marxist theory
assumes equality between individuals in terms of financial
independence:
people are only equal if they earn independently to support themselves.
Far from liberating women, Marxism has in fact served the interests of
the bosses by supplying them with a surplus of workers which makes it
easy
for them to demand cheap labour. Real-life experience has shown that
few
who do get financial independence have gained it by sacrificing their
own
physical and mental health. However, the majority have become the
victims
of rather than the winners of the society. From Chapter II we can
deduce
the ills befalling women in the non Islamic societies of today.

Zaretsky suggests
that the family
is seen as not only a haven for men but also the arena for the personal
fulfilment of fathers and husbands, this can only happen at the expense
of mothers and wives.’ This view is contrary to Islamic teachings,
which
advocates the family as a place where both man and woman obtain
serenity
and peace. The family thus is the arena which provides both partners
with
personal fulfillment and protection.

The assumption
that
child-care
duties in the home form the basis of oppression implies a need to
create
communal nurseries, canteens and sleeping quarters. Feminists have
falsely
assumed that all women would rather be on the shop floor or in the
office
than spend time with their children. In fact it is highly improbable
that
women would like to be whisked straight from the labour ward to the
factory
floor, thus losing the opportunity to nurture their infants. As far as
communal living is concerned, there are not many people who would
willingly
exchange their privacy and personal space for an open kibbutz style
life.
Another consideration is that in a communal environment, it would no
doubt
be the women who would be employed to take care of the nurseries and
canteens,
no doubt at unsociable hours and with the lowest status in the
hierarchy
of roles. (This is in fact the case in many Israeli kibbutzim where
women
tend to be stuck with the menial tasks and childcare whilst the more
interesting
and prestigious jobs go to the men).

It may be argued that to
expect
the state or commune to take care of children is absurd. Since parents
choose to have children, they should take the responsibility for their
upbringing. If we think of children as valued possessions, we should
not
say that it is unfair that a family of four should live on the same
income
as a family of two: we should say that one couple chooses to spend its
income on children, whilst the other chooses to spend its money on
holidays
or furniture. There is no justification for expecting the state to care
for children. In a capitalist system, money has become the reward for
everything.
The feminists have lowered women’s value by demanding financial
compensation
for an asset which they should be proud of.

Marxist theory
appears
to
have little room for questions that deal directly with women’s
reproductive
and sexual concerns: contraception, sterilisation, abortion,
pornography,
prostitution, rape, sexual harassment and domestic violence.

Marxist feminists try
to
retain their loyalty to both socialism and feminism. Consequently, they
continue to give priority to the issue of class, although – unlike
orthodox
socialists – they no longer see feminism as a necessary consequence of
a socialist victory.4 They agree, however, that feminism without
socialism
is impossible (Mitchell, 1971) and for this reason, if no other, the
struggle
for socialism is given prominence. At the same time, these women find
that
they can only do so by means of what amounts to a very radical critique
of orthodox Maviews on the position of women.

If the oppression of
women
is based on the economic and legal power that men have over them, and
if
that power is class-based, then it follows that abolishing private
property
and socialising production destroys the economic foundation of women’s
position.’ However, the experience of socialist countries has been used
to question this logic. Women under Marxist regimes throughout the
world
have been the unfortunate victims of oppression in the home, the
workplace
and in the educational and political spheres. As far as the liberation
of women goes, Marxism has offered nothing more than the illusion of
justice.

LEBERAL
FEMINISM

Liberal feminists see
working
towards the elimination of the differences between the sexes as the
first
step towards true equality.

Modern liberal
feminist
theories
of gender equality are based on the assumption that in order to achieve
equal status, all stereotyped social roles for men and women have to be
abolished. Conventional women’s work roles assign to them the major
responsibility
for unpaid domestic work, especially childcare, and thus handicap them
with regard to their occupational roles. Despite the legal rights of
women
to equality in employment, men use women’s actual or presumed domestic
handicaps to perpetuate de facto discrimination by forcing
women
into a small number of occupational roles that are segregated according
to labour market types and working time schedules, and that have lower
pay and prestige than comparable men’s occupations. Employed women’s
lower
income is used as a justification for the perpetuation of their unequal
burden of domestic and child care work and their inferior power in the
family. Their segregated and inferior roles also hinder their
acquisition
of economic and political power. It is in the interests of men of all
strata
to use the unpaid domestic services of women and prevent women from
competing
with them for better jobs.

Liberal feminists
seek
to
create an androgynous individual, that is an individual which would
combine
some of each of the characteristics, traits, skills and interests that
are now stereotypically associated with either men or women. Another
goal
of the liberal feminists is sexual equality or gender justice, which
means
freeing women from oppressive roles and enabling them to rise above
their
lower (or non-existent) position in academia and in the workplace.

These aims raise
immediate
questions: should women become like men in order to be equal with men?
Or should men become like women in order to be equal with women? Or
should
both men and women lose their identities and become androgynous, each
person
combining the “correct” blend of positive masculine and feminine
characteristics
in order to be equal with every other person? The problems thus raised
are phenomenal.

It is impossible to
create
an androgynous individual because of the physical, anatomical,
biochemical
and physiological differences between the sexes. Another point, made by
Ann Ferguson, is that it may not even be desirable for people to be
socialised
to develop the potential for androgyny. Complete elimination of gender
differences raises major legal and economic issues. For example, if a
woman
is allowed to take six months off work following childbirth, should not
the equal male be allowed the same time off to spend time with his new
baby? If men and women have the same intellectual capacity and
reasoning
skills, then surely there is no particular need for female
philosophers:
men can point out inequities and suggest reforms just as effectively as
women.

Liberal feminists
seek
to
prove that women are as good as men. But we may ask: why is this
necessary?
Why should women have to be like males before they are deemed equal?
The
direction taken by liberal feminists is destroying the very essence
that
makes women special.

The oppressive roles
from
which liberal feminists seek to free women are not confined only to
females.
The immigrant population, male and female alike, are the worst victims
of oppression; but even Caucasian males may be discriminated against in
the case of jobs such as child-care and secretarial work, which are
“reserved”
for females. No doubt women suffer more than men, but they cannot be
seen
as unique when ethnic minorities and immigrants in the Western world
are
also suffering oppression. The roots of this inequity lie in capitalism
and its need to seek cheap labour in order to increase returns on
investment.

Elshtain, a critic of
liberal
feminism, states that “there is no way to create real communities out
of
an aggregate of freely choosing adults”. She argues that liberal
feminists
have over emphasised the male up to the point of equating masculinity
with
humanity, manly virtues with human virtues. She argues that liberal
feminism
has three major flaws: the assumption that women can become like men if
they set their minds to it, the notion that all women want to become
like
men, and the claim that all women should want to become like men and to
aspire to masculine values.

Liberal feminism has
a
tendency
to over estimate the number of women who want to be like men, who want
to abandon the role of wife and mother for that of citizen and worker.
Any woman whose identity is that of a wife and mother is likely to
become
angry or depressed when, after years of investing blood, sweat and
tears,
she is told that being a wife or a mother is a mere role, and a
problematic
one at that. It is one thing to tell a woman to change her hairstyle;
it
is something else altogether to tell her that she should get a more
meaningful
identity.

A profound statement
by
Elshtain
states that liberal feminists are wrong to advocate that women should
reject
traditional values. Articles written for women about dressing for
success,
making it in a man’s world, being careful not to cry in public,
avoiding
intimate

friendship, being
assertive,
and playing hardball serve only to erode what after all may be best
about
women. It is wrong to assume that women must be the same as men in
order
to be socially, economically or politically equal. In fact the sexes
can
be different, carry out different tasks, and still be equal on all
these
levels.

From the Islamic
point
of
view, there is no room for entertaining a desire to create androgynous
individuals. If the Creator had intended this for us, He could have
created
us as asexual beings who would reproduce like the hydra. However, the
issue
of oppression of others on the basis of their sex or skin colour still
needs to be addressed. Equal opportunities and equal pay must be
implemented
for all, without bias. Laws should be instituted that would guarantee
such
equality, whilst taking into account any physical differences and
ruling
in favour of the weaker individuals. As stated earlier, the Qur’an
tells
us that Allah has assigned to the male his duties and to the female
hers.
The Prophet is reported to have said: “Allah’s curse is upon those men
who imitate women and those women who imitate men”.

RADICAL
FEMINISM

The New York
Feminist
Manifesto of 1971 declares:4

“Radical feminism
recognises
the oppression of women as a fundamental political oppression wherein
women
are categorised as an inferior class based upon their sex. It is the
aim
of radical feminism to organise politically to destroy this sex class
system.
As radical feminists we recognise that we are engaged in a power
struggle
with men, and that the agent of our oppression is man in so far as he
is
identified with and carries out the supremacy privileges of the male
role.
For while we realise that the liberation of women will ultimately mean
the liberation of men from their destructive role as oppressor, we have
no illusions that men will welcome this liberation without struggle.
Radical
feminism is political because it recognises that a group of individuals
- men · have set up institutions throughout society to maintain
this power”.

Radical, or extreme,
feminism
regards men as evil, benefiting from their power over women in every
way,
from ego-satisfaction, economic and domestic exploitation, sexual
domination
and political power.

Many radical
feminists
argue
that in order to make a complete commitment to feminism, a woman has to
be or become a lesbian. A leading radical feminist, Bunch believed that
only lesbians can be serious feminists, and that lesbianism is best
understood
as a revolutionary rejection of all males and male-defined institutions.

Adrienne Rich
suggested
that
compulsory heterosexuality is the central social structure perpetuating
male domination.3 A refusal of heterosexuality acts as an underground
feminist
resistance to patriarchy. She defines a lesbian as a woman bonded
primarily
to women who is sexually and emotionally independent of men.

Rich’s “lesbian
continuum”
proposes that all women are lesbians, insofar as they want to identify
with other women. She makes two basic assumptions in her defence of the
lesbian continuum as a construct for understanding female resistance to
patriarchy. First, she assumes that compulsory heterosexuality is the
key
mechanism underlying and perpetuating male dominance; second, she
implies
that all heterosexual relations are coercive in nature. Radical
feminists
allege that marriage is at the root of women’s subjection to men
because
through it, men control both a woman’s reproduction and her person.
Marriage
is thus seen as slavery for women, without the abolition of which
freedom
for women cannot be won. A prominent feminist philosopher, De Beauvoir
stated, “Women pay for their happiness with their freedom”. She
insisted
that this price is too high for anyone because the kind of contentment,
tranquillity and security that marriage offers a woman drain her soul
of
its capacity for greatness.l

The effect of
removing
men
from the scene altogether is not only weakening traditional male/female
tie, if not destroying it altogether, but the bond between father and
child
is eliminated. Meanwhile, the tendency for men to become merely
temporary
sexual partners and to lose their parental role increases. Instead of
making
men responsible and share in the duties of nurturing children, women
are
inadvertently freeing men of all responsibilities, no doubt to the
great
delight of capricious men.

Radical feminism’s
main
aim
is the destruction of patriarchy, which Ruth Blair defines as: “the
historic
system of male dominance, a system committed to the maintenance and
reinforcement
of male hegemony in all aspects of life – personal and private
privilege
and power as well as public privilege and power”.

Gerder Lerner defines
it
more clearly:

“Patriarchy means the
manifestation
and institutionalisation of male dominance over women and children in
the
family and the extension of male dominance over women in society in
general..”.

Patriarchy is a
system
of
structures and institutions created by men in order to sustain and
recreate
male power and female subordination. Such structures include
institutions
such as law, religion and the family; ideologies which perpetuate the
naturally
inferior position of women; socialisation processes which ensure that
women
and men develop behaviour and belief systems appropriate to the
powerful
or power group to which they belong.

Patriarchy also has a
materialistic
base the economic systems are structured so that women have difficulty
getting paid labour in a society which values only paid labour and in
which
money is the currency of power. Women without economic independence
cannot
sustain themselves without a breadwinner: they cannot leave a brutal
husband,
they cannot withdraw sexual, emotional and physical servicing from men,
they cannot have an equal say in decisions affecting their own lives,
such
as where they might live. Radical feminism has therefore stressed the
necessity
of women exercising economic power in their own lives.

Charlotte Buch has
emphasised
the importance of class analysis in radical feminism. In her words:

“Women’s oppression
is
rooted
both in the structure of our society, which is patriarchal, and in the
sons of patriarchy: capitalism and white supremacy. Patriarchy includes
not only male rule but also heterosexual imperialism and sexism;
patriarchy
led to the development of white supremacy and capitalism. For me, the
term
patriarchy refers to all these forms of oppression and domination, all
of which must be ended before all women will be free”.

Arguments from within
the
feminist group state that absolute separatism from men is neither
feasible
nor desirable. It is not desirable because “women will destroy
patriarchy
by confronting it, not by isolating themselves from it”.

One of the first
radical
feminists to gain prominence was Shulamith Firestone, who wrote:

“The end goal of
feminist
revolution must be not just the elimination of male privilege but of
the
sex distinction itself. Genital differences between human beings would
no longer matter culturally. The tyranny of the biological family would
be broken and with it the psychology of power”.

For Firestone it is
from
sexual differences that women’s subordination sprang, in part, as
reproductive
biology condemned women to a fearful existence of bearing children, to
be oppressed, in squalor and in pain. Firestone states: “Nature
produced
the fundamental inequality which was later consolidated and
institutionalised
in the interests of men”. In this account, the reproductive bond is not
even remotely pleasing; it is wretched. Firestone then draws the
logical
conclusion to such an opinion she proposes freeing women from their
long
ordeal by means of changes in reproductive technology that would allow
women to avoid pregnancy and childbirth just as is happening now:

“Until the taboo is
lifted,
until the decision not to have children or not to have them naturally
is
at least as legitimate as natural childbearing, women are being forced
into their female roles”.

Therefore, according
to
this
way of thinking, women must rebel. Women must control fertility. Women
must own their bodies and new technology. Above all, women must control
childbirth and childrearing. In Firestone’s view, this “natural”
inequality
can only be overcome when there is a complete separation of
reproduction
from women’s lives, so that women and men are made equal through
technological
innovations. Technology that will allow artificial reproduction outside
women’s bodies must be developed.

Whilst some radical
feminists
like Firestone want to free women from biological maternity, there is
another
version of feminism that wants to free maternity from male domination.
This thesis describes and deplores the transfer of maternity care from
women (midwives) to men (male obstetricians) that has occurred in the
West
over the past century or so. This liberation of maternity from male
domination
entails the return of childbirth to the care of women themselves, but
for
many feminists it also includes the progressive removal of the rights
and
duties of fatherhood.

If men in themselves
were
the enemy, as many radical feminists believe, then the solution could
well
come to be the abolition not only of marriage or even of the family,
but
of men themselves, whether by their exclusion from women’s society or
by
more extreme means. It is not likely that many women in the movement
envisaged
the physical destruction of men, and certainly it is difficult to see
this
as a practical possibility.

Many feminist
theories
suggest
that men have conditioned women and have taken control over them.
Feminists
thus ignore the views of the majority of women by assuming that women
have
let their minds be manipulated by men and are not capable of deciding
what
is best for themselves. But if feminists believe that women are weak
and
stupid enough to be conditioned by men, then it follows that if women
follow
their ideologies, then they have merely exchanged one type of coercion
for another.

Feminists object to
the
allocation
of gender roles, and complain if men and women are expected to do
different
sorts of work solely on the basis of their sex. But if, like the
feminists,
we go to the extreme of assuming that we have not rid ourselves of
tyranny
until men and women are doing the same sort of work, we risk a
different
problem, that of forcing them to do the same things although the
majority
may have the inclination to do different things.

Feminists object to
sexism
although the majority of people see gender as relevant. When there are
fewer women in certain positions on the career ladder, it is the
feminists
who are quick to point out sex differences.

Firestone’s
suggestion
that
reproduction must take place outside of women’s bodies before women are
liberated is senseless. If any advances in “test tube” reproduction are
made, the technology will no doubt be under the control of males. It is
true to say that radical feminism is not practical and would not
survive
for long if it were implemented: If heterosexuality were halted, this
would
prevent the production of a new generation and the human race would
come
to an end. Some might suggest that children could be produced by means
of artificial insemination or cloning. For women to totally succeed in
this they will no doubt be confronted by men, who will rightly fight
for
their survival. It cannot be envisaged even by the most ardent
feminist,
that the battle of sexes should led to the battle herds of war. It is
in
fact absurd to regard men as the core of evil, because there is no real
benefit for men as a whole in suppressing women. Men have to co-habit
with
women, and most sane human beings of either gender would prefer to live
in peace and harmony with their spouses, the “battle of the sexes”
makes
no sense at all.

Research has shown
that
the
majority of lesbians go under the banner of feminism and that they
represent
around 10% of active feminists.” In this case it appears that some
women
have used feminism as a guise to fulfil their deviant sexual desires.
Homosexuality
is completely forbidden in Islam, and there is no room for “gay”
religious
movements such as those that have emerged in Christianity.
Homosexuality
represents something which is at odds with the natural order and
endangers
the stability of human society.

Would you really
approach
men in your lusts rather than women? Nay, you are a people (grossly)
ignorant!

[al-Naml
27.55]

The Qur’anic view
(which,
by the way, coincides with that of the Bible, e.g. Leviticus 20:13) is
that homosexuality is an abomination and that those who indulge in it
are
“committing excesses”. This includes both male and female homosexuals,
or “gays” and “lesbians” as they are known.

Radical feminists
assume
that all marital relations are coercive. This undermines women and
implies
that they are not capable of taking care of themselves, but need a “big
sister” in an ivory tower to think for them. Radical feminism gives
women
less credit than they deserve.

To propagate a
complete
ban
on marriage would throw the world into disarray. Even if all
individuals
did not become homosexuals, we would find ourselves with a completely
promiscuous
society. An individual is not always attracted to a person who likes
him
or her, so with no moral restraints, those who are physically,
economically
and socially strong would fulfil their carnal desires at the expense of
the weak. Incest and paedophilia would become rife. It would be a
nightmarish
society in which exploitation of women would be the order to the day.

Most of those who
have
examined
the development of radical feminism are agreed that it has been
seriously
weakened by internal disputes, by its lack of formal structure, and by
the inherent weaknesses of its theories. Its heyday was in the late
1960s,
but since the 1970s it has fallen into a decline with its most
committed
followers retreating into communes where they could practice no more
than
a kind of personal redemption.

SEXUAL
LIBERATION

Mitchell suggested
that
women’s
status and function are jointly determined by her role in production,
reproduction
and the socialisation of children and sexuality.

To determine which of
these
factors most oppress women, Mitchell came to the conclusion that women
are making progress only in the area of sexuality. Taken to extremes,
sexual
liberation becomes merely another form of sexual oppression. In the
past,
women were condemned for being whores; now they are condemned for being
virgins. Curiously, a British newspaper report on female converts to
Islam
asked “Why are British women funding true sexual freedom in Islam”?
This
sensationalist piece of rhetoric turned out to refer to the refreshing
freedom from the sexual pressure which is so prevalent in Western
society.

Not everyone
concerned
with
human liberation welcomed the liberation of sexuality. Marxist
philosophers
argued that it was a device to distract people from more serious
political
and economical oppression. Other feminists said that the liberation of
female sexuality brought a reinforcement of the image of creatures of a
separate and powerless sphere. The Victorian stereotype of feminine
purity
at least had the merit of rendering women special in the eyes of men.
In
the pursuit of equality and freedom even this dubious moral advantage
was
lost, and the way was opened for a new and less advantageous
stereotype.
It was no accident that the most ardent supporters of the “playboy”
style
of sexual liberation were men!

A woman may say that
she
diets, exercises and dresses for herself, but in reality she is most
likely
to be shaping and adorning her body for the benefit of men. A woman has
little or no say about where, when, how or by whom her body will be
used,
because it can be appropriated through acts that range from standing on
the corner “watching all the girls go by” to the extreme of rape. In
contrast,
women’s progress in the area of reproduction, production and
socialising
of children has, according to Mitchell, ground to a halt.

Islam finds the whole
idea
of promoting sex for pleasure to be totally distasteful – as do many
rational
individuals who live in the West. Casual approaches to sex, such as
“cruising”
or using pornography are identified as being male oriented, since they
focus on sex for physical pleasure rather than as a means of deepening
emotional intimacy and affection.4 Seeking sex only for physical
pleasure
is dehumanising, because it treats people only as sexual objects and
fails
to tap the potential of the act for a deeper meaning, which is an
intimate
knowledge of and commitment to another human being.

The feminist drive
towards
sexual liberation has had catastrophic consequences for women’s social
status. As we have already seen in Chapter II, the push for women’s
equality
in the West has been accompanied by an increase among females of all
the
vices formerly associated with men. Alcoholism, smoking, gambling and
criminal
activity have all increased and are as likely to be found among females
as among males. In early 1996, it was announced that the female prison
population in the UK had increased by 30% in the previous year alone.

For many women, their
new
“freedom” has brought the dismal experiences of exploitation,
abandonment
by men, abortions, financial hardships, single parenthood and
isolation.
The sexual liberation movement has resulted in increased social,
financial,
health and economical hardship. Overall the greater sexual freedom is
being
acknowledged as working in favour of men rather than women.

APPRAISAL

All branches of
feminism
have their shortcomings, and the movement has essentially failed to
address
issues facing all the women throughout the world. Marxist theory has
ignored
the issues of oppression of women via pornography, prostitution and
sexual
harassment. Radical feminism has only served the interests of a few
women
living in Western suburbia, and its theories are inherently weak, as
has
been shown. Sexual feminism has only served to wet male appetites and
has
plunged the women of the West into the worst form of oppression since
the
Jahiliyyah. The failure of feminist ideologies to truly liberate women
should come as no surprise, since these are based on theories which
have
been devised by humans for humans: as such they will undoubtedly
contain
factors that will please some, displease others, and ignore the
majority.
The solutions to human problems can only come from the Creator of
humans.
It is to Him that we must turn, and it is in His teachings alone that
we
will find true liberty for all human beings.

The feminists have
given
women laws against sexual discrimination and equal opportunities in the
fields of education and work, which are undoubtedly deserved and which
Islam would certainly condone. However, as feminism succeeded in
freeing
women from the oppression of law and domesticity, a more sinister form
of oppression, in the form of the tyranny of “beauty”, took over. This
phenomenon is described by Naomi Wolf as the “beauty myth”.

THE
TYRANNY OF “BEAUTY”

The “Rites” of beauty
are
able to isolate women so well because it is not yet publicly recognised
that the devotees of beauty are trapped in anything more serious than
fashion
and a private distortion of self-image.” The Rites took over women’s
minds,
in the wake of the women’s movement, because oppression, like nature,
abhors
a vacuum; they gave back to women what they had lost when faith in God
died in the West. The swift spread of this new “religion” was ably
assisted
by the capitalist industries. Now, rather than being assessed on their
personal, intellectual and professional merits, women are judged by
their
physical attributes. This abhorrent attitude is diametrically opposed
to
Islam, which directs people’s attention towards an individual’s
character
by asking them to base their respect on the level of a person’s piety.

Until recently,
pornography
was only for male consumption. However, the feminists have fallen into
the trap that was carefully laid by those who had a vested interest in
making women believe it is normal for a liberated women to enjoy
pornography.
Pornography, which never depicts legal, intimate love between married
couples,
has the pernicious effect of planting notions of the acceptability of
adultery,
fornication and rape in idle minds. Film, TV and printed media find
themselves
in direct competition with pornography, which is now the biggest media
category worldwide, so the images of women and beauty in those media
become
more extreme. Incredibly, pornography generates an estimated $7 billion
a year, more than the legitimate film and music industries put
together.
Pornographic films outnumber other genres by three to one. Researchers
report that pornography worldwide is becoming increasingly violent 4
and
“snuff” movies which record the ordeal of real victims are not uncommon.

Beauty became the
currency
of exchange and, like money, was highly sought after by women. However,
it was more elusive than pound notes or dollar bills, as men kept
devaluing
the “currency”. There are no universal standards: “beauty” is an
imaginary
idol created by the Western male, who raises and changes its standards
at whim, thereby making it impossible for his mother, sister or
daughter
to attain it. Women’s beauty has nothing to do with women: it is all
about
men’s institutions and power. In the West, the man’s right to pass
judgement
on any woman’s appearance without himself being subjected to scrutiny
is
regarded as God-given.

As the white
middle-class
women threw away their aprons and marched out of their front doors in
pursuit
of liberation, they fell straight into the trap of the capitalist
beauty
parlour. The capitalist market has manipulated women to spend over $33
billion a year on diet products, $20 billion on cosmetics, $300 million
on cosmetic surgery, and over $7 billion on pornography.

The consequent burden
of
oppression borne by women is immense, of which the following represent
only the tip of the iceberg:

The most obvious
effect is the
vast amount of time, effort and money which women are expected to
devote
to their appearance whilst no such demands are made of men.

The standards that
women are
expected to attain are impossible, because the goal posts are
constantly
being shifted. The media must take the lion’s share of the blame for
this
problem.

At any given time,
the standards
of beauty are limited and rigid, and exclude the majority of ordinary
women.
Whatever body shape is dictated to be “fashionable,” those whose
natural
appearance differs from it will never be able to attain it and risk
subsequent
low self-esteem and depression, etc.

The fashion
industry
pressurises
women to fight their own natural bodies by undergoing cosmetic surgery,
squeezing themselves into tight dresses and skirts, crippling their
feet
with stiletto heeled shoes and starving themselves into ill health in
the
name of dieting.

This is what feminism
has
achieved,
instead of protesting against male demands that women should
essentially
be sensual and pleasing to men. The feminist movement has found its
greatest
support among capitalist corporate companies and “playboy” type men.

The demands of the
beauty
myth are destroying women, morally, psychologically and spiritually.
Women
need to emancipate themselves from this unjust demand made by male
driven
society. In order to achieve this it is not lobbying or government
bills
that are needed but a need to revert to a philosophy that frees them
from
the tyranny of fashion and role models, a philosophy that appreciates a
woman for herself and judges her on her character, and not for her
beauty
or bank balance, a philosophy that will reinstate her personal identity
and self-respect. This is to be found only in Islam.

The sociologist
Deborah
L.
Sheppard states:

“Women perceive
themselves
and other women to be confronting constantly the dualistic experience
of
being feminine and businesslike at the same time while they do not
perceive
men experiencing the same contradiction”.

Women are encouraged
by
advertisers
to wear clothes that express their femininity yet maintain
business-like
looks. By this they mean women wear clothes that reveal their breasts,
thighs and lace-lined lingerie. Women are caught between the
conflicting
ideals of “businesslike” and “feminine”, and suffer as a result. Over
75%
of women experience harassment that they blame on themselves and their
poor control over their appearance. Five studies on sexual organisation
have found that “a woman’s behaviour is noticed and labelled sexual
even
if it is not intended as such”. Women’s friendly actions are
misinterpreted
as sexual.’ This is substantiated by the fact that 38% of men have been
found to abuse their power in the work place to rape women. Islam
clearly
teaches Muslims to avoid creating or entering such freely-mixed
environments
in the first place, which prevents such misery and suffering from
occurring.

The fashion
industries
dependency
on survival by exploiting women can be assessed by the reaction of the
industry to John Molloy’s best seller book, Women’s dress for
success, advocating
women to wear a uniform at work. This minor observation made by Molloy
led the New York Times magazine, whose financial survival depends on
the
advertising revenue of the beauty industry, to publish an article
declaring
Molloy’s views as passe. Other media, who received a sizeable portion
of
their advertising funds from the fashion industry quickly followed
suit.
From all of this, one can understand why Islam, which preaches
moderation
and simplicity in dress and lifestyle is facing such hostility from the
capitalist world.

If working women did
not
dress up like models, the secret pleasures enjoyed by their male
colleagues
may decrease. No doubt if women followed Islamic standards of dress and
conduct, the incidence of sexual harassment would be negligible and
women
would be spared a major source of oppression. Above and beyond that
women’s
character would not be passed on sexual appeal but her intellect and
ability.

From the 60’s onwards
the
fashion industry, with capital growth interest at heart, have used the
media to manipulated women in thinking nudity and low weight are an
expression
of liberation. -Between 1968 and 1972, the number of diet related
articles
rose by 70%. Articles on dieting in the popular press soared from 60 in
the whole year of 1979 to 66 in the month of January 1980 alone. By
1984,300
diet books were on the shelves of bookstores. The lucrative “transfer
of
guilt” was achieved just in time.

The paranoia with
weight
in women has began to appear at a very early age and consequently
claims
many victims. Anorexia and Bulimia are overwhelmingly female maladies:
between 90 and 95%

of sufferers are
women.
America,
which has the greatest number of women who have “made it” in the male
world,
also leads the world with regard to rates of female Anorexia. The
American
Anorexia and Bulimia Association states that Anorexia and Bulimia
strike
one million US women every year. Every year, 150,000 American women die
of Anorexia. Brumberg reports that between 5 to 15% of hospitalised
anorexics
die during treatment, giving this disease one of the highest fatality
rates
for mental illness.

The UK now has 3.5
million
anorexics or bulimics, with 6,000 new cases yearly. Another study of
adolescent
British girls shows that 1% are now anorexic. According to the women’s
press, at least 50% of British women suffer eating disorders.

As the females began
to
integrate
with the males, in all the spheres, women’s body shape and size began
to
play a prominent role in an oppressing way to the women. A generation
ago,
the average model weighed 8% less than the average American woman;
today
she weighs 23% less.

A 1985 survey showed
that
90% of respondents thought they weighed too much. Although today’s
girls
have inherited the gains of the women’s movement, in terms of personal
distress they are no better off. Fifty three percent of high school
girls
are reported to be unhappy with their bodies by age 13, and by age 18,
over 78% are dissatisfied. The feminist movement has created the hunger
cult which is striking a major blow against women’s fight for equality.

In the West, female
bodies
have become public property and female “fat” is the subject of intense
public debate. Women feel guilty about female fat because they are made
to believe that their bodies belong not to them, but to society.
Thinness
is not a private ascetic but a hunger, a social concession exacted by
the
community. A cultural fixation on female thinness is not an obsession
about
female beauty but an obsession about female subservience.

Women’s images in the
media
and magazines are glamorised by “retouching” or “computer imaging” so
that
a 50 year old woman looks 30 and a 65 year old looks 45. Bob Ciano, an
art director at Life magazine, says that, “no picture of a
woman
goes unretouched… Even a well known older woman who doesn’t want to
be
retouched… We still persist in trying to make her look like she’s in
her fifties”. The effect of this censorship according to Heyn is clear:
“by now readers have no idea what a real woman’s 60 year old face looks
like in print because it’s made to look 45. Worse, 60 year old readers
look in the mirror and think they look too old, because they are
comparing
themselves to some retouched face smiling back at them from a magazine.
Women’s culture is an adulterated, inhibited medium”. How do the values
of the West, which hates censorship and believes in a free exchange of
ideas, fit in here?

This issue is not
trivial.
It is about the most fundamental freedoms: the freedom to imagine one’s
own future and to be proud of one’s life. Airbrushing age from women’s
faces has the same political echo as making black people look white: it
is condescending, insulting and offensive. To make women look younger,
thinner and more curvaceous is to erase women’s true identity, worth,
power
and history. This is the most damaging type of oppression and women in
the West are slowly waking up to it.3 This is one reason why young
educated
women in the West have found the sincere teachings of Islam to be so
attractive.

Magazines and other
media
are under pressure to project the idea that looking one’s age is
undesirable
because their survival in the capitalist society depends on their
advertising
revenue. In the US alone, 65 million dollars’ worth of advertising
revenue
comes from companies who would go out of business if looking one’s age
was acceptable or desirable.4 It is in the interest of companies that
reap
wealth from women to make them feel inferior about their bodies.
Through
the media the message is hammered in daily. As women spend millions of
Pounds and hours worldwide, on ‘beauty’ products and go through
dangerous
and painful procedures to look like the way they have been
indoctrinated
by the media. If only women wake up to their own worth, which Allah has
favoured them with, the companies via the media, will continue to
exploit
them and the problem is going to escalate.

Young women’s
oppression
is one story, but as women get older their miseries in the West simply
multiply. Old women are not only poorer, but they are also neglected,
by
the state and by their own children. Western culture is such that
helpless
older people are left out of sight in public nursing homes, and young
children
are kept out of their parents’ sight in nurseries and day care centres.
The West is rapidly moving towards a system where it is only worth
living
if you are able to fend for yourself in all aspects. Thus the value of
individuals is only measured in terms of supplying society either with
surplus labour or beauty. Hence the young who cannot provide the
capitalist
economy with surplus value and the old who are no longer aesthetically
pleasing are excluded from mainstream society and locked away in
nurseries
and old peoples’ homes respectively. Old age carries such a stigma in
the
West that adult children may be reluctant to be seen with
their
ageing and ailing parents in public. The very parents who nursed us and
wiped our bottoms when we had no faculty of reasoning have now become a
burden. In contrast, Islam urges those who are strong and in good
health
to take care of the infirm, and specifically makes it a duty upon the
children
to take care of their ageing parents and not even to speak to them in a
loud or angry voice.

Thy Lord hath
decreed
that ye worshOOip none but Him, and that ye be kind to parents. Whether
one or both of them attain old age in thy life, say not to them a word
of contempt, nor repel them but address them, in terms of honour.

[Banu
Israil 17: 23]

We have enjoined
on
man
kindness to his parents: In pain did his mother bear him and in pain
did
she give birth.

[Al-Ahqaf
17:23]

(see
also Luqman 31.14 quoted earlier and Al Ankabut 29:8,
AlAhqaf
46:16, 17, 18)

The average American
old
woman’s income is half that of an old man. In Britain, old women
outnumber
old men by four to one, and of those twice as many old women as old men
rely on income support (government assistance). Signs of ageing are
viewed
by Western women as a calamity, and women are constantly harangued in
the
media about the awfulness of wrinkles, grey hair and sagging breasts.
The
solution offered is: beauty parlours and plastic surgery, which is so
risky
and painful that it may be placed on a par with slavery. Modern
cosmetic
surgeons have a vested financial interest in a social role for women
that
require them to feel ugly. The cosmetic surgery industry in the US
grosses
$300 million annually, and is growing at a yearly rate of 10%. Between
200,000 and 1 million American women have had their breasts cut open
and
sacs of chemical gel implanted.

The effects of
feminism
have
been so devastating that women would do themselves a great favour if
they
were to abandon it and begin enjoying the pleasures that the Creator
has
given them. Food is a bounty from Allah from which women may eat what
is
good for them and enjoy it. Women’s bodies are for themselves, not for
public display: they should stop pandering to society’s pleasure and
bowing
to the demands of the fashion industry. Women should bear the signs of
ageing with pride, as marks of seniority and wisdom.

… These are the
limits
ordained by Allah; so do not transgress them. If any do transgress the
limits ordained by Allah, such persons wrong (themselves as well as
others).

[al-Baqarah
2:229]

America’s Tragedy: An Islamic Perspective

sufi786 — Mon, 05 Feb 2007 22:21:00 +0000

America’s Tragedy: An Islamic Perspective

By Shaykh Hamza Yusuf

This is an edited
transcript of the talk that Shaykh Hamza Yusuf gave on Sunday, Sept.
30^th, 2001 at Zaytuna Academy and Institute in Hayward, California
regarding his reflections on the Sept 11^th tragedy and his trip to
the White House from which he had just returned. In this talk, he distinguishes
what the terrorists did from what Islam teaches, addressing several important
issues in regards to the tragedy such as the Islamic concept of jihad and
martyrdom. Anyone wanting to gain a clear understanding of what the religion of
Islam has to say about the calamitous event is sure to find this talk
beneficial. If you would like to obtain the audio cassette of this talk, please
go to www.alhambraproductions.com.

We should all realize that
the outreach has been extraordinary in terms of the numbers of people contacting
Muslim organizations and reaching out to the Muslims. I think some of these
stories need to be documented because they are very profound and powerful
stories, and I think that something very interesting like a book can come out of
this. It may be titled, The Best of Americans in the Worst of Times or
something similar to that.

A mosque was attacked in
Seattle, and a group of Christians started an organization called, “The Peace
Keepers” and actually went and guarded the mosque. Also, if you do not have a
copy, I would get a copy of the tape the MCA (Muslim Community Association) in
Santa Clara made of the love messages that they got. The tape is just of people
calling up, and that was very powerful to listen to one after another, messages
of love and support. By far, the majority of people who have called have called
with those types of responses, and I think what we should see from this is that
there are a lot of good people in this country. That in itself is very powerful.

There are a lot of people
who do have the right sensibility. They also realize the stupidity of assuming
the acts of a statistically insignificant number of people, whoever they were,
represent the majority. In this country, there are almost 300,000,000 people;
the attackers of Sept 11^th are amongst a number of very crazy people
that would do very crazy things given the opportunity, and some of them have
actually proven that, and they are the Timothy McVeighs of the world. So, I
think that in it of itself, this outreach is something that we should all be
very optimistic of.

On the other hand, we also
should keep in mind that living in the Bay Area gives us a false sense about the
pulse in some of the other parts of the country. The outreach we have
experienced here is probably from some of the most educated and most tolerant
people because this is a very tolerating area. It tends to embrace others and
things considered strange, and that is something that people here pride
themselves in, so we do have that here. Another aspect of this area is that it
is very heavily populated with immigrants, and that in itself is good because
those who work with immigrants see the human side which is always important. The
immigrants, especially those coming from other countries where the social
conditions are difficult, tend to know what these types of incidents
mean.

In certain parts of this
country, there is a lot of jingoism going on right now. There is a lot of anger.
I flew across this country with a friend, who is a tall, dark-skinned Arab, and
it was very shocking to see the eyes of others, and this is not paranoia. People
looking at him as we were traveling were really frightened. There was real fear.
We were in the front of the plane, so every time my friend got up, I looked
back, and I noticed people would go into a state of rigor mortis as though they
were thinking, “What’s he going to do?!” and that is a tragedy. We traveled two
weeks earlier, and people did not have those feelings.

Also, I have been across the
country now four times in the last ten days, and the planes are empty. There are
a lot of economic repercussions to this; 15,000 people have been fired from
United Airlines. There are going to be disgruntle people. So, those elements are
going to be there; there are hard times ahead.

Now, in terms of what
happened in the last week, I think people need to understand. One of the things
about many people is that they tend to be very shortsighted in a lot of ways;
they do not look at long-term strategy. The Muslims are particularly this way.
We have forgotten what strategic thinking is. For example, Suraqa Ibn Malik was
attempting to catch the Prophet sallallahu ‘alayhi wa sallam to get a
reward of 100 camels promised by the Quraysh to whomever brought the Prophet
sallallahu ‘alayhi wa sallam in. When he met him in the desert, the
Prophet sallallahu ‘alayhi wa sallam said, “What did they offer you?”

He said, “100 camels.”

The Prophet sallallahu
‘alayhi wa sallam said, “Suraqa, what would you think about wearing the
bracelets of Khosroes?” and this is something that happened at the time of the
Prophet sallallahu ‘alayhi wa sallam. He always saw way ahead, and that
is wisdom. Even his ahadith apply until the end of time. That is the
beauty of the ahadith. He was not speaking only to his community.

Look at the hadith:
“If you leave one-tenth of what I have given you, you will be punished, but
there is coming a time on my ummah that if they hold to one-tenth, they
will go into paradise.” Now, think of the strategic planning of that
hadith. Think, had he just said to his sahaba, “If you leave
one-tenth of what I have given you, you will be punished,” what would that mean
to us? We know what the sahaba did, but the Prophet sallallahu ‘alayhi
wa sallam was not speaking just to the sahaba; he was speaking to us.
He was speaking to people whom he knew would be in such difficult situations
that holding on to their deen would be like holding onto burning coals.
That is the beauty of Prophetic wisdom. He spoke to every time and every place,
and he certainly spoke to the time and place that we are in because these are
the fitan.

Fitin is Arabic. Fatanah
means “to test gold.” One of the things you can see in this time is that the
basic material people are made of becomes apparent. Is it gold, is it silver, is
it lead, or is it some kind of toxic element? You see what people are made of.
Some people can act, and you are amazed at their humanity. Other people come
out, and you are amazed at their inhumanity, but that is what fitnah
does. It exposes people, and that is one of the wisdoms of tribulation.

I would like to talk about how people
judge situations. Many people often judge a situation with the short-term in
mind and without looking at the long-term implications. People who tend to get
caught up in the moment of their short-term judgment lose an understanding that
every moment is actually part of a continuum. Not only is the moment that we are
in right now based on everything that preceded it, but it also will affect what
follows it. There is no such thing as an isolated incident. Every incident in
your life is related to the totality of your life. You cannot separate any
individual life. That is why a human being is not judged for any individual
incident, but you must look at the whole spectrum of growth.

One of the things that people do not
like to do is allow people to grow. They want to pigeonhole you. However,
conditions necessitate different responses: not every condition necessitates the
same response. If you give the same response, you are a fool because there is a
time for anger, and there is a time for forgiveness. There is a time when you
need to get angry, and if you do not get angry, you are not responding
appropriately to the situation. Our prophet sallallahu ‘alayhi wa sallam
got angry, so there is a time for anger, but there is never a time for wrath
because wrath is excessive anger. There is never a time to lose your reason from
anger. I know that some people will judge from outward appearance because that
is all we have on which to base our judgments. The Prophet sallallahu ‘alayhi
wa sallam said, “I was commanded to judge people according to their outward
states,” but Allah does not judge by the outward because Allah encompasses
everything. “Muhitun bi ‘ibaadihi: Allah encompasses his servants” to
know their inward and their outward. “Ya’lamu sirrakum wa l’alaaniya: He
knows your inward and your outward,” and He judges actions by your intentions.
Allah gave to his servants a means to maintain harmony for the believers: the
idea of having a good opinion-husnu dhann. Having a good opinion of
people is the principle upon which our teaching is based. We should look for an
excuse for others and not assume the worst. We should always look to say,
“perhaps, perhaps, perhaps,” and come up with excuses. The hypocrite’s nature is
that he will always look for a reason to condemn. The munafiq will always
say, “he did it because of this; he did it because of that” and try to find
fault. That is unfortunate to mention.

In reality, what we have done too
little of is build real institutional bases and have engaged in too much empty
rhetoric. Now, it is coming back to haunt us. However, the Chinese symbol for
crisis is also the symbol for opportunity, and I think this crisis that we are
in is an opportunity. The power of the historical moment we are in is
extraordinary because we are in an unprecedented situation. For the first time,
large numbers of Americans actually want to understand what Islam is. Even the
Iranian Revolution did not do this because that was again something that
happened far away. Here is a time where it has come home, and people are trying
to make sense of it.

I have been getting many calls from
people wanting to know the concept of martyrdom. Martyrdom is not an alien
concept to the West. The West has a history of martyrdom. The Christian Church
honors martyrs. They are the highest people in the Church and are recognized as
saints because they are people who died for their beliefs. Some of the people of
the Revolutionary War were considered martyrs. Those are words that Westerners
use. Martin Luther King Jr. and people like him are considered martyrs, so the
concept is not alien to westerners. However, the idea of martyrdom being
associated with violence against innocent individuals is such an atrocity to any
sane person, and the travesty is when Islam is indicated here to have anything
to do with this. That is why we just cannot see this incident in religious
terms. It is really important to keep focusing on the fact that this act really
does not have anything to do with Islam.

Unfortunately, in the past, we have had
people whom we have been plagued with called the Khawarij. They emerged
early on and were the first people who split from the rightly guided
khulafa. They emerged from the time of Sayyiduna Uthman. These are the
people who surrounded his house and actually killed him. One of the things about
these people that is very problematic is that they are very “religious,” and
this is where the real crisis comes. These people display a religiosity about
which our Prophet sallallahu ‘alayhi wa sallam said, “You will hold your
own prayer in contempt when you see their prayer.” In other words, they will be
praying so much, you will feel that you do not pray enough. Similarly, he
sallallahu ‘alayhi wa sallam went on to say, “You will see them fast, and
you will feel like you do not fast.” They fast every other day or on Mondays and
Thursdays, and you will feel contempt for yourself when you compare your fasts
to theirs. He sallallahu ‘alayhi wa sallam said, “They read the Qur’an,
but it does not go past their throats.” The ‘ulama say this means that
they read the words, but they do not know the meanings. There are verses in the
Qur’an that if read outwardly, you will think they are a license to kill people,
but that is not what the verses actually mean. The verse in Sura Tawbah
was in clear reference to a group of people that broke the treaty with Muslims.
The Muslims were commanded to fight them wherever they found them. They were a
specific group of people, and that verse is not a generalized verse. It applies
only to that time of treachery.

Allah does not prevent you from being
good to those who have not fought you or chased you out of your home. Be good to
them, and share in your wealth with them. You can interact with and help
non-Muslims. This is permitted in Islam. The Qur’an is a holistic body of
guidance, and if you take parts of the Qur’an without understanding the holistic
body, you will go astray. For this reason, Buddah Al-Jakany in Mauritania wrote
a book, and in it, he said that every single group that has gone astray has used
part of the Qur’an to prove their error. There is not a sect in the history of
Islam that did not use the Qur’an as a foundation for their misguidance, not
one. They all proved their points from the Qur’an.

When Ibn Abbas went to the
Khawarij to try to speak with them, the Khawarij said that one of
the reasons they rebelled against Sayyiduna Ali is because Sayyiduna Ali asked
that a hakim be brought from Mu’awiya’s group to sit with a hakim
from his own group so that they would as arbitrators come to a decision on the
particular matter. To this idea, the Khawarij said that the Qur’an says,
“La hukma illa lillah: There is no judgment except Allah.” Allah is the
only one that can judge, and so they said, “What you have done is going against
the book of Allah, Imam Ali.” They said, “You do not understand the Qur’an. The
Qur’an says, ‘La hukma illa lillah.’” That was their slogan, literally:
There is no judgment except Allah’s. What did Imam Ali do? He sent Ibn Abbas to
go and debate with them. He advised Ibn Abbas: If they debate with the Qur’an,
debate with the other parts of the Qur’an; if they do not agree, then go to the
hadiths. So, Ibn Abbas went, and he argued with them. There were about
30,000 of them originally, and about 3,000 of those went over to the other side
and joined Ibn Abbas because he convinced them. He said, “Does not Allah allow
arbitration between a man and a wife? Does not Allah allow arbitration on hajj?
You bring a hakim to decide what the penalty is.” So, the point is that
these people have been a plague on the Muslim ummah from early time, and,
I think out of 1.3 billion people in this ummah, there are some people,
unfortunately, who are misguided enough to think that they could have been doing
something good. That is the reality of it. Whatever it was and whoever was
behind the recent events, the people that benefit from it are the enemies of
Islam. There is no doubt about that. The people that benefit from this are
enemies of Islam.

On the other hand, Allah says, “Maybe
you hate a thing, but in it is much good for you.” The reality of the situation
is that immense good can come out of the tragedy. US News and Report,
which is one of the major news journals, had an article on jihad that I
could not have done a better job writing. I was amazed. It was an excellent
article explaining the rules of jihad. My God, millions of people are
going to read this and have to confirm that these are very human rulings. They
mentioned not poisoning wells, not killing livestock, not cutting down fruit
trees; that is Islam. I think an intelligent person is going to have to reason
that if that is their reason in war, then the attacks on September
11^th certainly have nothing to do with Islam. Unfortunately, we have
other elements in the media that have a very serious agenda, and this is evident
to anyone who has been watching some of the media, particularly, Fox. They are
hardliners. I think what they did to Muzammil Siddiqi was a horrific thing to do
to him because it just does not represent Muzammil Siddiqi. You have Muslims
that were supporting what they believe to be a legitimate struggle of the
Palestinian people in their fight.

I have never and I will never agree
with suicide bombings. That has never sat right with me, ever. I think it is
just so antithetical to the truth of Islam, and I have always had that problem
with it. No one can ever find anywhere, in the last 13 or 14 years of my public
speaking, where I have condoned that. I have never been comfortable with that or
comfortable with any types of terror because my understanding of Islam is that
it is a chivalrous religion. It is a religion that demands honor in engagement,
and my belief is that I would rather die than reduce myself to the level of
these types of people because I know they certainly use it against us. They do.
However, as Umar Mukhtar pointed out, when they wanted to kill the Italian
prisoners and he refused to let them, they said, “Well, they do it to our
prisoners,” and he replied, “But they are not our teachers.”

These people are not our teachers. They
did not teach us how to fight. We have laws and rules, and those are our
principles. On 60 Minutes the other night, four of us were interviewed,
and they interviewed us for three hours. They give you enough rope to hang
yourself, and then they kind of edit from that. It is very tricky business
talking to these people. During the three-hour interview, I was asked, “Where
does this idea come from if it is not from Islam?” I replied that it is an old
idea called The End Justifies the Means, and it is a philosophy alien to
Islam because we believe that if the ends are noble, the means have to be
consistent with the ends. We believe in noble ends, and therefore our means have
to be consistent with those ends because if you say the ends justify the means,
what you are saying is you can use ignoble means to achieve noble ends, and that
is inconsistent logically. That is the philosophy here, and it is not from
Islam.

I think that we have a lot of work to
do. In chemistry, there is something known as dissipated structures. Prigogine
got a nobel prize for showing that when massive turbulence is created in a
system of chemical bonds that breaks all those bonds, what happens is they
re-bond at a more complex level than the initial. It goes to a higher level, and
this is consistent also with nuclear fusion. The point is that these types of
things should actually force us to go to a higher level of understanding and
operation, not to a lower level. This should literally force us to raise the
level of our discourse, to raise the level of our understanding, and to do a lot
more than we were doing before because there is no room for sleep anymore. Get
your sleep that you need for your body, but the rest of the time, you have to be
awake, and if this does not do it to wake us up, nothing is going to do it,
really, because we are now in danger. We hope for the best, but the danger is
repeated incidents and more blame because even if a White Supremacist group does
anything, who is everybody going to blame when it happens? They are going to
blame Muslims, right?

This is the time now to reach out and
build bridges as fast as we can with as many people as we can, to get out there,
to extend hands to anybody who is offering hands of friendship and understanding
right now; we have to reach out to them and really try to create some
understanding. Part of what we really have to focus on and what I want you to
understand is that Islam’s word for calling others to Islam is da’wah,
which in the Arabic language means “invitation to a banquet.” What we have to
remember is what Muhammad Zakariya said, “An invitation is only real if it’s
open to rejection,” and that is the beauty of our Lord: He has given an
invitation and is not forcing anybody to go to the banquet.

When we look at the people out there,
they have every right to believe what they believe, to be doing what they are
doing because it is consistent with where they are. Our job is only to present
Islam in the best way, and there are two responses that we hope for: either
somebody sees it as the beauty that it is and the truth that it is and is
welcome to join us or a person gains a heightened appreciation for this
incredible, human tradition because it is part of the tapestry of human
civilization, and we have, I think, the greatest contribution. That is something
we are all proud of, and it is something they need to find out about and learn
about so that at least they can appreciate it. There will always be the
disgruntled few who are going to hate you anyway, and Allah mentioned that in
the Qur’an; there is always going to be that, but I do not think that represents
a majority of people, yet the majority can be manipulated by that minority,
unfortunately, especially with the means that they have in their hands. You can
see: they can paint day night and night day, black white and white black. They
can call war “peace” and peace “war,” and people start believing it. They can
call murder “collateral damage,” and it sounds a lot nicer. “Collateral damage”
sounds a lot nicer than slaughtering innocent civilians. It has got a nicer ring
to it, and that is called a euphemism: “kicked the bucket” ? he did not kick the
bucket; he dropped dead. It is just a euphemism like, “retired to the farm.”
That is how they say in idiomatic English, “he died”: “he retired to the farm.”
He did not retire to the farm; he stopped breathing.

I mentioned what happened in the last
week, and I will just tell you, it was a very difficult trip. I was asked by
somebody I know, and whom people probably know, who works in the White House. He
is a Muslim, the son of a very prominent Muslim, and he called me up and said,
“They’re asking for somebody to come to talk to the President and represent the
Muslims, and I thought that you would be the best person in my estimation to do
that. So could you come?” So, I talked to Shaykh Abdullah Bin Bayyah, and he
said that it was a fard on me. He said, “You have to go.” I went, and I
was part of I think about 30 religious leaders there. The Head of the Mormon
Church, the Head of Billy Graham Ministries, his son Franklin Graham, the
Archbishop of the Greek Orthodox Church, the Archbishop of the Catholic Church
in America, and a lot of other very prominent religious leaders were there.
There were also a Tibetan Lama, one of the heads of a national Sikh
organization, and Methodist Bishops. A lot of different people were
present.

From that group, a handful, six of us
were asked to meet with President Bush in the Oval Office. So, I put forth four
points, and we were given quite a bit of time. I was allowed to say everything I
wanted to say. I gave a copy of The Essential Koran to the President, and
the night before, I spent a couple hours going through the book and putting
Post-Its on all of the verses that I thought were most pertinent. I said, “I
know you’re very busy, so I put these in so that if you don’t have time to read
the whole book, you can read these verses.” I also gave him a book called
Thunder in the Sky which is a book Thomas Cleary translated on the
humanistic use of power. In other words, it is about how to use power to benefit
humans and not to harm them. I also gave him a piece of calligraphy done by
Muhammad Zakariya, who did the Eid stamp.

When I called Muhammad Zakariya, he was
in Virginia; he lives a few miles away from the Pentagon, and he was writing
what is called a hilyah in calligraphy from the Shifa’ of Qadi
Iyaad. He was writing a description of the Prophet sallallahu ‘alayhi wa
sallam from Umar ibn Al-Aws. Muhammad Zakariya told me what was the sentence
he was writing when he heard the explosion. The beauty of this is that only
Allah can do this. That was for Muhammad Zakariya because Allah is the Author of
this; Allah is the One who has decreed all of this, and that moment was for
Muhammad Zakariya, and then it was related to the President because it ended up
going there. Muhammad Zakariya told me that the sentence he was writing when he
heard the explosions was “Wa kana salla llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam la yadfa’u
sayyi’ah bi sayyi’ah, wa lakin wa ya’fu wa yaghfiru: He would never repel an
evil with another evil, but he forgave, and he condoned.” Allahumma salli
‘alayh. And that is our teaching.

That is his description of the Prophet
sallallahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, and that is how we know that no matter what
America has done to Muslims anywhere, our teaching is that we do not repay evil
with evil, and that is Islam. It is not all this rage and anger that is out
there. That is Islam, and it is a hard thing to do except when you remember that
this is dunya, and you are looking at infinity; you are not looking at
dunya; you are not looking at 50, 60, 70 years; you are looking at
infinity, and you want Allah to forgive you for your own evil. Is not that what
we all want? We just want forgiveness on yaum al-qiyaamah because we are
all guilty. We think that we are independent from Allah. We are all guilty from
that perspective. The point is, here he was writing that, and I told the
President that. I said, “When the Pentagon was struck, Muhammad Zakariya was
writing that the Prophet sallallahu ‘alayhi wa sallam did not repel an
evil with an evil.” Similar incidents occur, and that is the beauty of our
deen. This is a true story; it is not made up. Muhammad Zakariya is
saadiq. He is truthful; he does not lie, and I believe him. I do not need
any witnesses ? the angels were the witnesses. Those are our two just
witnesses.

The points that I made at the White
House were four. The first was emphasizing, and it had to be reiterated again
and again, that Islam does not have anything to do with this, that this is not
the teaching of Islam. It is a religion that teaches mercy and compassion, and
when it uses martial force, it uses it with just laws, and non-combatants are
never involved. It is based on legitimate authority, not on vigilantism. We do
not believe in vigilantism; we do not believe in outlaws; we do not believe in
Robin Hood. It is kind of interesting that in this culture, Robin Hood is a hero
because he stole from the rich and gave to the poor, and even more bizarre is
the story of Samson. I told them on 60 Minutes, which I doubt they will
air, that Samson is the first suicide bomber, and he is in the Bible. If you do
not know the story of Shamshun, Samson was in the temple of the
Philistine, and he was an Israeli. He asked where the pillars that hold up the
temple were, and he went in chains, and he pushed them, killing himself and
everybody else as revenge for the Israelis against the wrongs of their enemies.
That story is in the Bible, and I was taught that as a child. Samson was
presented as a hero. That story is not in the Qur’an; it is conspicuously absent
from the Qur’an.

The second point I made to the
President was the danger of polarization. I said that this could polarize the
world, and we could get a self-fulfilling prophecy of Samuel Huntington’s
Clash of Civilizations, such as China and Islam versus the West. Nobody
wants that; there is no benefit in that, except for warmongers: people who make
money off of the death of other people.

I also spoke about the idea of a
consensus. I had already spoken to Shaykh Abdullah Bin Bayyah, and I had also
conveyed that to some Arab Ambassadors. I told them that I felt there should be
a summit meeting of the most prominent Muslim ‘ulama in the Muslim world
to declare terrorism as inconsistent with the teachings of Islam and that it is
prohibited by ijma’, consensus of the scholars. I said the attacks should
be just rejected by an ijma’. I also suggested that there should be one
done by the Abrahamic religions in someplace like Rome or Jerusalem, where there
is a declaration that the taking of innocent lives is not consistent with the
teachings of the prophets, whether it is state terrorism or individual
terrorism. Both forms of terrorism are rejected by religion, and let them be
seen as what they are: as political means to political ends because that is what
they are. They are political means to political ends, and that is not what the
prophets came to teach. They came to teach prophetic means to prophetic
ends.

Then the last point I made to the
President was about oppression. I said that this country had a responsibility in
creating just regimes because of the power that this country has and that we
have to recognize that the oppression and the extreme circumstances in the
Muslim world breed the type of extremism that exists in some parts of the Muslim
world.

I think that the Muslims are incredibly
moderate. The Iraqis have displayed incredible patience, perseverance, and lack
of animosity and hatred. Muslims are a testimony to patience at times of
adversity. Ismail Faruqi was in a debate once, and I heard this from a man who
was present at that debate. He said that someone was saying how terrible the
Muslims were, and Ismail Faruqi said that you see the Muslims now with their
corruption, and you go to the countries, and you can laugh at how corrupt these
countries are, but have you seen us suffer? He asked, have you seen what happens
to us when we get afflicted with pain and suffering? He said, then you will know
who we are because when we lose all our money, we do not jump out of buildings.
We say, “Ma sha’ Allah; la quwwata illa billah: Whatever Allah wills
happens; there is no power except by Allah,” and that is the truth. The Muslims
have been incredibly patient in the light of all this, and that is because we do
have hope, and we know that despair is Iblis, and we know that ya’as is
prohibited in Islam. We do not despair. “La tay’asu min rawhillah : Do
not despair from this spirit that God sends.” Do not despair of it, and that is
why in the worst of times, Allah sends that madad (help), and you should
all know that. It is Allah who sends that. It is Allah who gives people that
strength to get through even the most horrific times because if He did not send
that, we would all go crazy; we would lose our minds; we would go totally
insane.

That was the gist of what I said to the
President. Then I was asked to be the guest that night of the First Lady, and I
was told that there was going to be a speech. I had no idea that it was going to
be the way it was; I really did not, but that is the situation I was in, and my
intentions in it were trying to do what I could do in this type of a crisis. You
have to do what you think is the right thing and the best thing for the overall
benefit, I would say not just for Muslims but for everybody: Al-maslaha
al-’amma. I think we have a concern for humanity in general and certainly
for the Muslims in particular. Always the ummah is paramount, but we are
also supposed to be caretakers of humanity. That is a task that we were given by
Allah, so we should not act without the rest of humanity in our
considerations.

I would like to emphasize something
here. I thought that the most profound person and the one who seemed to be the
most genuine person of all those people that I met was Rabbi Joshua Haberman. He
defended Islam when he spoke to President Bush. At one point, I looked over at
him when we were in the Roosevelt room or some other room. Mayor Giuliani, the
Governor of New York, and the Chief of Staff were also present, and Rabbi Joshua
was sitting in the corner reading something in Hebrew. Everybody else was
’schmoozing,’ so I went over to the Rabbi, and I asked, “What are you
reading?”

He said, “Well, I’m reading the
Psalms,” and he was. He seemed like a genuine person, and we spoke quite a bit.
He said that the tragedy of this is that Americans are so ignorant of Islam;
they do not know the greatness of its civilization; they do not know the
history, and they really think that this represents Islam, and this is the real
tragedy. He also said that as somebody who has studied Islam, he knows that the
easiest religion for a Jewish person to convert to is Islam. Wallahi,
that is what he said. He said, “Your shari’a is not that different from
what Musa was given.” There are good people out there. That person was genuine,
and that is what I got from him. I asked him, “Are you a student of Martin
Buber?” and he said, “Yes.” That is what Martin Buber was about-just having real
regard for other human beings, and I think that, as Muslims, we need to
inculcate that in our relations with other people. When some of the Muslims say
“kuffar,” there is this disdain and contempt for people. Listen to those
love messages to MCA, and see if you can say “kuffar” with the same kind
of contempt and disdain. Those are good human beings. The disdain and contempt
we should have is for ourselves for not reaching out to those people, for not
being true representatives of Islam because Allah teaches us a du’ah in
the Qur’an: “Rabbana la taj’alna fitnatan liladhina kafaru : O our Lord!
Do not make us a tribulation for those who do not believe in this religion,” and
in a lot of ways, we have become the biggest barrier.

I think we have an immense opportunity,
and this is a time when we really need to reach out and go out there with
respect, recognizing that they have their ways. What we need to have is some
mutual understanding of each other, of our communities, and of their
communities. I got a call from the head of the Christian Businessmen’s
Association ? they’re all CEOs of business ? and he called me and said that he
read the interview I had done in the San Jose Mercury and that he would
really like me to come and address their business association. We continued
talking, and he said, “The thing that troubles me most is the arrogance of our
country.” He also said, “If you do not have humility in your heart when you have
power, God will destroy you.” This is what he said to me. We often forget that
they have truth in their Books, yet we believe in the Bible; we believe in the
Injil, and there is truth in there, and there are people who do read
those truthful things. One of the Bishops said to the President in the Oval
Office, “You have to remind people what the Bible says: “Vengeance is Mine
sayeth the Lord.” That is what he said: “Vengeance is Mine, sayeth the Lord.” He
advised the President not to take vengeance because that is what people want
when they get hurt, and vengeance is not from any of the prophetic
traditions.

Another thing that happened in the
White House was that I told the President that Infinite Justice is an attribute
of God and that by using that name, it is like saying that you are God, and the
President was shocked. He said, “You know, we don’t have any theologians down in
the Pentagon, and they name this stuff,” and so they changed the name.
Alhamdulillah. A friend of mine told me that during the sixties, somebody
used the term in a speech, “a hail-Mary play,” and he said that he read
an article in the Egyptian newspaper that was trying to prove that this was a
crusading conspiracy because this politician had used the phrase, “a
hail-Mary play.” He explained that Egyptian scholars do not know American
football, and the writer was simply using a sports metaphor. That is what we
find when we demystify power. A lot of it is just our own ignorance here. People
need to hear the truth, but if you are harsh or hard-hearted, people will not
listen to you. They will just flee from you. I think that we have allowed too
much harshness into our discourse, and I can say that for my own self in some of
the past talks I have given. We need to really rethink a lot about what we say
in our discourses.

THE WORLD FAMOUS BOOK " THE CONFERENCE OF THE BIRDS " – By the Great Sufi Saint Farid -Ud-Din Attar (R.A) – Part 1 -THE PARLIAMENT OF THE BIRDS

sufi786 — Mon, 05 Feb 2007 20:15:00 +0000

THE CONFERENCE OF THE BIRDS

IN FOUR PARTS

PART I

THE PARLIAMENT OF THE BIRDS

Once upon a time, in the dim old days, all the birds of the world assembled in solemn conclave to consider a momentous question.

Ever since the dawn of Creation the inhabitants of every city had had a king or leader, called Shahryar, or the friend of the city, but these feathered souls had no king to befriend them. Theirs was an army without a general—a position most precarious. How could they be successful in the battle of life without a leader to guide the weak-winged party through the perils of earthly existence? Many an eloquent speaker addressed the assembly, deploring their helpless plight in plaintive terms, bringing tears to the eyes of thetiny ones, and it was unanimously agreed that it was highly desirable, nay, absolutely necessary, that they should place themselves without delay under the protection of a king.

At this stage, full of fervour, leapt forward the Hoopoe (Hud-hud) renowned in the Muslim scriptures for the part she had played as King Solomon’s trusted emissary to Bilqis, the Queen of Sheba. She had on her bosom the crest symbolizing her spiritual knowledge and on her head shone the crown of faith.

“Dear birds”, she said, “I have the honour to belong to the Celestial Army. I know the Lord and the secrets of creation. When one carries, as I do, the name of God writ large upon its beak, one may be given the credit of knowing many a secret of the spiritual world.”

In the same vein of exultation she recounted her physical and mental qualities. She had the gift of divining underground sources of water and had directed the genii to them by pecking the earth. She had gone round the globe in the days of the Deluge and had accompanied Solomon in his journey through dales and deserts. She was the forerunner of his army and his faithful messenger.

“We have a king, my friends,” said she, “I have obtained an indication of His court; but to go alone in quest of Him is beyond my power. If, however, you accompany me, I think we may hope to reach the threshold of His Majesty. Yea, my friends, we have a king, whose name is Simurg*, and whose residence is behind Mount Caucasus. He is close by, but we are far away from Him. The road to His throne is bestrewn with obstructions; more than a hundred thousand veils of light and darkness screen the throne. Hundreds of thousands of souls burn with an ardent passion to see Him, but no one is able to find his way to Him. Yet none can afford to do without Him. Supreme manliness, absolute fearlessness and complete self-effacement are needed to overcome those obstacles. If we succeed in getting a glimpse of His face, it will be an achievement indeed. If we do not attempt it, and if we fail to greet the Beloved, this life is not worth living.”

The Hoopoe then described to her winged friends how the Simurg had first made His appearance on earth.

“During the early days of Creation He passed one midnight in His radiant flight over the land of China. A feather from His wing fell on Chinese soil. Instantly there was great tumult throughout the world. Everyone was seized with a desire to take a picture of that feather, and whoever saw the picture lost his senses. That feather is still in China’s picture-gallery. ‘Seek knowledge, even in China’ points to this.”*

On hearing this account of the Simurg, the birds lost all patience and were seized with a longing to set out at once in quest of the Sovereign Bird. They became His friends and their own enemies and wished to go forward in search of Him, but when they were told how long and fearful the road was, they were completely unnerved and brought forward several excuses. These apologies were typical of the personal idiosyncrasies of the different species of the birds.

The first to retrace its steps was the Nightingale, known for his passionate fancy for the Rose and for the rapturous melodies in which he sings of his love. “I am so completely drowned in the ocean of love for my Rose”, said he, “that I have practically no life of my own. How can a tiny thing like me have the fortitude to withstand the splendour of the Simurg? For me the love of the Rose is enough.”

“Oh”, cried the Hoopoe, “ye who stop short at mere appearances, being enamoured of external beauty only, talk no more of Love. Your love for the Rose has merely spread thorns in your way. Such a passion for transient objects brings naught save grief. Give up your fancy for the Rose. It mocks you at every spring and blossoms not for your sake. Your attachment for it is like that of the Dervish in the story I will relate to you.”

The Jinn or Ginii -PART TWO – THE FINAL PART

sufi786 — Mon, 05 Feb 2007 19:25:00 +0000

The Jinn Pt 2

By Sami Zaatari

[Part two]

We now continue our discussion concerning the jinn, in part one we
discussed what the jinn were created from, why they were created, and
discussed the information that we have concerning their life-style from
the Quran and the authentic hadiths. We now continue discussing the power of the jinn.

At the end of part one we
talked about how the jinn’s are able to travel at very fast speeds.
Another power the jinn have is to also be able to travel the spaces
(the universe) which do not have to include a vehicle; they do this to
try and steal some secrets and pass them on to humans, such as fortune
tellers:

015.018
YUSUFALI: But any that gains a hearing by stealth, is pursued by a flaming fire, bright (to see).

Ibn Kathir comments:

(Blessed be He Who has placed the big stars in the heavens.) [25:61] `Atiyah Al-`Awfi said: “Buruj
here refers to sentinel fortresses.” He made the “shooting stars” to
guard it against the evil devils who try to listen to information
conveyed at the highest heights. If any devil breaches it and advances
hoping to listen, a clear “shooting star” comes to him and destroys
him. He may already have passed on whatever he heard before the fire
hit him, to another devil below him; the latter will then take it to
his friends [among humans],

067.005
YUSUFALI: And we have, (from of old), adorned the lowest heaven with Lamps, and We have made such (Lamps) (as) missiles to drive away the Evil Ones, and have prepared for them the Penalty of the Blazing Fire.

Ibn Kathir comments:

And indeed We have adorned the nearest heaven with lamps, ) This refers to the stars which have been placed in the heavens, some moving and some stationary. In Allah’s statement,

(and We have made them (as) missiles to drive away the Shayatin,) The pronoun `them’ in His statement, “and We
have made them” is the same type of statement as the stars being
referred to as lamps. This does not mean that they are actually
missiles, because the stars in the sky are not thrown. Rather, it is
the meteors beneath them that are thrown and they are taken from the
stars. And Allah knows best. Concerning Allah’s statement,

(and We have prepared for them the torment of the blazing Fire.) means,
`We have made this disgrace for the devils in this life and We have
prepared for them the torment of the blazing Fire in the Hereafter.’

Also another passage dealing with this issue:

037.006
YUSUFALI: We have indeed decked the lower heaven with beauty (in) the stars,-

037.007
YUSUFALI: (For beauty) and for guard against all obstinate rebellious evil spirits,

037.008
YUSUFALI: (So) they should not strain their ears in the direction of the Exalted Assembly but be cast away from every side,

037.009
YUSUFALI: Repulsed, for they are under a perpetual penalty,

037.010
YUSUFALI: Except such as snatch away something by stealth, and they are pursued by a flaming fire, of piercing brightness.

Ibn Kathir comments:

The Adornment and Protection of the Heaven comes from Allah

Allah
tells us that He has adorned the lowest heaven with the heavenly bodies
for those among the people of the earth who look at it. The stars and
planets in the sky give light to the people of earth, as Allah says:

(And indeed We have adorned the nearest heaven with lamps, and We have made such lamps (as) missiles to drive away the Shayatin, and have prepared for them the torment of the blazing Fire.) (67:5),

(And indeed, We have put the big stars in the heaven and We beautified it for the beholders. And We have guarded it from every outcast Shaytan. Except him who steals the hearing then he is pursued by a clear flaming fire.) (15:16-18). And Allah says here:

(And to guard) meaning, to protect as it should be protected,

(against every rebellious Shaytan. ) means,
every insolent and impudent devil, when he wants to eavesdrop (on news
in the heavens), a piercing fire comes and burns him. Allah, may He be glorified, says:

(They
cannot listen to the higher group) meaning, they cannot reach the
higher group — which refers to the heavens and the angels in them –
when they speak of what has been revealed by Allah of His Laws and
decrees. We have already mentioned this when explaining the Hadiths quoted when we discussed the Ayah,

(when
fear is banished from their hearts, they say: “What is it that your
Lord has said” They say: “The truth. And He is the Most High, the Most
Great.) (34:23). Allah says:

(for they are pelted) meaning, they are hit,

(from every side.) means, from all directions from which they try to reach the heaven.

(Outcast,) means, they are rejected, and are repelled and prevented from reaching it, and they are pelted.

(and theirs is a constant torment.) means, in the Hereafter, they will have an ongoing, everlasting and painful torment, as Allah says:

(and [We] have prepared for them the torment of the blazing Fire) (67:5).

(Except such as snatch away something by stealing,) means, except for the one among the Shayatin
who manages to get something, which is a word he has heard from the
heaven. Then he throws it down to the one who is beneath him, who in
turn throws it down to the one who is beneath him. Perhaps the flaming
fire will strike him before he is able to throw it down, or perhaps he
will throw it — by the decree of Allah — before the flaming fire
strikes him and burns him. So the other devil takes it to the
soothsayer, as we have seen previously in the Hadith. Allah says:

(Except such as snatch away something by stealing, and they are pursued by a flaming fire of piercing brightness.) meaning, shining brightly. Ibn Jarir recorded that Ibn `Abbas, may Allah be pleased with him, said, “The Shayatin had places where they sat in the heavens listening to what was being revealed by Allah. The stars did not move and the Shayatin
were not struck. When they heard the revelation, they would come down
to earth and to every word they would add nine of their own. When the
Messenger of Allah was sent, if a Shaytan
wanted to take his seat in the heavens, the flaming fire would come and
would not miss him; it would burn him every time. They complained about
this to Iblis, may Allah curse him, and he
said, `Something must have happened.’ He sent his troops out and they
found the Messenger of Allah standing in prayer between the two
mountains of Nakhlah.” — Waki` said, “This means in the valley of Nakhlah.” — “They went back to Iblis and told him about that, and he said, `This is what has happened.”’

This is why sooth-Sayers should be avoided, since their information comes from the evil shayateen from the jinn.

Now
as we know the jinn do not look like humans, nor do humans look like
jinn’s, the jinn’s have a much completely different form than us humans
do, this is natural and to be expected, the jinn were created from a
much different substance than we were, namely fire. The jinn cannot be
seen to the naked eye, as the Quran tells us:

007.027
YUSUFALI:
O ye Children of Adam! Let not Satan seduce you, in the same manner as
He got your parents out of the Garden, stripping them of their raiment,
to expose their shame: for he and his tribe watch you from a position where ye cannot see them: We made the evil ones friends (only) to those without faith.

So
the jinn cannot be seen to the naked eye, however so a jinn can take on
a form and by doing so then the jinn can be seen although it will not
be its true form. This in itself is something us humans cannot do which
is transform ourselves into other beings, such as changing into an
animal, or changing into another human, this is something the jinn’s
and angels can do, not so for us.

5- Jinn possession

One
topic that often comes up when the jinn are discussed is the topic of
jinn possession, or more commonly known as demon possession. The vast
majority of Islamic scholarship agrees that jinn possession is real,
and it does happen, it is the consensus of the ulema. The Quran itself indicated jinn possession:

002.275
YUSUFALI: Those who devour usury will not stand except as stand one whom the Evil one(shaytan, satan)
by his touch Hath driven to madness. That is because they say: “Trade
is like usury,” but Allah hath permitted trade and forbidden usury.
Those who after receiving direction from their Lord, desist, shall be
pardoned for the past; their case is for Allah (to judge); but those
who repeat (The offence) are companions of the Fire: They will abide
therein (for ever).

Ibn Kathir comments:

After Allah mentioned the righteous believers who give charity, pay Zakah
and spend on their relatives and families at various times and
conditions, He then mentioned those who deal in usury and illegally
acquire people’s money, using various evil methods and wicked ways.
Allah describes the condition of these people when they are resurrected
from their graves and brought back to life on the Day of Resurrection:

[ÇáøóÐöíäó íóÃúßõáõæäó ÇáÑøöÈóæÇú áÇó íóÞõæãõæäó ÅöáÇøó ßóãóÇ íóÞõæãõ ÇáøóÐöì íóÊóÎóÈøóØõåõ ÇáÔøóíúØóÜäõ ãöäó ÇáúãóÓøö]

(Those who eat Riba will not stand (on the Day of Resurrection) except like the standing of a person beaten by Shaytan leading him to insanity.)

This
Ayah means, on the Day of Resurrection, these people will get up from
their graves just as the person afflicted by insanity or possesed by a demon would.

We now also put forth several statements made by Islamic scholars and sheikhs concerning jinn possession:

Praise be to Allaah.

Imaam Shaykh al-Islam said in his Fataawa after some introductory comments:

. For this reason, a group of the Mu’tazilah, such as al-Jabbaa’i, Abu Bakr al-Raazi
and others, denied that the jinn enter the body of the epileptic,
although they do not deny the existence of the jinn, because that is
not as clearly mentioned in the reports narrated from the Messenger
(peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) as their existence is mentioned. They were mistaken in this matter. Hence al-Ash’ari mentioned in Maqaalaat Ahl al-Sunnah wa’l-Jamaa’ah that they [Ahl al-Sunnah] believe that the jinn may enter the body of the epileptic, as Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):

?Those who eat Ribawill not stand (on the Day of Resurrection) except like the standing of a person beaten by Shaytaan (Satan) leading him to insanity.’

[al-Baqarah 2:275]

?Abd-Allaah ibn al-Imaam
Ahmad said: I told my father that some people claim that the jinn do
not enter the body of a human. He said, O my son, they are lying, for a
jinn may speak with the tongue of a person who is lying on his
sick-bed. (Majmoo‘ Fataawa Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah, 19/12). He also said (may Allaah have mercy on him), in vol. 24 of his Fataawa (p. 276, 277):

“The existence of the jinn is proven by the Book of Allaah and the Sunnah of His Messenger (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), and by the consensus of the salaf and scholars of this ummah. Similarly, the fact that the jinn can enter human bodies is also proven by the consensus of the imaams of Ahl al-Sunnah wa’l-Jamaa’ah. Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):

Those who eat Ribawill not stand (on the Day of Resurrection) except like the standing of a person beaten by Shaytaan (Satan) leading him to insanity.’

[al-Baqarah 2:275]

In al-Saheeh it is narrated that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: ?The Shaytaan flows through the son of Adam as his blood flows.

There is no one among the imaams
of the Muslims who denies that the jinn enter the body of the
epileptic. Whoever denies that and claims that Islam denies that is
telling lies about the sharee’ah, for there is no evidence in sharee’ah to say that this is not the case.”

From Majmoo‘ Fataawa wa Maqaalaat Mutanawwi’ah li Samaahat al-Shaykh ?Abd al-?Azeez ibn Baaz (may Allaah have mercy on him), p. 60

Another sheikh writes:

Praise be to Allaah.

The fact that jinn can enter human bodies is proven in the Qur’aan and Sunnah, and by the consensus of Ahl al-Sunnah wa’l-Jamaa’ah, and by real-life events. No one disputes this apart from the Mu’tazilah who give priority to their own rational analysis over the evidence of the Qur’aan and Sunnah. We will mention a little about this below:

Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):

“Those who eat Ribaawill not stand (on the Day of Resurrection) except like the standing of a person beaten by Shaytaan (Satan) leading him to insanity. That is because they say: ?Trading is only like Ribaa‘.” [al-Baqarah 2:275]

Al-Qurtubi said in his Tafseer (part 3, p. 355): “This aayah
is proof that those people are wrong who deny that epilepsy is caused
by the jinn and claim that its causes are only physical, and that the Shaytaan does not enter people or cause madness.”

Ibn Katheer said in his Tafseer (part 1, p. 32), after mentioning the aayah
quoted above: “They will not rise from their graves on the Day of
Resurrection except like the way in which the epileptic rises during
his seizure, when he is beaten by the Shaytaan. This is because they will rise in a very bad state. Ibn ?Abbaas said: the one who consumes ribaa will rise on the Day of Resurrection crazy and choking.”

According to a saheeh hadeeth narrated by al-Nasaa’i from Abu’l-Yusr, the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) used to pray: “Allaahumma innee a’oodhu bika min al-taraddi wa’l-haram wa’l-gharaq wa’l-harq, wa a’oodhu bika an yatakhabatani al-shaytaan ?ind al-mawt ( O Allaah,
I seek refuge with You from being thrown from a high place, old age,
drowning and burning; and I seek refuge with You from being beaten by
the Shaytaan at the time of death).” Commenting on this hadeeth in Al-Fayd (part 2, p.148), al-Manaawi said: “[The phrase] ?and I seek refuge with You from being beaten by the Shaytaan
at the time of death’ means, lest he should wrestle with me and play
with me, and damage my religious commitment or mental state (at the
time of death) by means of his insinuating whispers which cause people
to slip or lose their minds. The Shaytaan could take control of a person when he is about to depart this world, and misguide him or stop him from repenting.”

Ibn Taymiyah (Majmoo‘ al-Fataawa, 42/276) said: “The fact that jinn can enter human bodies is proven by the consensus of Ahl al-Sunnah wa’l-Jamaa’ah. Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning): ?Those who eat Ribaawill not stand (on the Day of Resurrection) except like the standing of a person beaten by Shaytaan (Satan) leading him to insanity. That is because they say: ?Trading is only like Ribaa‘.’ [al-Baqarah 2:275]. And in as-Saheeh it is narrated that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: ?The Shaytaan flows through the son of Adam as the blood flows through his veins.’”

?Abd-Allaah ibn al-Imaam Ahmad ibn Hanbal
said; “I said to my father, ?There are some people who say that the
jinn do not enter the body of the epileptic.’ He said: ?O my son, they
are lying; the jinn could speak through this person.’” Commenting on
this, Ibn Qudaamah
said: “What he said is well known, because a person may suffer an
epileptic seizure and speak in a language that no one understands, and
his body may be beaten with blows that would fell a camel, but the
epileptic does not feel them at all, and he is also unaware of the
words he is saying. The epileptic and others may be dragged about, or
the carpet on which he is sitting may be pulled, and utensils may be
moved about from place to place, and other things may happen. Anyone
who witnesses such a thing will know for sure that the one who is
speaking through the person and moving these things is not human.” And
he said, may Allaah have mercy on him: “There is no one among the imaams
of the Muslims who denies that jinn may enter the body of the epileptic
and others. Anyone who denies that and claims that Islam denies it is
lying about Islam. There is nothing in the proofs of sharee’ah to show that it does not happen.”

So the fact that jinn may enter human bodies is proven in the Qur’aan and Sunnah, and by the consensus of Ahl al-Sunnah wa’l-Jamaa’ah, some of whose comments we have quoted above.

As regards the aayah (interpretation of the meaning): “but they could not thus harm anyone except by Allaah’s Leave” [al-Baqarah 2:102],
this is undoubtedly a clear indication that the jinn cannot harm anyone
through witchcraft or epilepsy or through any other kind of disturbance
or misguidance, except with the permission of Allaah. As al-Hasan al-Basri said: “Whomever Allaah
wills, He gives them power over him, and whomever He does not will, He
does not give them power over him, and they cannot do anything to
anyone except with the permission of Allaah.” The Shaytaan
(who is the disbelieving jinn) may gain power over the believers by
making them sin and by making them neglect the remembrance and Tawheed of Allaah and sincerity in worshipping Him. But he has no power over the righteous slaves of Allaah, as Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):

“Verily,
My slaves (i.e. the true believers of Islamic Monotheism) ? you have no
authority over them. And All-Sufficient is your Lord as a Guardian” [al-Israa' 17:65]

During the Jaahiliyyah the Arabs were well aware of this and mentioned it in their poetry. For example, the poet al-A’shaa likened his she-camel’s energy to that of one who was touched by the jinn, and said that it was the jinn who was giving her her energy.

As regards the causes of epilepsy, Ibn Taymiyah explained (in Majmoo‘ al-Fataawa,
19/39) the causes. He said: “When the jinn touch a person with
epilepsy, it may be because of desire or love, just as happens between
one human and another. or it may – as is usually the case – be because
of hatred and punishment, such as when a person has harmed them or they
think that he has harmed them deliberately, either by urinating on them
or pouring hot water on them or killing them, even if the person did
that unknowingly. There are ignorant and wrongdoing ones among the jinn
who may punish a person more than he deserves, or they may be playing
with him and mistreating him, like foolish people among mankind.”

And I say: the way to save oneself from this is to remember Allaah and speak His Name at the beginning of all things, as it was reported that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) used to mention Allaah
in many cases, such as when eating, drinking, mounting his
riding-beast, taking off his clothes for any reason, having intercourse
and so on.

As regards treatment (of one whose body has been entered by the jinn), Ibn Taymiyah said (Majmoo‘ al-Fataawa, 19/42): “When the jinn attack a person, they should be told of the rulings of Allaah
and His Messenger, proof should be established against them, and they
should be commanded to do what is good and told not to do what is evil,
just as should be done in the case of people, as Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning): ?And We never punish until We have sent a Messenger (to give warning)’ [al-Israa' 17:15].”
Then he said: “If the jinn does not leave after being addressed in this
manner, then it is permissible to rebuke him, tell him off, threaten
him and curse him, as the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) did with the Shaytaan when he came with a falling star to throw it in his face, and the Messenger (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “I seek refuge with Allaah from you and I curse you with the curse of Allaah” – three times. (Narrated by al-Bukhaari).We may also seek help against the jinn by remembering Allaah (dhikr) and reciting Qur’aan, especially Aayat al-Kursi. The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “Whoever recites it will remain under the protection of Allaah and no shaytaan (devil) will be able to approach him until the morning.” (Narrated by al-Bukhaari). And al-Mi’wadhatayn (the last two soorahs of the Qur’aan) may also be recited.

As for psychiatrists who do not treat the epileptic in the manner described, they cannot do him any good at all.

This
issue may be discussed in much more detail, but what we have said here
is sufficient for those who want to know a little about this matter,
Praise be to Allaah, the Lord of the Worlds.

Masaa’il wa rasaa’il, Muhammad Mahmoud al-Najdi, p. 23

And finally another scholar writes:

A Muslim has to believe in the jinn. They are mentioned in the Qur’an and Hadith.
In many instances, they share with us many of our roles and actions.
However, it is noticeable nowadays that many people, when they feel
anything wrong with themselves, interpret that as a matter of
possession by jinn. In fact, many of them will change their mind after
they go to a doctor who checks up to find out that the person is
diagnosed to have some physical or psychological problem.

Every
Muslim is to believe firmly that no one, however great his powers may
be, can benefit or harm him unless Allah wills it. Then a Muslim’s best
cure, protection, and immunity against the harm of jinn is by
practicing Islam, reading the Qur’an and making frequent dhikr and du`a‘.

In this context, the following fatwa is issued by Sheikh M. S. Al-Munajjid, a prominent Saudi Muslim lecturer and author, regarding jinn possession:

“There
are some facts and some illusions connected to the issue of jinn
possession, and among most people nowadays the illusions outweigh the
facts. There is agreement among Sunni Muslims the jinn can dwell in the
bodies of humans, but that does not mean that everyone who has epilepsy
is possessed by the jinn, because epilepsy may have physical causes.
The pains that many people feel in their bodies cannot be ascribed for
certain to the actions of the jinn, rather they may be illusions or something imaginary.

So
a Muslim should not pay any attention to the whispers of the Satan that
make he/she think that he/she has done this and that. This is one of
the ways in which the Satan deceives the Muslim and makes him/her think
that he can control him/her, and that he has powers that in fact he
does not possess. This may lead to bad consequences as has happened to
many people.

A Muslim has to keep on treating himself with ruqyah, for the Book of Allah is available to him/her. One should recite from it and treat him/herself with ruqyah. Whether one is possessed or not, he/she will undoubtedly benefit from this reading and ruqyah.

If a Muslim goes to someone who is known for using ruqyah as prescribed in Shari`ah
and is also righteous and keeps away from deviance and myths, there is
nothing wrong with that and it may be a means of being healed from this
problem.

A
Muslim has to seek the help of Allah and pray to Him and beseech Him to
prevent the plots of the devils among mankind and the jinn from harming
him/her. Man is always in need of his Lord, and Allah is Able to rid
one of these thoughts, illusions and facts that are harming him/her.”

Shedding more light on the protection against and the immunity from the harm of jinn, we’d add the following:

“Because
jinn can see us while we cannot see them, the Prophet (peace and
blessings be upon him) taught us many ways to protect ourselves from
their harm. They are seeking refuge of Allah from the accursed shaytan, reciting surat Al-Falaq and surat An-Nas, and reciting the words taught by Allah in the Qur’an. Allah Almighty says, “And
say: My Lord! I seek refuge in Thee from suggestions of the evil ones.
And I seek refuge in Thee, my Lord, lest they be present with me.” (Al-Mu’minun: 97-98)

Saying Bismillah
(in the Name of Allah) before entering one’s home, eating or drinking,
and having intercourse will keep Satan from entering the house or
partaking with a person in his food, drink and sexual activity.
Similarly, mentioning the name of Allah before entering the toilet or
taking off one’s clothes will prevent the jinn from seeing a person in
a state of undress or harming him. The Prophet (peace and blessings of
be upon him) says: “To put a barrier that will prevent the jinn from seeing the `awrah of the sons of Adam, let any one of you say ?Bismillah‘ when entering the toilet.” (Reported by at-Tirmidhi)

Strength
of faith and religion in general will also prevent jinn from harming a
person, so much so that if they were to fight, the one who has faith
would win. Ibn Mas`ud
(may Allah be pleased with him) says: “A man from among the Companions
of Muhammad met a man from among the jinn. They wrestled, and the human
knocked down the jinn. The human said to him, ?You look small and
skinny to me, and your forearms look like the front paws of a dog. Do
all the jinn look like this, or only you?’ He said, ?No, by Allah,
among them I am strong, but let us wrestle again, and if you defeat me
I will teach you something that will do you good.’ The human said,
?Fine.’ He said, ?Recite (the verse): “Allah! There is no God save Him, the Alive, the Eternal. Neither slumber nor sleep overtaketh Him. Unto Him belongeth whatsoever is in the heavens and whatsoever is in the earth. Who is he that intercedeth with Him save by His leave? He knoweth
that which is in front of them and that which is behind them, while
they encompass nothing of His knowledge save what He will. His throne includeth the heavens and the earth, and He is never weary of preserving them. He is the Sublime, the Tremendous.” (Al-Baqarah: 255) The human said, ?Fine.’ He said, ?You will never recite this in your house but the shaytan will come out of it like a donkey breaking wind, and he will never come back in until the next morning.’” (Reported by ad-Darimi)

For more information see `Aalam al-Jinn wa ash-Shayatin by `Umar Sulayman al-Ashqar.”

So
yes jinn possession does occur and it is not a myth, however so Muslims
should not be paranoid or fearful of it. Later on in this paper I shall
discuss how a Muslim can protect themselves from the shayateen.

7- Iblis who is Satan himself

Now the first thing that normally pops into our heads when the word jinni comes up is Iblis, or satan
as he is called. Satan is without a doubt the most notorious and evil
wicked jinn that has ever been created, and indeed may Allah curse him
for the evils he has brought and for the continuous evil he plans to
bring.

Iblis or satan is often mentioned in the Quran,
for his rebellious behavior towards Allah regarding Adam, and for many
other evil wicked things that he is responsible for. He is most
notoriously known for his dis-obeyment of God:

018.050
YUSUFALI: Behold! We said to the angels, “Bow down to Adam”: They bowed down except Iblis. He was one of the Jinns, and he broke the Command of his Lord. Will ye then take him and his progeny as protectors rather than Me? And they are enemies to you! Evil would be the exchange for the wrong-doers!

The story is basically summarized in one verse, Iblis
refused to obey Allah’s command because he was too arrogant and selfish
to do so, he though that he being a jinni and made out of fire made him
better than Adam, as the Quran tells us:

007.012
YUSUFALI: (Allah) said: “What prevented thee from prostrating when I commanded thee?” He said: “I am better than he: Thou didst create me from fire, and him from clay.”

So since Iblis was created from fire, he thought this some-how made him better than Adam, not so, Iblis was simply being an arrogant fool, as the Quran says:

007.013
YUSUFALI:
(Allah) said: “Get thee down from this: it is not for thee to be
arrogant here: get out, for thou art of the meanest (of creatures).”

One must really read these verses very closely and understand how bad Iblis really is, because you have evil, and then you have very evil which is what Iblis is. Iblis DIRECTLY dis-obeyed
God, by directly I mean that God told him to do something and he said
no, so can you just imagine how wicked and evil this creature is? I
mean we have many people who dis-obey
God, but they do not do it directly like this evil one did, this
wretched creature actually had the audacity to directly refuse an order
from Allah!

It must be made crystal clear that satan is Man’s worst enemy, Iblis’s refusal to bow to Adam signified many things, for one Iblis
said he did not bow down to Adam because he felt he is better than Adam
due to him being created from fire and Adam out of clay, this signifies
that satan looks down upon us humans as inferior beings and that he views his kind as superior beings to us.

Iblis has also threatened to attack us humans and by attack he means throw us into mis-guidance although it can also be said that him and his auliya have physically attacked humans over the centuries, as the Quran tells us concerning satan’s threat:

007.017
YUSUFALI:
“Then will I assault them from before them and behind them, from their
right and their left: Nor wilt thou find, in most of them, gratitude
(for thy mercies).”

Satan has declared an all out war against mankind, satan already viewed humans as inferior beings prior to him being expelled from heaven, satan
now also blames mankind for his expulsion of heaven, so in a sense his
hatred and distain for man rose after his expulsion and he now wants to
get back at us as a revenge you could say.

Although it must be said that satan
is simply an idiot, and that it is he who is responsible for his own
expulsion, all he had to do was bow to Adam instead of being an
arrogant fool, he chose to dis-obey Allah and be arrogant, so therefore he was expelled.

8- How to protect ourselves against the evil Jinn

Now with everything that has been said one must not get worried or fearful of these evil shayateen among the jinns including that cursed evil one satan. Satan did threaten mankind however so he cannot fulfill his threat against the true believers of Allah as the Quran tells us:

038.082
YUSUFALI: (Iblis) said: “Then, by Thy power, I will put them all in the wrong,-

038.083
YUSUFALI: “Except Thy Servants amongst them, sincere and purified (by Thy Grace).”

Iblis
himself admitted that he will not be able to harm the true servant of
Allah, so therefore a Muslim must hold strong to his faith and be a
good Muslim and satan nor his allies will be able to harm us.

There are other ways of protecting yourself against Iblis and his evil shayateen:

004.076
YUSUFALI: Those who believe fight in the cause of Allah, and those who reject Faith Fight in the cause of Evil: So fight ye against the friends of Satan: feeble indeed is the cunning of Satan.

As the Quran
says, those who believe, meaning those who have faith, believe in
Allah, his books, his messengers, and the unseen, by believing in all
this you are fighting satan and his evil shayateen, and by believing in Allah and having faith in him these evil shayateen including their leader satan will not be able to harm you.

The Quran tells us more on how to protect ourselves from these evil creatures:

Satan’s
plan is (but) to excite enmity and hatred between you, with intoxicants
and gambling, and hinder you from the remembrance of Allah, and from
prayer: will ye not then abstain? Obey Allah, and obey the Messenger,
and beware (of evil): if ye do turn back, know ye that it is Our
Messenger’s duty to proclaim (the message) in the clearest manner
(5:90-91, Y.Ali)

So as you can see, alcohol and gambling are the handiwork of satan,
he likes these things because they make man keep away from his prayers
and his remembrance of Allah which makes us vulnerable to his and his shayateens
attacks. So therefore we Muslims should strive in remembering Allah,
try as hard as we can to pray 5 times a day and obey Allah and his
messenger, by doing so it will give us protection against Iblis and his allies. We Muslims must defend ourselves against Iblis and his shayateen as they are an openly declared enemy upon us as the Quran tells us:

004.060
YUSUFALI:
Hast thou not turned Thy vision to those who declare that they believe
in the revelations that have come to thee and to those before thee?
Their (real) wish is to resort together for judgment (in their
disputes) to the Evil One, though they were ordered to reject him. But
Satan’s wish is to lead them astray far away (from the right).

028.015
YUSUFALI: And he entered the city at a time when its people were not watching: and he found there two men fighting,-
one of his own religion, and the other, of his foes. Now the man of his
own religion appealed to him against his foe, and Moses struck him with
his fist and made an end of him. He said: “This is a work of Evil
(Satan): for he is an enemy that manifestly misleads!”

035.006
YUSUFALI: Verily Satan is an enemy to you: so treat him as an enemy. He only invites his adherents, that they may become Companions of the Blazing Fire.

So we Muslims must always be on guard against satan
and his allies, we should leave no openings for them which will allow
them to attack us and influence us, if we leave the door open then we
leave the possibility of jinn possession, and many other evil things
that these creatures do that will drive us to madness. Allah has told
you what to do, Allah has told you clearly on how to protect yourselves
from these evil beings, so therefore act upon it and protect yourselves
against satan and his evil shayateen.

Last but not least, other ways of defending yourself against the evil jinn and warding of evil jinns away from you is by:

-Reciting Surah Al-Baqarah

-Reciting ayat al kursi (2:255)

-Pronouncing the Adan loudly, which is the call to prayer

-Performing Salah

-Reciting the Quran in general

-Reciting the last 2 Surah’s of the Quran before going to sleep, and when waking up, or in general.

So
these are one in many ways in which us Muslims cant get protection from
these evil wicked beings, even seeking refuge with Allah by saying ?authubilahi minal shaytanil rajeem‘ will grant you Allah’s protection so therefore Muslims should not be fearful of these creatures.

I end this article by quoting a wonderful passage from the Quran:

SHAKIR: It is only the Shaitan that causes you to fear from his friends, but do not fear them, and fear Me if you are believers.

AMEEN MAY ALLAH PROTECT US ALL!

The Jinn or Ginii -PART ONE

sufi786 — Mon, 05 Feb 2007 19:21:00 +0000

The Jinn

By Sami Zaatari

[Part one]

Among
the creation of man Allah has also created a vast number of other
creations throughout the heavens and the earth, as he himself states:

042.029
YUSUFALI: And among His Signs is the creation of the heavens and the earth, and the living creatures that He has scattered through them: and He has power to gather them together when He wills.

So
as you can see, Allah makes it clear that he has created several living
beings throughout the heavens and the earth, Allah does tell us about
some of these creations but not all, one of these creations is the man
off course:

015.026
YUSUFALI: We created man from sounding clay, from mud moulded into shape;

032.007
YUSUFALI: He Who has made everything which He has created most good: He began the creation of man with (nothing more than) clay,

038.071
YUSUFALI: Behold, thy Lord said to the angels: “I am about to create man from clay:

055.014
YUSUFALI: He created man from sounding clay like unto pottery,

Among his other creations is the angel’s off course:

035.001
YUSUFALI:
Praise be to Allah, Who created (out of nothing) the heavens and the
earth, Who made the angels, messengers with wings,- two, or three, or
four (pairs): He adds to Creation as He pleases: for Allah has power
over all things.

And off course the animals:

081.004
YUSUFALI: When the she-camels, ten months with young, are left untended;

081.005
YUSUFALI: When the wild beasts are herded together (in the human habitations);

022.018
YUSUFALI: Seest thou not that to Allah bow down in worship all things that are in the heavens and on earth,-
the sun, the moon, the stars; the hills, the trees, the animals; and a
great number among mankind? But a great number are (also) such as are
fit for Punishment: and such as Allah shall disgrace,- None can raise to honour: for Allah carries out all that He wills.

Now
among these creations Allah also created another race, called the Jinn.
Now there are several miss-conceptions about the jinn, the main one is
the belief that all jinn’s are demons and devils, this is not true,
jinn’s are just like humans, there are good and bad, and the jinn have
the very bad which we call demons and the devil.

In this paper, we shall discuss who the jinn are citing the Quran and the hadith,
before doing so it should be made known that Allah’s creation is not
simply limited to humans, animals, jinn’s, and angels. There are many
more creations other than these entities, however so we do not know
what these entities are nor does the Quran tell us, the Quran only talks about 4 of these creations.

1- What are the Jinn created from

As we know, the Quran tells us that humans have been made from clay, while angels have been made from light, concerning the creation of jinn, the Quran tells us this:

015.027
YUSUFALI: And the Jinn race, We had created before, from the fire of a scorching wind.

055.015
YUSUFALI: And He created Jinns from fire free of smoke:

So the jinns have been created from a smokeless fire, Ibn Kathir’s tafsir writes:

The Creation of Humans and Jinns

Allah mentions that He created mankind from clay, like that used in pottery, and created the Jinns from the tip of the flame of a smokeless fire. This was said by Ad-Dahhak from Ibn `Abbas. It was also said by `Ikrimah, Mujahid, Al-Hasan and Ibn Zayd. Al-`Awfi reported from Ibn `Abbas, “From the best part of the fire, from its smokeless flame.” Imam Ahmad recorded that `A’ishah said that Allah’s Messenger said,

(The angels were created from light, the Jinns from a smokeless flame of fire, and `Adam from what was described to you.) Muslim also collected this Hadith. Allah’s statement:

(Then which of the blessings of your Lord will you both deny) was explained above.

(And the Jinn, We created earlier) means before creating humans.

(from the smokeless flame of fire.) Ibn `Abbas said, “It is the smokeless flame that kills.” Abu Dawud At-Tayalisi said that Shu`bah narrated to them from Abu Ishaq, who said: “I visited `Umar Al-Asamm when he was sick, and he said: `Shall I not tell you a Hadith that I heard from `Abdullah bin Mas`ud
He said: `This smokeless flame is one of the seventy parts of the
smokeless fire from which the Jinn where created. Then he recited,

(And the Jinn, We created earlier from the smokeless flame of fire).”’ The following is found in the Sahih,

(The
angels were created from light, the Jinn were created from a smokeless
flame of fire, and Adam was created from that which has been described
to you.) The Ayah is intended to point out the noble nature, good
essence and pure origin of Adam.

So naturally due to the jinn’s creation from fire this makes them much different to us, in physical terms and in their nature.

Now it is also known that the jinn were also created before mankind, as the Quranic verse proves along with its tafsir.

2- Why were the Jinn created?

Jinns were created for the same reason that man was, as the Quran answers this question:

051.056
YUSUFALI: I have only created Jinns and men, that they may serve Me.

Allah created the jinn to worship him, Ibn Kathir comments:

Allah Only created Mankind and Jinns to worship Him Alone

Allah the Exalted and Most Honored said,

(And I created not the Jinn and mankind except that they should worship Me.) meaning, `I, Allah, only created them so that I order them to worship Me, not that I need them.’ `Ali bin Abi Talhah reported that Ibn `Abbas commented on the Ayah,

(…except that they should worship Me.) meaning, “So that they worship Me, willingly or unwillingly.” Allah the Exalted said,

(I
seek not any provision from them nor do I ask that they should feed Me.
Verily, Allah is the All-Provider, Owner of power, the Most Strong.)
Imam Ahmad recorded that `Abdullah bin Mas`ud said, “The Messenger of Allah taught the following:

`Verily, I am the Provider, Owner of power, the Most Strong.’ Abu Dawud, At-Tirmidhi and An-Nasa’i also collected this Hadith. At-Tirmidhi said, “Hasan Sahih.
” The meaning of this Ayah (51:56) is that, Allah the Exalted, the
Blessed created the creatures so that they worship Him Alone without
partners. Those who obey Him will be rewarded with the best rewards,
while those who disobey Him will receive the worst punishment from Him.
Allah stated that He does not need creatures, but rather, they are in
need of Him in all conditions

The jinn just like us will be held accountable for their deeds and actions:

037.158
YUSUFALI: And they have invented a blood-relationship between Him and the Jinns: but the Jinns know (quite well) that they have indeed to appear (before his Judgment-Seat)!

006.128
YUSUFALI: One day will He gather them all together, (and say): “O ye assembly of Jinns! Much (toll) did ye take of men.” Their friends amongst men will say: “Our Lord! we
made profit from each other: but (alas!) we reached our term – which
thou didst appoint for us.” He will say: “The Fire be your
dwelling-place: you will dwell therein for ever, except as Allah willeth.” for thy Lord is full of wisdom and knowledge.

And just like us, the jinn will also be thrown in the hell fire, or be granted paradise:

011.119
YUSUFALI:
Except those on whom thy Lord hath bestowed His Mercy: and for this did
He create them: and the Word of thy Lord shall be fulfilled: “I will fill Hell with jinns and men all together.”

032.013
YUSUFALI: If We had so willed, We could certainly have brought every soul its true guidance: but the Word from Me will come true, “I will fill Hell with Jinns and men all together.”

Ibn Kathir comments:

(And
the Word of your Lord has been fulfilled (His saying): “Surely, I shall
fill Hell with Jinn and men all together.”) Allah, the Exalted,
informs that He precedes everything in His preordainment and decree, by
His perfect knowledge and penetrating wisdom. The result of this decree
is that from those whom He has created, some deserve the Paradise and some deserve the Hell Fire. From this decree is that He will fill the Hellfire with both mankind and Jinns. His is the profound evidence and the perfect wisdom. In the Two Sahihs it is recorded that Abu Hurayrah said that the Messenger of Allah said,

Paradise and the Hellfire debated. Paradise
said, `None will enter me except the weak and despised of the people.’
The Hell- fire said, `I have inherited the haughty and the arrogant
people.’ Then Allah said to the Paradise, `You are My mercy and I grant mercy with you to whoever I wish.’ Then He said to the Hellfire, `You are My torment and I take vengeance with you upon whoever I wish. I will fill each one of you.’ However, the Paradise
will always have more bounties, to such an extent that Allah will
create more creatures to dwell in it and enjoy its extra bounties. The
Hellfire will continue saying, `Are there anymore (to enter me),’ until
the Lord of might places His Foot over it. Then it (Hell) will say,
“Enough, enough, by Your might!”)

Also they will be granted paradise like us:

055.054
YUSUFALI:
They will recline on Carpets, whose inner linings will be of rich
brocade: the Fruit of the Gardens will be near (and easy of reach).

055.055
YUSUFALI: Then which of the favours of your Lord will ye deny?

055.056
YUSUFALI: In them will be (Maidens), chaste, restraining their glances, whom no man or Jinn before them has touched;-

055.057
YUSUFALI: Then which of the favours of your Lord will ye deny?-

055.058
YUSUFALI: Like unto Rubies and coral.

055.060
YUSUFALI: Is there any Reward for Good – other than Good?

055.061
YUSUFALI: Then which of the favours of your Lord will ye deny?

055.062
YUSUFALI: And besides these two, there are two other Gardens,-

So
this is a whole description of how it will be in heaven, and as you can
see, the jinn’s will be there too. So jinn’s are not exempt from their
actions, they are held accountable, what this means is that the jinn
have a free will.

3- The Jinn community

Now
as I said, the jinn are like us, they have a free will and will be held
accountable for it. Just like us the jinn have their own communities,
and their own life-styles with their own dwelling places. In this
section we provide information on the life of jinn’s and how they are.

The jinn just like us receive their own messengers:

006.130
YUSUFALI: “O ye assembly of Jinns and men! came
there not unto you messengers from amongst you, setting forth unto you
My signs, and warning you of the meeting of this Day of yours?” They
will say: “We bear witness against ourselves.” It was the life of this
world that deceived them. So against themselves will they bear witness
that they rejected Faith

The verse makes it clear that the jinn themselves receieved messengers to them, to convey the truth, Ibn Kathir comments:

Chastising the Jinns and Humans after their Admission that Allah Sent Messengers to Them

Allah will chastise the disbelieving Jinns
and humans on the Day of Resurrection, when He asks them, while having
better knowledge, if the Messengers delivered His Messages to them,

(“O you assembly of Jinn and humans!
Did not there come to you Messengers from among you”) We should note
here that the Messengers are from among mankind only, not vice versa,
as Mujahid, Ibn Jurayj and others from the Imams of Salaf and later generations have stated. The proof for this is that Allah said,

(Verily, We have sent the revelation to you as We sent the revelation to Nuh and the Prophets after him.) [4:163], until,

(Messengers
as bearers of good news as well as of warning in order that mankind
should have no plea against Allah after the (coming of) Messengers.) [4:165] Allah said, concerning the Prophet Ibrahim,

(And We ordained among his offspring prophethood and the Book) [29: 27], thus sending the prophethood and the Book exclusively through the offspring of the Prophet Ibrahim. No one has claimed that there were Prophets from among the Jinns before the time of Ibrahim, but not after that. Allah said,

(And We never sent before you any of the Messengers but verily, they ate food and walked in the markets.) [25:20], and,

(And We sent not before you any but men unto whom We revealed, from among the people of townships.) [12:109] Therefore, concerning prophethood, the Jinns follow mankind in this regard and this is why Allah said about them,

O
you assembly of Jinn and humans! “Did not there come to you Messengers
from amongst you, reciting unto you My verses and warning you of the
meeting of this Day of yours” They will say: “We bear witness against
ourselves.”) meaning, we affirm that the
Messengers have conveyed Your Messages to us and warned us about the
meeting with You, and that this Day will certainly occur. Allah said
next,

(It was the life of this world that deceived them.) and
they wasted their lives and brought destruction to themselves by
rejecting the Messengers and denying their miracles. This is because
they were deceived by the beauty, adornment and lusts of this life.

(And they will bear witness against themselves) on the Day of Resurrection,

(that
they were disbelievers…) in this worldly life, rejecting what the
Messengers, may Allah’s peace and blessings be on them, brought them.

And just like us the Jinn also reject their messengers and cause a lot of hardships on them:

006.112
YUSUFALI: Likewise did We make for every Messenger an enemy,- evil ones among men and jinns,
inspiring each other with flowery discourses by way of deception. If
thy Lord had so planned, they would not have done it: so leave them and
their inventions alone.

So
even the jinn just like us would rebel against the messengers of God,
causing them a lot of hardship, they most likely did the same thing us
humans did, ridicule, mock, and insult the messengers, while also at
the same time becoming violent. Ibn Kathir comments:

Every Prophet Has Enemies

Allah says, just as We
made enemies for you, O Muhammad, who will oppose and rebel against you
and become your adversaries, We also made enemies for every Prophet who
came before you. Therefore, do not be saddened by this fact. Allah said
in other Ayat:

(Verily, Messengers were denied before you, but with patience they bore the denial, and they were hurt…) [6:34], and,

(Nothing
is said to you except what was said to the Messengers before you.
Verily, your Lord is the Possessor of forgiveness, and (also) the
Possessor of painful punishment.) [41:43] and,

(Thus have We made for every Prophet an enemy among the criminals.) [25:31]. Waraqah bin Nawfal said to Allah’s Messenger , “None came with what you came with but he was the subject of enmity.” Allah’s statement,

(Shayatin among mankind…) refers to,

(enemies. ..) meaning, the Prophets have enemies among the devils of mankind and the devils of the Jinns. The word, Shaytan, describes one who is dissimilar to his kind due to his or her wickedness. Indeed, only the Shayatin, may Allah humiliate and curse them, from among mankind and the Jinns oppose the Messengers. `Abdur-Razzaq said that Ma`mar narrated that Qatadah commented on Allah’s statement,

(Shayatin (devils) among mankind and Jinn…) “There are devils among the Jinns and devils among mankind who inspire each other.” Allah’s statement,

(inspiring one another with adorned speech as a delusion.) means, they inspire each other with beautified, adorned speech that deceives the ignorant who hear it,

(If
your Lord had so willed, they would not have done it;) for all this
occurs by Allah’s decree, will and decision, that every Prophet had
enemies from these devils,

(so leave them alone with their fabrications.) and
lies. This Ayah orders patience in the face of the harm of the wicked
and to trust in Allah against their enmity, for, “Allah shall suffice
for you (O Muhammad) and aid you against them.” Allah’s statement,

(And Tasgha to it.) means, according to Ibn `Abbas, “incline to it.”

(the hearts of those who do not believe in the Hereafter…) their hearts, mind and hearing. As-Suddi said that this Ayah refers to the hearts of the disbelievers.

(And that they may remain pleased with it.) they
like and adore it. Only those who disbelieve in the Hereafter accept
this evil speech, being enemies of the Prophets, etc., just as Allah
said in other Ayat,

Now like I said before, the jinn have their good and bad, not all jinns are bad, and not all jinn’s are demons and devils as some wrongly assume. As the Quran tells us:

072.011
YUSUFALI: ‘There are among us some that are righteous, and some the contrary: we follow divergent paths.

This passage is taken from Surat
Al-Jinn; the chapter basically deals with the jinn community. As the
passage makes it clear, there are bad jinn’s, and there are good
jinn’s, each have their own different paths which they follow, Ibn Kathir comments:

Allah says that the Jinns said about themselves,

(There are among us some that are righteous, and some the contrary;) meaning, other than that.

The Jinns testify that among Them there are Believers, Disbelievers, Misguided and Guided

(We are groups having different ways.) meaning, on numerous differing paths and having different thoughts and opinions. Ibn `Abbas, Mujahid and others have said,

(We are groups having different ways.) “This means among us are believers and among us are disbelievers.” Ahmad bin Sulayman An-Najjad reported in his (book of) Amali that he heard Al-A`mash
saying, “A Jinn came to us, so I said to him, `What is the most beloved
food to your kind’ He replied, `Rice.’ So we brought them some rice and
I saw the morsels being lifted but I did not see a hand lifting it. So
I asked him, `Do you have these desires (religious innovations) among
your kind as we have among ours’ He replied, `Yes.’ Then I said, `Who are the Rafidah among you’ He said, `They are the worst of us.”’ I presented this chain of narration to our Shaykh, Al-Hafiz Abi Al-Hajjaj Al-Mizzi and he said its chain is authentic to Al-A`mash.

There are even Muslim jinn’s as well, as the Surah continues telling us:

072.014
YUSUFALI: ‘Amongst us are some that submit their wills(almuslimoona)
(to Allah), and some that swerve from justice. Now those who submit
their wills – they have sought out (the path) of right conduct:

So
naturally if there are Muslim jinn’s, then there would be jinn’s of
other faiths as well, however so Christianity would be of no use to a
jinn, since Jesus died for the sins of man and not for the sins of
jinn, so therefore there would be no use for a jinn to become a
Christian since it will not grant the jinn any salvation since it’s not
a human. So therefore the jinn’s are Muslim, Jew, or some other faith.

Now the jinn’s also do eat, as the authentic hadiths tell us:

Muslim Book 004, Number 0903:

Dawud reported from ‘Amir who said: I asked ‘Alqama if Ibn Mas’ud was present with the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) on the night of the Jinn (the night when the Holy Prophet met them). He (Ibn Mas’uad) said: No, but we were in the company of the Messenger of Allah (may
peace be upon him) one night and we missed him. We searched for him in
the valleys and the hills and said. He has either been taken away (by
jinn) or has been secretly killed. He (the narrator) said. We spent the
worst night which people could ever spend. When it was dawn we saw him
coming from the side of Hiri‘. He (the
narrator) reported. We said: Messenger of Allah, we missed you and
searched for you, but we could not find you and we spent the worst
night which people could ever spend. He (the Holy Prophet) said: There
came to me an inviter on behalf of the Jinn and I went along with him
and recited to them the Qur’an. He (the narrator) said: He then went along with us and showed us their traces and traces of their embers. They
(the Jinn) asked him (the Holy Prophet) about their provision and he
said: Every bone on which the name of Allah is recited is your
provision. The time it will fall in your hand it would be covered with flesh, and the dung of (the camels) is fodder for your animals. The Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) said: Don’t perform istinja with these (things) for these are the food of your brothers (Jinn).

What makes this hadith more interesting is that it shows that jinn’s also have their own type of animals, as the hadith says:

and the dung of (the camels) is fodder for your animals

We can only wonder what these creatures are, and indeed they are a very strange dirty creature with the type of food they eat.

Now do jinn’s also have sex and reproduce? The answer is yes, as the Quran says:

055.054
YUSUFALI:
They will recline on Carpets, whose inner linings will be of rich
brocade: the Fruit of the Gardens will be near (and easy of reach).

055.055
YUSUFALI: Then which of the favours of your Lord will ye deny?

055.056
YUSUFALI: In them will be (Maidens), chaste, restraining their glances, whom no man or Jinn before them has touched;-

These
passages are describing heaven, however the point to note is the part
where verse 56 talks about the maidens saying whom no man OR JINN has
touched, this indicates that jinn’s themselves on earth have their own
type of females who they touch and have sexual intercourse with. And
off course through sexual intercourse the jinn beget other jinn, and
off course anything that is given birth to will also die, the Quran says:

041.025
YUSUFALI:
And We have destined for them intimate companions (of like nature), who
made alluring to them what was before them and behind them; and the
sentence among the previous generations of Jinns and men, who have passed away, is proved against them; for they are utterly lost.

So just like us humans the jinn too also die, they are mortals and not immortals.

Now what about the dwelling places of jinn? Where do they live, in our homes? In the desert? In the sea? Or in the mountains?
One could say that they live all these places, the jinn normally prefer
to live in deserted quiet abandoned areas, which naturally include the
desert, and the mountains. Many people have often recounted strange
occurrences when they were in the dessert in the night. At the same
time jinn’s also like to dwell in many ruined and un clean places such as dung hills, garbage dumps, grave-yards and so on.

4- The Power of the Jinn

Now
although the jinn are similar to humans in many aspects, such as
eating, having sexual intercourse and reproducing, dying, being judged
on judgement day, being granted paradise or being thrown into hell,
having a free will and so on. There are also many different aspects
between the human and the jinn, this is
natural, since the jinn are a different race then us, created from a
different substance than we were. The jinn’s have many capabilities
that us humans do not have.

For instance the jinn can move very fast, quicker than light you could say, as the Quran tells us:

At length, when they came to a (lowly) valley of ants, one of the ants said: “O ye ants, get into your habitations, lest Solomon and his hosts crush you (under foot) without knowing it.” So he smiled, amused at her speech; and he said: “O my Lord! so
order me that I may be grateful for Thy favours, which thou hast
bestowed on me and on my parents, and that I may work the righteousness
that will please Thee: And admit me, by Thy Grace, to the ranks of Thy
righteous Servants.” And he took a muster of the Birds; and he said:
“Why is it I see not the Hoopoe? Or is he among the absentees? “I will
certainly punish him with a severe penalty, or execute him, unless he bring
me a clear reason (for absence).” But the Hoopoe tarried not far: he
(came up and) said: “I have compassed (territory) which thou hast not
compassed, and I have come to thee from Saba with tidings true. “I
found (there) a woman ruling over them and provided with every
requisite; and she has a magnificent throne. “I found her and her
people worshipping the sun besides Allah: Satan has made their deeds
seem pleasing in their eyes, and has kept them away from the Path,-
so they receive no guidance,- “(Kept them away from the Path), that
they should not worship Allah, Who brings to light what is hidden in
the heavens and the earth, and knows what ye hide and what ye reveal. “Allah!-
there is no god but He!- Lord of the Throne Supreme!” (Solomon) said:
“Soon shall we see whether thou hast told the truth or lied! “Go
thou, with this letter of mine, and deliver it to them: then draw back
from them, and (wait to) see what answer they return”… (The queen) said: “Ye chiefs! here
is delivered to me – a letter worthy of respect. “It is from Solomon,
and is (as follows): ‘In the name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful:”‘Be ye not arrogant against me, but come to me in submission (to the true Religion).’” She said: “Ye chiefs! advise me in (this) my affair: no affair have I decided except in your presence.” They
said: “We are endued with strength, and given to vehement war: but the
command is with thee; so consider what thou wilt command.” She said:
“Kings, when they enter a country, despoil it, and make the noblest of
its people its meanest thus do they behave. “But
I am going to send him a present, and (wait) to see with what (answer)
return (my) ambassadors.” Now when (the embassy) came to Solomon, he
said: “Will ye give me abundance in wealth? But that which Allah has
given me is better than that which He has given you! Nay it is ye who
rejoice in your gift! “Go back to them, and be sure we shall come to
them with such hosts as they will never be able to meet: We shall expel
them from there in disgrace, and they will feel humbled (indeed).” He
said (to his own men): “Ye chiefs! which of you can bring me her throne before they come to me in submission?” Said an ‘Ifrit, of the Jinns: “I will bring it to thee before thou rise from thy council: indeed I have full strength for the purpose, and may be trusted.” Said one who had knowledge of the Book: “I will bring it to thee within the twinkling of an eye!” Then when (Solomon) saw it placed firmly before him, he said: “This is by the Grace of my Lord!- to test me whether I am grateful or ungrateful! and
if any is grateful, truly his gratitude is (a gain) for his own soul;
but if any is ungrateful, truly my Lord is Free of all Needs, Supreme
in Honour !” (27: 18-40, Yusuf Ali)

So
as you can see, Solomon wanted to bring the pagan queen’s throne to
him, and he asked his chiefs who could do this task for him? An ifrit
from the jinn said it could do it, and that it could bring the throne
before Solomon even got up from his place, another Jinn said that he
could bring it within a blink, and this was done, the jinn got the
throne of the queen within a blink! Solomon was amazed by this as any
one of us would be, the jinn managed to get the pagan queens throne in
a blink of an eye! This shows how fast the jinn’s are and that they
unlike us are not bound by long time constraints and can simply travel
to anywhere they like in amazing speeds.

Now as to the ifrit, the ifrit is a type of jinn, there different types of jinn, there are shayateen among the jinn, which are the demons, and then you have the ifrit jinns who are the very powerful and strong jinn.

Let us post Ibn kathirs tafsir of these passages:

How the Throne of Bilqis was brought in an Instant

Muhammad bin Ishaq reported from Yazid bin Ruman: “When the messengers returned with word of what Sulayman
said, she said: `By Allah, I knew he was more than a king, and that we
have no power to match him, and that we can gain nothing by being
stubborn with him. So, she sent word to him saying: “I am coming to you
with the leaders of my people to see what you will instruct us to do
and what you are calling us to of your religion.” Then she issued
commands that her throne, which was made of gold and inlaid with
rubies, chrysolite and pearls,
should be placed in the innermost of seven rooms, one within the other,
and all the doors should be locked. Then she told her deputy whom she
was leaving in charge, “Take care of my people and my throne, and do
not let anyone approach it or see it until I come back to you.” Then
she set off to meet Sulayman with twelve thousand of her commanders from the leaders of Yemen, under each of whose command were many thousands of men. Sulayman
sent the Jinn to bring him news of her progress and route every day and
night, then when she drew near, he gathered together the Jinns and humans who were under his control and said:

(O chiefs! Which of you can bring me her throne before they come to me surrendering themselves in obedience (as Muslims)).”

(An `Ifrit from the Jinn said: ) Mujahid said, “A giant Jinn.” Abu Salih said, “It was as if he was a mountain.”

(I will bring it to you before you rise from your place.) Ibn `Abbas, may Allah be pleased with him, said, “Before you get up from where you are sitting.” As-Suddi
and others said: “He used to sit to pass judgements and rulings over
the people, and to eat, from the beginning of the day until noon.”

(And verily, I am indeed strong and trustworthy for such work.) Ibn `Abbas said: “Strong enough to carry it and trustworthy with the jewels it contains. Sulayman, upon him be peace, said, “I want it faster than that.” From this it seems that Sulayman
wanted to bring this throne as a demonstration of the greatness of the
power and authority that Allah had bestowed upon him and the troops
that He had subjugated to him. Power such as had never been given to
anyone else, before or since, so that this would furnish proof of his prophethood before Bilqis
and her people, because this would be a great and wondrous thing, if he
brought her throne as if he were in her country, before they could come
to it, although it was hidden and protected by so many locked doors.
When Sulayman said, “I want it faster than that,

(One with whom was knowledge of the Scripture said: ) Ibn `Abbas said, “This was Asif, the scribe of Sulayman.” It was also narrated by Muhammad bin Ishaq from Yazid bin Ruman that he was Asif bin Barkhiya‘ and he was a truthful believer who knew the Greatest Name of Allah. Qatadah said: “He was a believer among the humans, and his name was Asif.”

(I
will bring it to you within the twinkling of an eye!) Meaning, lift
your gaze and look as far as you can, and before you get tired and
blink, you will find it before you. Then he got up, performed ablution
and prayed to Allah, may He be exalted. Mujahid said: “He said, O Owner of majesty and honor.” When Sulayman and his chiefs saw it before them,

(he said: “This is by the grace of my Lord…”) meaning, `this is one of the blessings which Allah has bestowed upon me.’

(to test whether I am grateful or ungrateful! And whoever is grateful, truly, his gratitude is for himself;) This is like the Ayat:

(Whosoever does righteous good deed, it is for himself; and whosoever does evil, it is against himself.) (41:46)

(and whosoever does righteous good deed, then such will prepare a good place for themselves.) (30:44).

(and whoever is ungrateful, certainly my Lord is Rich, Bountiful.) He has no need of His servants or their worship.

(Bountiful) He is Bountiful in and of Himself, even if no one were to worship Him. His greatness does not depend on anyone. This is like what Musa said: p

(If you disbelieve, you and all on earth together, then verily, Allah is Rich, Owner of all praise.) (14:8). It is recorded in Sahih Muslim:

(Allah,
may He be exalted, says: “O My servants, if the first of you and the
last of you, mankind and Jinn alike, were all to be as pious as the
most pious among you, that would not add to My dominion in the
slightest. O My servants, if the first of you and the last of you,
mankind and Jinn alike, were all to be as evil as the most evil one
among you, that would not detract from My dominion in the slightest. O
My servants, these are deeds which I am recording for you, and I will
judge you according to them, so whoever finds something good, let him
praise Allah, and whoever finds otherwise, let him blame no one but
himself.”)

With all that said we conclude part one of this article, in part two we shall continue to discuss the powers that jinn have, and we shall also discuss the cursed one who is iblis (satan himself).

IMPORTANT ANNOUCEMENT TO ALL MEMBERS OF LOVE YOUR LORD GROUP

sufi786 — Mon, 05 Feb 2007 01:17:00 +0000

JUST GOT A REQUEST FROM A MEMBER OF THIS GROUP WITH THE BELOW STATEMENT

PLEASE remove me from your mailing list. you are flooding my inbox. i can check on your site if i want to. thank you.

The Administration team of this group is not sure how many members of this group have faced this similar problem .

PLEASE READ THE BELOW REPLY IF YOU ARE HAVING SIMILAR KIND OF PROBLEMS

My friend the Administration team of this group ( Love Your Lord) has
not put you or any member of this group on any E- mail alerts , what is
happening is because of default settings of Multiply blogs which are
set to receive E-mail alerts from your contacts or groups , you can
easily change this settings by following these instructions below .

Please
click on the settings and you will see My E-mail alerts , please click
on My E-mail alerts,then you will see a whole list of your contacts and
your groups , kindly check the option receive none of E-mail alerts
from the Group Love Your Lord , and will have not a single E- mail
alert coming to your E- mail account from this group .

Even
though it is not a fault of the Administrative team of Love Your Lord
group , we do apologize for any inconvenience caused caused by us
unintentionally to any member of this group

Thank You

Sufi786