irshaddering thoughts

What I believe motivated the Times Square bombing suspect

Posted in Irshaddering Thoughts on May 05, 2010

Courtesy: Orkut.com

Since Tuesday, my office has been fielding questions from journalists about the Times Square bombing suspect, Faisal Shahzad.

Born in Pakistan, he came to the United States as a 19-year-old student with no apparent ties to extremists back home. Moreover, his American Dream unfolded as many do, from earning an MBA to buying a home in 2004 to having it foreclosed a few years later to taking his oath of citizenship last April.

One question hovers above all the others: Why would a new U.S. citizen and seemingly well-adjusted young man attempt an act of war against his country?

Reportedly, Shahzad has confessed to being outraged by U.S. drone attacks that wiped out much of the Taliban’s leadership in Pakistan. Factually, he might be correct. But why would he resort to drastic measures of his own to avenge those attacks is an issue that can’t be explained by U.S. foreign policy. Nor can it be demystified by conventional counter-terrorism or national security policy.

Reforming the “moderate” Muslim mindset is key.

I’m convinced that Islam is not the intrinsic problem. Rather, the tribal culture of honor in which many of these would-be terrorists are steeped is the real source of their “religious” motivations.  Among mainstream Muslims, tribal culture has become synonymous with faith. A lethal mistake.

Young Muslims often come of age being taught that they have a religious duty to avenge the Muslim community’s honor. In fact, it’s not God-given faith but man-made culture that dictates this “duty.”

And the tribal culture of honor travels well beyond traditional Islamic nations, colonizing the hearts and minds of even second- and third-generation Muslims in North America, Europe and Australia.

My next book will tackle how, exactly, to address this problem.

Meanwhile, if you want to know how Pakistan’s culture of honor could have seeped into young Faisal’s bloodstream, read chapter 5 of my book, The Trouble with Islam Today.

There, I answer “who’s betraying whom?” — the bottom line being that Islam’s clerics and governments, not ordinary Westerners, are the true source of dishonor among Muslims.

Sign my petition… or else

Posted in Irshaddering Thoughts, Announcements on Apr 26, 2010

These days, you don’t even have to attempt a depiction of the Prophet Muhammad — however lousy your attempt may be — to incur a death threat from Islamist thugs.

I’m referring, of course, to the South Park controversy. But remember: The “offending” episode didn’t portray the Prophet at all. It put Santa Claus in a bear suit and asked the audience to pretend that the Prophet stood inside the furry, sweaty costume. (Good thing he’s accustomed to warm climes.)

In reality — uh, whatever that means for a cartoon — the Prophet sat in a U-Haul truck at an undisclosed location. God, now the messenger of Islam is channeling Dick Cheney. Will the absurdity never end?

Let’s get serious. Here are the top three reasons why free expression is entirely acceptable in Islam, even if it’s not welcomed by some Muslims:

1) The Prophet Muhammad warned Muslims not to put him on a pedestal. That’s because he’s not the one to be revered; God alone is to be worshiped. Welcome to the hypocrisy of those who claim to be protecting the Prophet while violating one of his core teachings.

2) The Qur’an expressly affirms that “there is no compulsion in religion” (2:256). Which means nobody should be forced to follow Islamic traditions, even if they’re “mocking” the religion.

3) The Qur’an advises Muslims to deal with hurt feelings by getting up and walking away (4:140). That’s it. Don’t retaliate. Just “do not sit with them.” Change the channel. Click the mouse. Move on. Once the dust has settled, come back to discuss the issues with those who’ve offended you.

I’m taking that advice.

See, as a faithful Muslim who’s trying to educate her fellow Muslims that Islam can be reconciled with free expression, I’m offended by the broadcaster of South Park, a channel called Comedy Central, which has censored any mention of Muhammad. I’m offended that the executives are caving to Islamist criminals. I’m offended that they’re infantilizing Muslims by expecting so little from us. Above all, I’m offended that they’re making my mission of Muslim reform that much harder.

So I want to discuss the issues with Comedy Central. But, dear readers, I need your help. I’m asking you to sign my petition against death threats and for secular values. This petition requests not just your name, but also your city.

Thanks to my Facebook community and news stories like these, we’ve amassed thousands of signatures since South Park hit the headlines. I’m planning to present these signatures to the executives at Comedy Central because I want them to see that if “ordinary” people have the guts to defy would-be murderers, the suits should have courage, too.

Beyond that — and in true Qur’anic spirit — I hope to generate a dialogue with Comedy Central and other broadcasters. The topic: why there’s no showdown between free expression on the one hand and respect for Islam on the other.  Media purveyors don’t need to make a false choice. Islam and free speech can be harmonized. Indeed, they must be.

Take it from the many Muslims who’ve already put their names on my petition. A quick sample:

* Hemin Sabir (Kurdistan, Iraq)

* Surya Lesmana (Yogyakarta, Indonesia)

* Salina Abaza (Damascus, Syria)

* Riaz Khan (Karachi, Pakistan)

* Mourad Menadi (Algiers, Algeria)

* Sheema Abdul Aziz (Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia)

* Anees Ahmad (Noida, Uttar Pradesh, India)

* Sarah Al-Ahdal (Saudi Arabia)

You get the picture. Please sign now.

If you won’t do it for the brave Muslims above, do it for South Park’s bear community. They’re the real victims of humiliation here.

What Catholics can teach Muslims in a time of moral crisis for both

Posted in Irshaddering Thoughts on Apr 18, 2010

Now that Pope Benedict is making public amends for the long-percolating sex abuse scandal inside his worldwide Church, all sorts of commentators are weighing in. As they should. Wisdom requires a multiplicity of perspectives.

What I find interesting is that when it comes to eviscerating the Vatican, nobody tells Jews, Protestants, Hindus, atheists, humanists, or Muslims that “you can’t comment because you don’t represent.”

But that’s a choice slogan hurled at non-Muslims who want to participate in public conversations about the troubles within Islam today. Usually laced with anger and meant to induce fear, the slogan tends to succeed in silencing non-Muslims.

Non-Catholics, on the other hand, feel utterly permitted to comment about Catholicism’s travails. There’s the Harvard law professor and proud Jew, Alan Dershowitz. There’s Nicholas Kristof, who strikes me as a religion-tolerant humanist. There’s the secular Hindu Tunku Varadarajan. There’s the strident atheist Christopher Hitchens, who has also testified against the miracle-workings of Mother Teresa — at the invitation of the Vatican.

I, myself, have been openly critiquing the Vatican for years. As the host of a Canadian TV show called Big Ideas, I’d deliver an editorial in every episode. From time to time, it would involve what I viewed as crimes committed by the Church’s top honchos.

In a 2003 editorial, I blasted “the Church’s complicity in the Rwandan genocide, in which ethnic Hutu extremists killed 800,000 minority Tutsis and Hutu moderates. Today, four clergymen are facing genocide charges at the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, and a couple of years ago in Belgium, two Rwandan nun were convicted of murder. They assisted the massacre of 7,000 Tutsis who sought protection at a Benedictine convent. In fact, human rights groups have documented several cases in which Christian clerics let Tutsis take shelter in their churches, then turned the Tutsis over to death squads. Some Hutu priests even encouraged their congregations to kill Tutsis.“

For all the emails I received about that editorial, not one told me, “You can’t comment because you don’t represent.” Not even a mention of the sort. Nor did anybody accuse me of being anti-Catholic. Could you imagine a non-Muslim issuing an unsparing indictment of mullahs without being branded an Islamophobe?

Another of my editorials started with respect for Pope John Paul’s denunciation of the “culture of death” — from suicide bombings to capital punishment to abortion. But, I pointed out, the Pope’s refusal to endorse stem cell research “strikes me as perpetuating the culture of death for people in developing countries. Ninety percent of what the world spends on health research is directed to alleviating diseases that affect only ten percent of the world’s population. If the Vatican supported the use of discarded embryos strictly to treat the neglected diseases of the Third World, wouldn’t this be more righteous than sinful? And if it’s deemed strictly sinful, then how does the Vatican reconcile that position with Catholicism’s cardinal principle that unnecessary human suffering is evil?“

Again, plenty of public feedback without a single soul assailing me as anti-Catholic. Not one accusation that my Muslim mouth has no business running on about another religion’s affairs. Muslims ought to salute Catholics for recognizing that what happens to people — any people — in the name of a universal God is everybody’s affair.

That’s what ordinary Muslims can learn from everyday Catholics in this moment of moral crisis for both of our religions. The lesson is simple. You can — you must — comment even if you don’t represent.

Which brings me to a final thought. In his column, “A Church Mary Can Love,” Kristof writes that “the old boys’ club in the Vatican became as self-absorbed as other old boys’ clubs, like Lehman Brothers, with similar results. And that is the reason the Vatican is floundering today.”

Clearly, Kristof sees that leaving the reform of institutional culture — whether Wall Street’s or the Vatican’s — to insiders alone is a non-starter. To do the right thing, insiders usually need outside pressure.

When will we all understand the same about Islam — that reform won’t happen exclusively from the inside?  Questions form the outside will be key to advancing change inside the world of Islam. In my next book, I’ll explain the crucial role that non-Muslims have to play.

“Do homosexual Muslims deserve happiness?”

Posted in Irshaddering Thoughts, Q & A on Apr 11, 2010

That question comes from a Muslim teenager in Norway. Here’s the entire, abrupt, email:

Salaam, Irshad Manji

But I have to say that there is something bothering my mind and soul. Do homosexual Muslims deserve happiness? From a teenage Muslim in Norway.

To be candid, I didn’t know how to answer — not because I don’t believe gays and lesbians deserve to be happy, but because the question itself opens up so many possible responses.

Do I offer my interpretation of what the Qur’an says (or suggests) about homosexuality?

Do I talk about democratizing the spirit of ijtihad, Islam’s tradition of independent thinking, so that any of us with wrenching questions feel the permission to seek responses through our own consciences?

Do I reconcile Islam and human rights, faith and free will, duty towards others and fulfillment of self?

Do I analyze “happiness”?

Do I ignore the question altogether, given my tight book-writing deadlines and a slew of other commitments? But if I ignore the question, am I intensifying the isolation that a potentially queer Muslim teenager may be feeling right now? How does exacerbating someone’s pain serve my integrity as a person of deep faith in God?

As if on cue, landing in my inbox this week was an email that answers the question more convincingly than I could have. It comes from a religious Muslim who’s also a lesbian. Despite her broken English, you’ll grasp the wholeness — the integrity — in which she now exults:

I always denied that I am gay. It is sinful. How can a religious girl like me being a lesbian? I knew which is Haram [forbidden] in Islam and which is not… 

Every time, I pray to Allah. I asked Him, why He give me this test? This is too much for me. Allah gave me everything I wished. I am a bright girl. But why Allah tests me with the very sinful thing in Islam, being a lesbian?…

I met one girl and we both loved each other so much. She is my true love and my soul mate. She is the ONE for me. We lived together for many years and we kept it as a secret. No one knew, as both of us are lady-like and wear scarf. 

Last year, we broke up and I was totally a mess. I lost my feet. I nearly insane because I just can’t live without her. But, she already made her decision, even though I beg her, she stick with her decision. I lost so much weight. For months I was in pain.

Until one day I asked for a help from one of my friends. They brought me to see a counselor. There are a few questions from the counselor that really, really woke me up. She asked me, Why am I afraid to accept that I am a lesbian, and I answered, Because this is one of the biggest sin in Islam, I don’t want to dishonor my family, and Allah will also send me to hell. 

The counselor asked me the second question, How I measure my goodness, and I said, by serve and praise Allah. 

And the last question she asked me, Even you know you are gay, did you still pray and feel the connection to Allah when you pray, and I said YES, I still feel it.

So, she said, Allah still love you and you are one of His creation, being a lesbian is not your choice, you just got it from HIM. So accept who you are and keep serving Allah.

The next day, I performed my morning prayer and I just can felt that Allah is closer to me than before. I just like a new born baby, and by accepting that I am a lesbian, has changed my personality and life for 180 degree. I am totally a brand new person.

For all of my life, I am questioning Allah why I love and like women more than men, and now I found the answer… Allah is not cruel to human. He LOVE us. Only Man discriminate people like us.

There is no word to describe my feeling of happiness.

Happiness: It appears that the Almighty believes she deserves it. And if she deserves it, why not the Muslim teenager in Norway, too?

In their new book, Made for Goodness, Archbishop Desmond Tutu and his daughter, Rev. Mpho Tutu, tell us that “God’s call to be perfect is not just a command — it is an invitation.” An invitation, that is, “to something life-giving, something joy-creating.” Far from being flawlessness, “Godly perfection is wholeness.”

In short, to be one with yourself is to be one with God.  May The One go with you.

Proudly PC (post-wing & centrist)

Posted in Irshaddering Thoughts, Announcements on Apr 04, 2010

Manifesto for independent thinkers

A few days ago, The Daily Beast — a popular news and opinion site — named me one of the top 25 centrist commentators in America. Sharing space with journalistic icons such as David Brooks, Tom Friedman and Andrew Sullivan would have been enough for me. But to be affiliated with the label “centrist” only upped the honor.

In the essay he wrote to introduce The Daily Beast’s list of influential centrist commentators, John Avlon observes that centrists “have refused to surrender their conscience or common sense to walk in lockstep with one political party. Theirs is a rebellion from the pressures to conform in today’s hyper-partisan debates.”

As the author of Wingnuts: How the Lunatic Fringe is Hijacking America, Avlon is well poised to weed out the centrists from the dogmatists. Wingnuts, he entertainingly details in his book, have succumbed to the suffocating grip of groupthink. By contrast, centrists insist on personal integrity through individuality. In that case, color me a centrist and gleefully so.

Whenever I’m asked whose “camp” I pitch my tent in, I answer, “My own.” If the questioner persists, I elaborate: “Independent thinkers don’t belong to a ‘camp.’ They belong to their conscience.“

Pressed further, I explain by invoking Rick Warren, pastor of Saddleback Church and author of The Purpose-Driven Life. At the World Economic Forum a few years ago, I heard Warren deliver an incantation that has stuck with me ever since: “I’m not right-wing. I’m not left-wing. I’m for the whole bird.“

Now, I could tell curious folks that my politics are pro-bird. But that’s weird and not entirely true — I devour General Tso’s chicken and Thanksgiving turkey.  So I’ve adapted Warren’s words to my own convictions, pointing out that “I’m not left-wing. I’m not right-wing. I’m post-wing.“

Perhaps it’s because I’ve got so many identities that I don’t have to invest myself in any single descriptor. Which means there’s no need to cling to a particular dogma for validation.  When understood that way, being multi-dimensional, complex and fluid isn’t a curse; it’s both a blessing and an opportunity to re-imagine our power as individuals — not just in the voting booth or at the ballot box, but also in the lion’s den of religious reform.

One of my readers, Sahan, crystallized the lesson for me: “As a queer, Arab and Muslim, it seems I’ve been going against the current all my life. A torrent of native apologists on one side and sanguine fundamentalists on the other. I’ve waited too long for an intellectual to point out the problems in the dogma of Islam. The time is right for a reformation. Maybe some of us can see ahead and light the way better than someone who is entrenched in tradition. Maybe we are the ones who are forced to look at the norm from the outside, whether in terms of gender, sexuality, or spirituality.“

Let your freak flag fly, honey. Flap on.

But exactly because the fringe now has a disproportionately loud voice not only in Islam but also in American politics, it’s even more important not to get sucked into that vortex.

Take a cue from one of Charles Johnson. He runs a blog called LittleGreenFootballs. As The Daily Beast’s Jon Avlon notes, “Johnson had risen to prominence as a committed anti-jihadist — a cause he continues to fight. ‘I used to get pretty nasty emails from radical Islamists,’ he told me, ‘but the stuff I’m getting now from right-wingers is an order of magnitude worse.’“

Rather than leap to the Left in disgust with the Right, Johnson announced his independence from the partisan puppeteers. His camp is his own. He belongs to his conscience.

Is it conformity if more us follow his lead? Just by thinking about it, you’ll be breaking ranks with the wingnuts. Because you’ll be thinking, period.

Moral courage in U.S. health care debate

Posted in Irshaddering Thoughts on Mar 28, 2010

All week, a claustrophobic circle of journalists and pundits has been buzzing about the abrupt departure of David Frum,  a former Bush speechwriter, from the American Enterprise Institute, a high-profile conservative think tank.

Me? I yawn at that part of the story.

What I’m interested in is David’s moral courage. For months now, he’s been speaking truth to the Republican powers-that-be about their capitulation to right-wing populists, especially on health insurance reform.

No surprise that he’s got few fans in the Tea Party. But even the Wall Street Journal editorial board has drunk the tea. “Mr. Frum,” it recently sneered, “now makes his living as the media’s go-to basher of fellow Republicans…”

(Sounds suspiciously like the smear hurled at me by self-styled “progressive” Muslims who can’t stand my call to reform Islam from within. They’d prefer to blame Islam’s ills on U.S. foreign policy. I’ve long argued that politicized progressives and neo-conservatives mirror each other. This is just more proof. )

So what, exactly, has David said to tweak so many noses? Here are my favorite extracts from a TV interview he gave few hours before the House of Representatives voted to pass health insurance reform:

In this debate, Republicans have listened to the most radical voices in the party. No compromise. Hand the President his Waterloo. If this turns out to be our Waterloo, then there has to be an accountability moment!. This is going to be a much worse outcome than we would have gotten if we had negotiated early.  And we are going to have to do some self-criticism.

Why didn’t Republicans negotiate with Democrats to produce a better health insurance reform bill? David again:

Some of our leaders were trapped. They were trapped by voices in the media that revved the Republican base to a frenzy. That made dealing impossible. I mean, you can’t negotiate with Adolf Hitler, and if the President is a Adolf Hitler, then obviously you can’t negotiate with him…

We’re encouraging a mood of radicalism in the party that’s not just uncivil. That’s not the problem. The problem is that it makes you stupid. It leads you to make bad decisions.

Wow. “It makes you stupid.” Truer words were never uttered. If you want to watch the entire interview, I’ve embedded the clip at the top of this post.

I suspect there’s more to what’s throwing some conservatives into a spittle-flecked frenzy over David. Part of their fury might be triggered by the fact that David has given interviews to liberal broadcasters such as MSNBC. These interviews then get re-posted and circulated by ardently left-wing netcasters like Daily Kos TV. In short, he’s aiding and abetting “the enemy.”

Once again, I can relate. Over the years, supposedly “progressive” Muslims have blasted me for giving interviews to Fox News, convinced that racist rednecks will use my words to sow the seeds of a holocaust against Muslims. But something funny has happened the few times that I’ve appeared on O’Reilly (and usually to spar with him). After such appearances, I’ve been bombarded with thanks from Muslims. Seems they watch Fox News in far higher numbers than they consume MSNBC.

My point? Whether they define themselves as progressives or conservatives, the dogmatists in our societies will always — always — presume to represent more people than they actually do. Critical thinkers don’t belong to a camp.  They belong to their conscience.

Which is why, a few days ago, I fired off this personal note to my friend, David Frum:

Just a quick note to say that I sincerely appreciate your moral courage. What you’re doing has your conscience as its guide and its gird. You’re a principled conservative — and whatever the partisan labels, principle, like character, matters. It must matter for life to have meaning and for the individual to have integrity. Stay strong.

Muslims in the West: To be reformist or defensive?

Posted in Irshaddering Thoughts, Q & A on Mar 21, 2010

 

When writing a book, it’s typical for a journalist to rely on interviews and personal observations, backed by reports and other forms of scholarly research.

But I’m blessed to have an added source of information: your emails. They serve as reality checks par excellence.

Over the years, I’ve received the most incredible messages from you — ranging in tone from side-splittingly funny to spine-chillingly scary.

Muslims and non-Muslims who care about freedom need to know exactly what we’re up against, and why there’s hope. Emails from actual people, reflecting actual attitudes, will keep the content of my next book both honest and human.

Here’s what I mean. Recently, an email from London, UK landed in my inbox. It’s at once troubling and promising: “I am an 18 year old Sunni Muslim… I don’t like a lot the things associated with Islam.” He mentions “stoning.” But he’s also struggling with “xenophobic attacks… There are a lot of groups that appear determined to smear Muslims.”

The young man asks, “How do I deal with this problem? I have begun to become really insecure.”

You can see that he’s torn between religious reform and personal defensiveness. As I’ve learned by speaking at countless universities, it’s an all-too-common dilemma.

Rather than fire off an answer informed my own experiences, I decided to widen the circle of advisers by consulting my Facebook community. Tapping into their empathy, I figured, could not only produce more relevant answers, but it would educate them further about why, when we’re discussing or debating Muslim reform, we’re ultimately talking about people’s lives — not academic theories.

The Facebookers, as always, came through. Some of their responses:

* “You are young, British and Muslim. You are full of ideas. Your generation holds the key to tomorrow for your faith, your country and your world. Your discomfort with things deemed Islamic is real discomfort, like standing in a dank London rain without an umbrella. Don’t let anyone tell you that you’re out of line, that you’re crazy. What you wouldn’t want for yourself, you shouldn’t want for others. Let your friends and neighbors know this through your actions.

Admired by the young and the downtrodden, [Prophet] Muhammad never wore a frown or ever refused to help a petitioner. He taught us to seek God everywhere and in everyone, regardless of their faith or belief. You might have to endure more than you already have. The groups who target Muslims are replacing one form of hate with another. Regardless, we need to set our house in order, then show our neighbors the repairs we have made.” - Ismail

* “Show the attitude of a Muslim as friendly and confident.” - Taufan

* “My 18-year-old twins choose to hold their mother’s faith and conduct themselves as positive, progressive and relevant Muslim youths. The effect is evident in the awe and admiration they inspire among their peers of all ethnicities. They are asked many questions and I think their words and actions defuse and debunk many of the negative stereotypes.” - Mazlina

* “As a Mexican-American, I can’t tell you how important it is to show gratitude toward the host country that is now home yet, at the same time, remain proud of one’s roots. Any minority has to be pro-active and not always defensive. He should pressure his local religious and political representatives to speak out against Muslim violence more frequently. Have them conduct more discussions about the importance of integration.” - Rosa

* “The worst thing you can do is start to think that these xenophobic attacks are the result of everyone disliking you. The people doing the attacking aren’t attacking you, they are attacking what they ‘think’ you represent. They don’t even know you.

Guaranteed, these attacks are only from a small group of small-minded people. You need to find friends, like us, are on your side. Friends who will empower you to stand up against those who try to disempower you.” - Jamie (teacher)

* “At 18, you have a wide selection of choices depending on where you are academically. If it is practical, try exchange programs that take you away from the circumstances within and expose you to the ‘other,’ thus giving you a different perspective.” - Nganga

* “He will likely have to learn to take the high road and be honest about where his spiritual exploration takes him.” - Jason

* “The best way is to prove to the Muslim-haters, through his own behavior, that not all Muslims deserve their anger. This is how they will understand that it is not Islam which should be hated but the abuses committed in its name.” - Armand

* “Only by your example as a reform-minded Muslim can the xenophobes find their way to change.  Show them the power of REASON.” - Henri

* “What do you mean by ‘xenophobic’? That word is used loosely these days. Let me ask: do you believe in stoning, honour-killing and terrorism? No? Then don’t feel bad; critics of Islam are not talking about you. Welcome to Britain, mate.” - John

* “I hear your fear and want you to know that not everyone is out to get Muslims. I truly believe that those folks are in the minority. There seems to be more of them because they get so much news coverage. The news covers those who foment discontent. There are many of us who aren’t Muslim but who open our arms and hearts to you. If you look for us, you will find us.” - Teri

* “I think this young man is already showing he has no need need to be insecure. He is questioning some of the more objectionable practices, which anyone should do in his shoes. He should apply the same thought to xenophobia as he does to stonings.  Why is this happening? Does it solve a problem? Is it moral? Why am I reacting this way? What are the long-term effects of this type of reaction?

The risk here is that these illogical attacks will push him towards a more hard-line view that over time will become very difficult to defend.” - Nathan

* “I also have to deal with xenophobic attacks. All you can do is keep your head held high and have the attacks investigated. But more personally, he needs to distinguish between the Islam that is practiced today and the Islam that should be practiced.

Also, he doesn’t have to stick with the Islamic community. I, myself, don’t care for Sunni or Shia interpretations. I try to understand things on my own and don’t take them in without questioning them. Only then can you establish a greater belief in your religion.” - Moussa

* “Recognize that not all non-Muslims believe all Muslims are akin to the Wahhabi strain of Islam.  By all means, feel free to share the positive aspects of your religion but please don’t take it as a license to force anyone to listen. I don’t appreciate Christian fundamentalists who get in my face and I won’t appreciate it from Muslims either.  Many non-Muslims will support the efforts of reform-minded Muslims who recognize human rights, INCLUDING the right of religious freedom.” - Athena

* “Being a Muslim in 2010 London is what it was like being Irish in London in the 1970s and 80s.  In this information age, people are more accepting and caring human beings. But there will always be a few who cut you to the bone with how they describe you. Don’t let that hurt turn inwards. You and your faith are stronger. Their words are fueled by fear and ignorance. If you break the cycle of hate, they will pass.” - Eoin

Charles Le Gai Eaton (1921-2010)

Posted in Irshaddering Thoughts, Announcements on Mar 14, 2010

A few days ago, I woke up to an email from Leo Eaton, a filmmaker who’d collaborated closely on my PBS documentary, Faith Without Fear.

Leo wrote to tell me that his father had passed away. Now, you should know that Leo’s dad wasn’t just “the father of my friend.” Leo’s dad, Charles Le Gai Eaton, was among contemporary Islam’s most sophisticated thinkers.

I knew of Gai Eaton even before I’d met Leo. As the host of a Toronto TV program in 2000, I dispatched one of my producers to London, UK, where she interviewed him about homosexuality and Islam. After a vigorous back-and-forth with my producer, Mr. Eaton — a Muslim convert, accomplished author and distinguished consultant to London’s Islamic Cultural Centre — summarized why he couldn’t condemn homosexuality: “With a majestic God, anything is possible.”

It wasn’t his refusal to denounce gays and lesbians that stuck with me all these years. It was his refusal to play God. In a handful of unadorned words, Mr. Eaton captured the essence of my  faith in Islam — leaving final judgment to the Almighty rather than the Almighty’s self-appointed ambassadors. In so doing, he paid serious tribute to the Creator, suggesting that any Deity worth worshiping is grand and expansive enough to break the mold that His insecure creatures won’t. Mashallah.

Charles Le Gai Eaton prized intellectual honesty. Hearing nothing but protest against the Iraq war from British Muslims, he went on the record with his differences. “Saddam was such a monster,” Mr. Eaton told a magazine that caters to Muslims in the West. “[M]aybe we were right to interfere in this case. I am very torn either way and I cannot quite make up my mind.” How refreshing to encounter humble ethical uncertainty at a time of cavalier political absolutes.

The writer to whom he made that statement opined that “Eaton despairs at the state of the Muslim world, which he vehemently feels should address the issue of tyrants, injustice, poverty and human rights abuses littering its own backyard…” His moral courage, gently proffered, meant so much to Muslims like me who needed role models like him, and frankly still do.

When Leo emailed me about the death of Gai Eaton, he attached something he’d written. It’s the deeply personal “remembrance” of a son watching his father slip into the next world. Leo had shared it only privately, particularly with members of his dad’s tariqa or Sufi order.

Prepared to be turned down, I asked Leo if he’d allow me to post an excerpt of the remembrance for my international audience. To his credit and my delight, he agreed.

*****

Here’s the passage I’ve chosen:There have been a constant stream of Sufi Brothers and Sisters arriving at this bedside from around the world, and some days they’ve set up an almost continuous chanting of the Koran. It’s beautiful and strangely peaceful, this lovely musical  recitation that goes on any time of the day and night. They venerate him as though he is a saint; a strange way to think of ‘Dad.’

We have been warned that thousands will come to his funeral if given the chance, so leaders of the tariqa are helping us keep it to family and close friends. All this love and respect, based partly on four previous books, especially Islam and the Destiny of Man, which has changed so many lives, but also on my father’s character. In his old age, he had endless patience with young seekers of faith who came to him for advice and wisdom. And if they happened to be beautiful women, so much the better, as his just-published autobiography, A Bad Beginning, makes clear.

When my wife Jeri and I read the initial drafts of A Bad Beginning, drawn from over 75 years of diary entries that my father had written since childhood, we worried about how devout Muslims around the world who so respect his work might take stories of such a scandalous past.I am reminded of a story he tells of his first book, The Richest Vein, published by TS Eliot, that he wrote when he was still in his twenties. A respected clergymen came out from England to Jamaica, where Dad was living, awed by the book and wanting to meet the author, expecting some grey-haired sage. When introduced to my father, sitting with a girl on one knee and a drink in his hand, he exclaimed in horror: “That can’t be the man.”

Perhaps some Muslims awed by Islam and the Destiny of Man or Remembering God may also say “that can’t be the man,” but I suspect the majority will take inspiration from Dad’s circuitous path to Islam, a version of St. Augustine’s prayer, “Oh God, make me chaste, but not yet.”

And in any case, my father has always taken pains to separate the human persona from spiritual work. “God can choose even the most flawed vessel from which to pour out his blessings,” he has often told me. He would be horribly embarrassed to see this outpouring of love and veneration that now surrounds him. Sitting at his bedside these past days, I sense the beginning of a legend. I don’t know if I’m glad or sorry.

Ashhadu an la ilaha illa’Llah (There is no God but God)

*****

Having been privileged to ‘glimpse’ Charles Le Gai Eaton’s final hours, I now pray for him. May he rest in peace for as long as he needs. Then may he raise appropriate hell in heaven.

A different kind of fatwa

Posted in Irshaddering Thoughts on Mar 07, 2010

In the world of Islamic reform, the big news this week is that an eminent Pakistani sheikh has issued a 600-page fatwa against Muslim terrorism — with no qualifiers  attached. You’d think I’d be celebrating.

Not really.

The very notion that 21st-century Muslims need a fatwa confirming the immorality of blowing each other up is, well, infantile. Frankly, it’s just another relic of the tribal mentality, in which the higher-ups do all the thinking for the lowly peeps.

The sooner Muslims wean ourselves off the fatwa fetish, the faster we’ll tap our potential to engage our own minds, hearts and consciences. As I’ll explain in my next book, it’s individuality — not deference to yet more external authority — that will spark the long-overdue liberal reformation within Islam.

You know whose fatwa I can endorse? Watch the video below:

Yep, I dig the idea of Washington, Jefferson, Franklin, Adams and Paine breaking the news to a violent jihadi that he’ll be spending eternity with them. After all, America’s founding fathers were a motley crew of Christians, skeptics, secularists and agnostics. That a true believer might have to share the afterlife with such infidels makes me smile.

Three cheers for a different kind of fatwa.

“The Stoning of Soraya M.” now out on DVD

Posted in Irshaddering Thoughts, Announcements on Feb 27, 2010

Does this man go through with hurling his stone at Soraya?      Watch the movie…

This week, among the most important movies of my generation, “The Stoning of Soraya M.,” comes out in DVD and Blu-Ray. You can order either version here.

“The Stoning,” starring recent Emmy-award winner Shohreh Aghdashloo, dramatizes the true story of an Iranian village wife whose deceitful husband sets her up for execution so that he can marry an unsuspecting girl in the city.

Ultimately, though, this isn’t a tale of female victimhood. Instead, it’s about moral courage. The target of the stoning — Soraya — has an aunt who shows us that even when you can’t stop the crime unfolding before you, there’s always an opportunity to use your mind, conscience and voice for longer-term good. That’s what Aunt Zahra does in this film. I won’t tell you how she does it. You’ll just have to buy the DVD!

Beyond buying it, I hope you’ll screen it in your homes, churches, temples, mosques, classrooms and community centers. The questions unleashed by “The Stoning” will generate amazing conversations.

I should know. My NYU leadership program, the Moral Courage Project, launched a human rights campaign around the film. Thanks to the participation of people worldwide, we won the 2009 Visionary Award from the Women’s International Film and Television Showcase. This couldn’t have happened without student bloggers, Facebookers and Tweeps engaging about what it means to be a global citizen today.

For example, are non-Muslims “allowed” to comment on issues that affect Muslim women — such as the so-called honor killing of Soraya? If you watch a movie like “The Stoning,” are you sticking your nose in “other” people’s business? In an interdependent world, is there such a thing as “other” people?

Aunt Zahra protecting Soraya

To get you into the spirit of hi-octane discussion, here’s what I would say if I were part of the film club that I want you to create once you buy the “The Stoning” DVD:

As a Muslim reformer, I routinely receive heart-wrenching emails from fellow Muslims whose basic human rights are being violated — not by “outsiders” but by members of their own communities. Equally saddening is that self-professed human rights activists in the West often play the purity game, suggesting that you can’t comment if you don’t represent.

Their misguided conviction: Anyone living in the West can’t legitimately expose oppressive practices in cultures elsewhere. Hmmm… Would they say the same to Muslims in the traditional Islamic world who expose America’s human rights abuses at Gitmo or Abu Ghraib? Of course not.

Nor should they. Human rights, being human, are above the politics of identity. As Martin Luther King Jr. pointed out in his Letter from a Birmingham City Jail, “Never again can we afford to live with the narrow, parochial, ‘outside agitator’ idea.”

But it seems that Elise Auerbach, Iran specialist for Amnesty International USA, can more than live with the narrow and parochial. She practices it in her baffling denunciation of “The Stoning of Soraya M.”

Tellingly, Amnesty itself released a January 2008 report that described stonings as “grotesque and unacceptable”. In its press release about the report, Amnesty called on “the Iranian authorities to abolish death by stoning and impose an immediate moratorium on this horrific practice, specifically designed to increase the suffering of victims.”

In her remarkably contradictory review of “The Stoning” — a review in which she acknowledges the report — Auerbach emphasizes that “Iranians don’t need people from outside Iran telling them what is good for them…”

Really? Then why did her own organization dare to tell Iranian authorities what to do in its report against stoning?

And why did Amnesty feature “The Stoning” at its 2009 annual film festival?

Above all, why did Amnesty invite Cyrus Nowrasteh, the Iranian-American director of “The Stoning,” to introduce the film at its festival? Is it because he’s Iranian? If so, then what makes him someone “from outside” according to Auerbach?

Of course, Nowrasteh is American too.  Perhaps that’s the real taboo. In which case, isn’t Auerbach’s employer — UK-based Amnesty — also an outsider? Why does she continue to work for Amnesty and make herself part of the interference that she believes is a problem?

Within its own ranks, Amnesty International needs an intellectually honesty debate about how to realize its motto, “Defending Human Rights Worldwide.” Personally, I can attest that more than a few Amnesty activists worry about the scourge of moral and cultural relativism in their midst. That’s the single biggest concern confided to me when I presented at Amnesty’s 2006 conference in Mexico City.

Delegates disclosed to me that Amnesty International has no clear message about honor-based crimes, including stoning, because nobody wants to be deemed a bigot. As if defending human rights worldwide has ever been a matter of politeness.

It’s 2010 and apparently Amnesty has not resolved its dilemma. Auerbach condemns a movie that spotlights an Iranian heroine — Soraya’s aunt, Zahra — who tries to stop the stoning. Zahra is a Muslim who realizes her faith by speaking truth to power about the non-negotiable need for human dignity.

And yet, according to Auerbach, hapless audience dupes will respond with “disgust and revulsion at Iranians themselves, who are portrayed as primitive and bloodthirsty savages.” Thus, “we” — idiotic Westerners who can’t be trusted to reach independent conclusions — “still have to wait” for a “thoughtful” film about executions in Iran.

I hope we don’t have to wait for thoughtful human rights activists to speak truth to power in their organizations. Dissidents do exist, as I learned at the Amnesty conference that I attended. Will they exercise their own freedom of conscience? Of this, I can’t be sure. Moral courage is always more difficult than self-censorship.

To watch exclusive clips from “The Stoning of Soraya M.,” click here. And to buy the just-released DVD, click here.

The Moral Courage Project screens “The Stoning of Soraya M.” You can too.

Pages (22): Previous 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 Next ... Last »