Tuesday, July 03, 2007

self-cultivated dilemma

I anguish over the reality's demand that we have to choose EXCLUSIVELY. Tamak sgt & x sedar diri sgt ke aku ni ha. Ideals are such an individualistic aspiration. So chaotic is the world with so many independent feelings, independent minds...

Labels:

Thursday, February 15, 2007

A Legend Of Masamune and Murasama blades...

from wikipedia.

A legend tells of a test where Muramasa challenged his master, Masamune, to see who could make a finer sword. They both worked tirelessly and eventually, when both swords were finished, they decided to test the results. The contest was for each to suspend the blades in a small creek with the cutting edge facing the current. Muramasa's sword cut everything that passed its way; fish, leaves floating down the river, the very air which blew on it.

Highly impressed with his pupil's work, Masamune lowered his sword into the current and waited patiently. Not a leaf was cut, the fish swam right up to it, and the air hissed as it gently blew by the blade. After a while, Muramasa began to scoff at his master for his apparent lack of skill in his making of his sword. Smiling to himself, Masamune pulled up his sword, dried it, and sheathed it. All the while, Muramasa was heckling him for his sword's inability to cut anything.

A monk, who had been watching the whole ordeal, walked over and bowed low to the two sword masters. He then began to explain what he had seen.

"The first of the swords was by all accounts a fine sword, however it is a blood thirsty, evil blade as it doesn't discriminate as to who or what it will cut. It may just as well be cutting down butterflies as severing heads. The second was by far the finer of the two, as it doesn't needlessly cut that which is innocent and undeserving."

Sunday, December 24, 2006

Mengenai riba (an Utusan.com.my article)

source: http://www.utusan.com.my/utusan/content.asp?y=2006&dt=1224&pub=Utusan_Malaysia&sec=Bicara_Agama&pg=ba_01.htm

If there are nonmalaysian readers out there who wishes me to translate this article, buzz me up.

-----------

Mengenai riba
Oleh: DR. ASYRAF WAJDI DUSUKI

Masyarakat Islam Malaysia umumnya amat mengambil berat soal halal dan haram dalam isu pemakanan. Rata-rata umat Islam hari ini amat prihatin terhadap makanan yang dimakannya agar tidak terkandung elemen-elemen haram yang boleh menjejaskan keberkatan.

Persoalannya, apakah cukup sekadar memperakui barangan makanan bertanda halal tetapi wang yang digunakan untuk membelinya masih lagi bersumberkan perolehan yang haram? Sejauh manakah keprihatinan mengenai halal dan haram ini turut diterjemahkan dalam kegiatan muamalah yang lebih penting seperti urus niaga harian dan perolehan pendapatan?

Hakikat yang tidak dapat dinafikan, kesedaran umat mengenai halal dan haram dalam aspek perolehan pendapatan masih di takuk yang amat mendukacitakan. Umat lebih memperhitungkan soal barangan berlabel halal berbanding dengan sumber perolehan mahupun pendapatan.

Apa yang pasti, kesedaran mengenai sumber rezeki yang halal amat penting bagi menumbuhkan rasa keterikatan dengan hukum dan peraturan yang ditetapkan Allah. Rezeki yang diperoleh dengan cara halal tanpa merugikan orang lain pastinya akan membawa barakah atau keberkatan. Sedang yang haram termasuklah perolehan daripada sumber penyelewengan, penipuan, rasuah, pecah amanah dan riba hanya akan membawa padah dan kecelakaan.

Dalam konteks ini, penulis lebih cenderung memfokuskan isu riba dalam penulisan kali ini. Bagi penulis, tahap kefahaman umat mengenai riba masih terlalu rendah. Walaupun kerajaan telah berusaha menyediakan pelbagai insentif galakan dan membangunkan prasarana kewangan berpandukan syarak seperti institusi perbankan Islam, realitinya umat Malaysia masih ramai yang tidak mendukung sistem muamalah Islam yang diperkenalkan.

Laporan Bank Negara 2005 jelas membuktikan senario ini. Penguasaan pasaran sistem perbankan Islam yang bebas riba umpamanya hanya dalam lingkungan 11 ke 12 peratus berbanding jumlah umat Islam di Malaysia hari ini yang melebihi 65 peratus. Ini bermakna masih ramai umat Islam yang kekal mengamalkan urus niaga dengan perbankan konvensional yang berasaskan riba.

Bank Negara Malaysia sendiri secara sederhana meletakkan sasaran bagi tahun berakhir 2010 untuk sistem perbankan Islam meningkatkan penguasaan pasaran perbankan hingga ke tahap 20 peratus.

Ini juga memberi indikasi penting bagi 27 institusi-institusi perbankan dan kewangan Islam yang sedia ada untuk melakukan promosi secara besar-besaran bagi meyakinkan bukan sahaja umat Islam bahkan masyarakat bukan Islam untuk turut melabur dan menyimpan dalam institusi-institusi yang menawarkan produk-produk yang menepati syarak.

Dalam konteks ini, umat Islam sendiri terutamanya harus disuntik dan dipertingkatkan kesedaran mereka mengenai kepentingan berurus niaga secara halal tanpa melibatkan elemen riba. Umat harus difahamkan betapa besarnya dosa melibatkan diri dalam urus niaga yang mempunyai unsur-unsur riba tidak kira sama ada berbentuk pelaburan, simpanan mahupun pembiayaan.

Ini kerana Islam amat tegas memerangi unsur-unsur riba dalam sistem muamalah manusia. Pernyataan keras di dalam al-Quran bahawa Allah dan Rasul-Nya mengisytiharkan perang terhadap golongan yang mengamalkan riba jelas menggambarkan betapa beratnya dosa riba yang sememangnya boleh mendatangkan penganiayaan dan ketidakadilan dalam hubungan sesama manusia (al-Baqarah: 279).

Malah dalam sebuah hadis sahih riwayat al-Hakim dinyatakan bahawa: “Riba mempunyai 73 jenis. Yang paling ringan antaranya menyamai kesalahan berzina dengan ibu kandung sendiri”. Terdapat sekurang-kurangnya 12 ayat yang secara khusus membincangkan isu riba dalam al-Quran. Malah terlalu banyak hadis yang memperincikan urus niaga muamalah yang bebas daripada elemen-elemen riba dan penindasan. Pengharaman riba turut ditegaskan sekali lagi dalam khutbah terakhir Nabi dalam peristiwa Haji Wida' sebelum kewafatan baginda.

Berdasarkan dalil-dalil inilah, sesetengah ulama menyatakan bahawa tahap pengharaman riba adalah lebih serius dan berat berbanding bentuk pengharaman lain seperti minum arak, judi mahupun makanan haram seperti babi. Ini kerana, Allah tidaklah sampai menegaskan secara keras seperti pengisytiharan perang terhadap mereka yang minum arak, berjudi mahupun memakan barangan haram seperti babi berbanding pengharaman riba.

Justeru, sudah tiba masanya kerajaan melihat perkara ini secara lebih serius. Kurikulum pendidikan agama di sekolah-sekolah umpamanya harus mulai diperkemaskan bagi membincangkan aspek muamalah Islam dengan lebih luas dan bukan sekadar menitikberatkan aspek ibadah fardu ain semata-mata.

Ini amat menepati aspirasi syarak atau disebut Maqasid as-Syariah yang amat menitikberatkan bukan sahaja pemerkasaan dalam konteks ibadah semata-mata tetapi turut memastikan kehidupan muamalah sesama manusia sentiasa berteraskan prinsip keadilan, kesaksamaan sekali gus menghindari sebarang bentuk penindasan dan penganiayaan.

Hanya dengan meningkatkan kesedaran dan kefahaman umat secara tuntas mengenai prinsip-prinsip muamalah berpandukan syarak sahajalah mampu merealisasikan impian kerajaan untuk menjadikan Malaysia sebagai peneraju sistem kewangan Islam pada masa depan.

------------

My comments:

the mentioning of Al-Baqarah 279 brings an intriguing question to my mind: It is often claimed that Islam upholds peace above all, and won't attack unless violated (or at least during the Prophet's own times, when Islam was at its purest form... can't say much about the seemingly trigger-happy later times Ottoman Empire though...). So if Al-Baqara 279 says that the Prophet is ready to wage war against usury-practicing people, how do we consolidate that with the peace-loving concept? time to seek out the knowledgeable people...

Saturday, December 02, 2006

my Nusantara 2006 article in RPI's Poly Newsletter

I was requested by the Poly's journalist to write an article about our Nusantara 2006 event last April... (doh, our original intention of calling up the Poly is for THEM to write a coverage of our event...). Almost forgot about this article's existence, until I stumbled upon it again, in digital form. Here it is, reproduced for your reading pleasure...

--------------

Malaysian students unite with Nusantara <-- (Not my original title btw...)
Posted 04-12-2006 at 7:09PM
Nik Mohamed Nizal
Special to The Poly

Malaysians at RPI are quite an odd bunch. You may see some of them around campus; the girls with bright-colored headscarves scuttling around, always at least in twos or more; the guys who are generally more mild-mannered and sometimes easily mistaken for Mexicans in terms of looks. You might even be familiar with some of them through class or work. The consensus seems to be that yes, they are quite an amiable lot once you get to know them, and they do cook great food, but overall they are somewhat ... withdrawn.

Then came Nusantara 2005. All of a sudden, the West Hall audience was bedazzled with explosions of color and rhythms, of bewitching motions and of artistic postures, of exquisite culture and of mystical myths. For three hours, the people in the audience were transfixed in their seats as we bombarded them with all-out Malaysian-ness like they never experienced before—transfixed, that is, save for the times when we mercifully gave them some pauses to blink, breath, and get some quick refreshments from the food stalls at the back. The event was a tremendous success despite being the first of its kind, and the first of such a large scale—we employed close to a hundred people to run the event, audience turnout was well over 400, and we pulled in about $1200, all of which we donated toward the Tsunami Relief efforts.

That was last year, and with over 30 senior Malaysian students having graduated soon afterward, we were not sure whether we could pull off something of that scale again. Accordingly, we adjusted our approach, and when we held Nusantara II: Rojak! last Saturday, we focused more on the food (which has always received favorable reviews) as well as games, which relies on the cunning formula of letting you entertain yourself rather than us spoonfeeding it to you—more interactivity and active brain processing for you, and less burden for us. There were still onstage shows for those who desired the couch potato style of immersion, only this time, we held the reins a bit; we did not want the performers, who were probably going to both design and assemble the props, handle the stage lighting or some other logistics, and cook and sell food for the night as well.

We did go wild with the room decorations though. Seeing the sheer amount of decorations we had put on all around the McNeil Room, one can’t help but be absorbed in the atmosphere of rustic villages juxtaposed with cosmopolitan cityscapes; what with the handconstructed thatch hut in the games area bordered with picket fences and dotted with river rocks and rolling expanses of paddy fields in the background view; what with a model of the Kuala Lumpur Convention Center Twin tower, the world’s second tallest building, gracing one of the pillars and the Kuala Lumpur Tower on the other one; what with the realistic rural-style food stall design contrasted against the city-bound ones, all lined up on the side of roads complete with margin markers and traffic signs.

Nusantara II: Rojak! signifies medleys on many layers as the name indicates. Rojak is a Malaysian cuisine that involves mixed fruit cuts dipped in hot and sweet sauce. Likewise, our event that night featured mixed themes of shows as well as mixed themes of food. There were nine food stalls selling over 15 different dishes covering all aspects of a full-course meal, all authentically Malaysian in their exuberance of taste and freshness of texture, lovingly made with human hands and rich natural ingredients instead of cold industrial machines soaked with artificial chemical substitutes that typify the modern food of the West.

Nusantara II: Rojak! started off with the traditional Dikir Barat, where 10-15 people sat crosslegged (a feat which I heard many westerners find hard to do, if I may smugly remark) on the stage and sang out jovially while letting only their upper body dance. Then it was followed by a humorous wayang kulit (shadow puppet) show, voiced over by none other than the MCs themselves, Kwattz and Mitch. There was then a half an hour break to allow the audience to rush the foodstands. The show continued afterward with a selamat datang (Welcoming) Dance, a colourful performance embedded with many cultural welcoming gestures, if one was to observe carefully. As martial arts demonstrations are the staple of cultural shows, we also took the opportunity to perform ours, with a unique twist of female warriors dominating the show. Another break ensued, and then we had the bagaikan puteri (Like a Princess) Dance, based off from a contemporary Malaysian pop song.

Next was the highlighted How Hot Can You Go contest, a Fear Factor style competition of tongue endurance against increasing levels of hot and spicy Malaysian sauces. The ultimate challenge was called “the Chip’s Sauce” in recognition of the person concocting it, who was notorious for at least one occasion of making sauces so hot yet so good that people can’t stop eating it, even though it resulted in them having diarrhea for two weeks. Incidentally, there was also a hilarious mix-up before the contest when some hopeful youth turned up asking about the “Hot cheerleading competition,” probably due to the misleadingly alluring imagery portrayed in the contest’s posters.

After the contest was the Endang dance, symbolizing the motions of eight ladies washing clothes at a river bend. Yes, for us Malaysians, even the dreary affairs of laundry can be done in an exquisite style. Following that was a short session of auctioning of Malaysian Handicrafts, where half of the profit goes to charity. The last show of the night was a band performance of the song Eyelash, a suitably soothing lullaby to the event’s closure.

Overall, we had about 200 people in attendance. Since each food vendor kept all the profits for their sales, there is no total figure yet, but the charity auction and donation booth collected over $450, which shall be channelled toward United Nation’s World Food Programme, which seeks to address world hunger issues.

http://www.poly.rpi.edu/article_view.php3?view=4793&part=1

Sunday, November 26, 2006

touchy-touchy game idea: handcuffed duel

I had this inspiration after watching Michael Jackson's "Beat It" videoclip, where two guys tie one of their hands to the other person's, with the other hand holding a knife and try to score on each other. what i have in mind is something less violent, of course: instead of dueling with knives, use a marker pen and attempt to score a mark on the opponent's shirt.

e.g. lets have each player wearing a white shirt with a 3x3 box drawn in front of it. The first player to manage to complete to mark all 9 squares wins the duel. This tests one's dexterity in trying to home in one's attacks while at the same time nimbly avoiding the opponent's attempts. And since the players are tied to each other, they can't simply run away, thus the battle will always be constantly up-close & personal.

this should make a fun game to play & watch at parties, among yer close friends, among intimate spouses, *ehem*!

For better flexibility & range of movement, it's better to use handcuffs rather than tightly tying the hands together... allowing the player to whirl around the bondage without risking breaking each other's wrist in the process.

to discourage skill-less wild slashing attacks, each mark that hits outside of the 3x3 box is counted as penalty... e.g. in extended plays , winner's score for each round is 10 pts, minus 1 for each missed marks... thus a consolation prize of 1 pt in the worst case if you are a very sloppy winner.

hmm... to play this game would need lots of sacrificial white shirts in preparation, and lots of laundrying afterwards... hmm... further game-rules tightening is in order. of course the marker shouldn't be permanent... d'oh. use washable magic pen or something.

alternative marking methods to be considered:
- hairclips
- stickers
- velcro

to be further refined...

Friday, November 10, 2006

Why A Christian Scholar on Islam won't convert

The Prophet Muhammad (PBUH): A mercy to mankind
by Martin Forward
Aurora University's Wackerlin Center for Faith and Action

I’m going to assume that most people here are Muslims, and that the rest of us have come to celebrate this event with you. My first, happiest and most important task is to wish you blessings and peace on this auspicious occasion. Ever since the seventh century of the Islamic calendar, which is the thirteenth century of the Christian, the Mawlid al-Nabi has been celebrated by most Muslims, and I’m delighted to share your celebrations with you today. The Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, has been a mercy to humankind, and deserves our respect and esteem, and even our love. Incidentally, please forgive me if in future I don’t say ‘Peace be upon him’ or its Arabic original Salla Allah ‘alayhi wa sallam after naming one of God’s messengers. I mean no disrespect by this, but am simply following academic convention. And an academic is what I am.

You’ve done me a great honor by asking me to speak to you today. For I’m a Christian, not a Muslim; and the history between our great religions has often been unhappy, even violent. One of the great sadnesses of my Muslim friends, often expressed to me, is that whereas Muslims honor the Prophet Jesus, Christians have mostly failed to say anything positive about the Prophet Muhammad at all. Indeed, during the European Middle Ages, scurrilous and slanderous charges were laid against him. I won’t specify any of them, though they’re easy to look up and ponder. They don’t show my Christian tradition in an admirable light, and would only cause offence and gloom at this happy event.

I allude to them only in order to illustrate my conviction that Christians need to come to a positive assessment of the achievements of the great Arabian Prophet. If they can do so, it’ll be a small way of repenting their past slanders about him, and of acknowledging the positive achievements of Islam in human history.

Let me tell you some stories about my own interest in Islam, so that you can see why, as a Christian, I feel strongly that my co-religionists should learn to appreciate your religion and its final Prophet.

When I was around ten years old, I lived in Aden, then a British colony at the heel of the Arabian peninsular. My father was a member of the Royal Air Force, and he’d been there before, during World War 2 and again just after that conflagration. When he brought his family there, from 1961-63, we met some of the Arab and Indian Muslim friends he’d made there on previous visits. One of them asked us all to dinner and, to me, it proved an unforgettable experience. After dinner, my father’s friend excused himself and said his evening prayers nearby, as though it was the most natural thing in the world to do. I’d been brought up as a Christian. My family went to church, occasionally. But this was the first time I was aware of prayer not just as a private preoccupation but as a public activity: as important, more important, than hospitality and other good things. That event made me ponder the religion of Islam that my father’s friend followed. Ever since then, I’ve felt unable to dismiss Islam as a false religion with no merit in it at all. That man was warm and gracious, made so by the faith that he followed and practiced. To deny this would be pointless, churlish and untruthful.

Years later, I went to India and worked in Hyderabad for the Henry Martyn Institute, a Christian center for the study of Islam. My teacher of quranic Arabic, Hayath Khan, was a lovely old man, imam of a mosque on the outskirts of the city. He became very fond of me, as I of him, and he was deeply troubled why I, who knew so much about Islam, nevertheless remained a Christian. He worried lest, on the Day of Judgment, I would be among the losers. I’ll come back to that point later. I myself was captivated by his devotion to God and His Prophet. Every time he recited from the Holy Qur’an verses about the mercies of God or told me stories about the life of the Prophet, tears would flow down his cheeks and into his white beard. He invited me to his family’s celebrations on the occasion of Bakr Eid, where a goat was slaughtered and shared with other members of the local community, and where I was made more than welcome. He took me to shrines at the tombs of local Muslim saints, explaining to me that some Muslims forbade this practice but that others drew comfort and inspiration from it. Another Muslim friend from Indian days was Sabiha Latifi. She was a frail woman, who worried about my health, not hers. She often fed me, gave me a wonderful recipe for Lentil curry and, if she had a fault at all, it was an overwhelming love for chocolate. In later years, whenever I visited India from England, I had to bring lots of chocolate for her and hope that it wouldn’t melt under the glare of the Indian sun and of customs’ officials. I called her ummi: mother. Sabiha was a saintly woman, whom I mourned greatly when she died. I remember talking with her about the Prophet Muhammad and, when she spoke of him, she seemed lit up from within by joy and hope and love.

I learned to speak Urdu whilst in India, badly. Some years later, I tried to improve it by going to a teacher, Mohammed Alam. He became one of my dearest friends. He’s a Pakistani Muslim who immigrated to England as a young man and settled in the city of Leicester, where I then lived and where he was leader of a Punjabi welfare group. His family and mine became fast friends. He once told me of a dream he had where, as he lay dying, I was there to whisper the name of God into his ear. We often talked about religion and about the follies and stupidities of many religious leaders in both our faiths. We would talk of the Prophets Moses, Jesus and Muhammad, and how their teaching has often been misrepresented, distorted and used for acts of violence instead of deeds of peace, as much by insiders as by outsiders. Religions, including our own religions of Islam and Christianity, can be poison or medicine, depending on how they’re used. Alam and I could be honest with each other about our beliefs and our religion, as friends should, not needing to justify our religion by pretending that it’s wholly good and perfect as humans have practiced it.

Of course, I’m not alone in being a Christian who has appreciated Islam. Over the last two centuries, there’ve been many Christians who’ve not been blind to Islam’s historical, political and religious achievements, nor to the Prophet Muhammad’s power over the hearts and minds of Muslims. There are lots of stories of friendships between Christians and Muslims. For example, Constance Padwick was a Christian missionary in Cairo, Palestine and Sudan from 1923 to 1957, who wrote a wonderful book called Muslim Devotions. Her deep Christian faith did not cause her to slander Islam and the Prophet Muhammad. Rather, she wrote appreciatively about Islam’s great spiritual heritage. She was one of a number of western scholars (including Louis Massignon, Kenneth Cragg and many others) who, although they remained Christians, had Muslim friends and tried to find a positive and approving and grateful way of understanding Islam and its great Prophet.

One such eminent Christian is William Montgomery Watt, still alive in his 97th year and Professor Emeritus at Edinburgh University, Scotland. His books have done much to emphasize the Prophet’s commitment to social justice; Watt has described him as being like an Old Testament prophet, who came to restore fair dealing and belief in one God to the Arabs, for whom these were or had become irrelevant concepts. This would not be a sufficiently high estimate of his worth for most Muslims, but it’s a start. Frankly, it’s hard for Christians to say affirmative things about a religion like Islam that postdates their own, which they are brought up to believe contains all things necessary for salvation. And it’s difficult for Muslims to face the fact that Christians aren’t persuaded by the view that Christianity is only a stop on the way to Islam, the final religion. But we should try to understand each other’s dilemma, and try to find some ways to affirm the hope and the goodness we find in each other’s faith. In truth, Muslims are never going to agree to central Christian teaching about Jesus, and Christians are never going to accept all that Muslims claim for Muhammad. But we can talk together in friendship, respect and affection, agreeing where we can, and disagreeing where we must in faith, and hope and love. In such a context, puzzlement and even anger can be expressed in healthy and respectful, not insolent and destructive ways.

Still, as Muslims you might ask why these remarkable Christian scholars of Islam remained Christians. Or why do I? If great intellectuals like them, or workaday ones like me, have read about Islam, studied the life of the Prophet Muhammad, talked with Muslim friends: why haven’t we had the good sense to convert to Islam? Or, since many Muslims believe that Islam is the original religion, why don’t I and others revert to the primordial faith of humankind?

Well, there are no doubt sociological and psychological reasons for this: the pressures of culture reinforced by the earliest stories we are told, no doubt make it difficult for most of us to convert. Relatively few individuals do, in reality, transfer from one religion to another because they are absolutely convinced that they are moving from darkness to light, from falsehood to the clear truth. There are usually other factors in play when individuals make that decision to convert. And often it’s not an individual choice at all, but a communal act of groups of people, pressured to do so or fleeing an oppressive faith. Most people stay in the religion of their birth. That doesn’t make it right, but it does make it usual.

It’s hard to transfer from one faith to another unless you are really convinced that you should. Some people go there, though most do not. But it’s not just sociology, psychology or other such factors that keep us moored to our original religious shores. Nor is it wickedness, or blindness, or apathy. Religions are cultural systems that reinforce value and values, that empower and challenge us. At their best, each one does that, a truth that can be proved by observing the life of others and in our own life-experiences. Our religion is a part of our identity. For most of us, changing our religion would be denying who we are and what we’ve become. So we stay put: as Christians, or Muslims, or whatever we are.

Moreover, many of us grow to love what we’ve learned and experienced. Like many Christians, I remain Christian because of Jesus the Christ. As I read the pages of the New Testament, I love the stories he tells and I’m enthralled by his message that God’s kingdom of love is open to all, not just to a social or a moral elite. I believe that his death showed the depth of God’s commitment to the world he made and the people in it, and the fact that God raised him from the dead illustrates God’s capacity to transform darkness into light, despair into hope, and death into life. Muslims and Christians don’t believe the same things about Jesus. For Muslims he’s a prophet, but for Christians he’s more than a prophet, embodying the heart, the mind and the purpose of God. That’s what Good Friday and Easter, which we have just celebrated, mean to Christians.

Because of my commitment to Jesus, I can readily appreciate the commitment of Muslims to the Prophet Muhammad, and so I too can be angered by attempts by outsiders to mock him; attempts such as the recent cartoon controversy in Denmark and elsewhere. Our religious leaders, especially the human founders under God of our religions, should challenge us by their wisdom and insight and revelatory power. We should not challenge their importance by demeaning them, and reducing them to our own level of sin and folly. If outsiders have a problem with the actions of some Muslims, then they should challenge those Muslims and their understanding of what God and His Prophet demand of them. You and I can be mocked, and we should learn to deal with it. We might have questions about the life and teachings of God’s messengers, and some things about them may puzzle us. But to mock them is to mock God. Actually, I’m sure that God can cope with our ridicule, but that’s not the point. It’s we who are wounded and debased by it, not God.

Earlier, I noted that many of my Muslim friends are saddened, even shocked and offended, by the unwillingness of Christians to honor the Prophet Muhammad in any significant way. I should tell you that a similar sadness touches Christians who listen to Muslim teaching about central Christian beliefs. Perhaps not enough Muslims are aware of the offence caused to Christians by some Muslim teaching about Jesus. Most educated Christians find many Islamic descriptions of the Christian doctrine of the Trinity to be a caricature. We do not believe in three gods but in one God, revealed in different ways. If Christians trouble Muslims by not having any assessment of the Prophet Muhammad at all, then Muslims trouble Christians by having views of Jesus that, from a Christian perspective, are inadequate to his meaning.

How can we deal with this difference between us? Well, we can adapt the attitude of my old friend Hayath Khan, who liked me but sincerely believed that there was no eternal hope for me because of my unwillingness to embrace Islam. Some of you here tonight may hold a similar view, and I must respect it as a deep-rooted and long tradition, but not the only one, in Islam. If you hold it, I hope you are as warm and loving as he was, despite this rather austere, exclusive and bleak view. I also need to tell you that there are a pile of Christians out there who feel much the same about Muslims who, in their opinion, have seriously erred in not accepting Jesus as their savior. But their’s is no more the only Christian view than Hayath Khan’s is the only Muslim one.

Friendship can break through distrust and antagonism to find points of agreement: that hospitality is good and mirrors the generosity of God; that God does speak to us his will and his love; and so on. We can meet in the cave of the heart. The mystical experience is common to both religions, though frowned upon by some Muslims and some Christians; foolishly, in my opinion, for these experiences teach us that the membrane between this world and the next is very thin, that people and places and things and religions can point beyond themselves to the truth of God, who is pure love, for you and for me and for all.

When, instead, we meet at the level of scripture, doctrine and religious law, differences can be emphasized to the exclusion of our shared faith in the God of Adam and Eve and of Abraham and Hagar.

We sometimes confuse the words ‘religion’ and ‘faith’, using them interchangeably. So: when we refer to the Christian faith, we mean Christianity; or by writing or speaking of the Muslim faith, we signify Islam. It’s convenient to do this. I do it myself. Nevertheless, religion and faith are not the same. Faith is a response to this world’s mystery. It’s a way of indicating our trust that there is more to life than meets the eye, that this world is the creation of a good God who seeks us out to follow him. Faith is an attitude of life, offering us hope. Religions provide the structure that we all need to help us channel our faith so as to understand and obey God. Religions are nouns: they are full of things (scripture, beliefs, codes of conduct, stories, and many other things) that help us express our faith. At its best, faith is an adjective: something that helps us to discern and describe and live by the power of what is really real.

When I read about the religion of Islam, I recognize that it’s not my home. Its stories have not shaped by life; nor can I share, even though I can admire, the beliefs about the Holy Qur’an that Muslims hold; and its theological and philosophical debates are not quite the same as those held within my own religion of Christianity. I can admire and even to some extent understand and appreciate another religion like Islam, but I don’t feel at home there.

But not only can I admire, understand and appreciate another’s faith; I can also inhabit it, or at least elements of it. When I read or hear of the Prophet Muhammad’s passion that God should be God, and that people should recognize him for who the merciful one who deals mercifully that he is; or of the Prophet’s emphasis upon social justice; or of his desire to reconcile conflicting groups, so that war and violence should only be a last resort: then my heart is filled with joy. I can share that faith in the goodness of God, and I can hope that Christians and Muslims and other people of goodwill will work together to mend the world. When I hear Muslim friends speak words of hope for a better world for all, where God’s name is invoked as a blessing, when they act (as most do) in ways that are good and holy and life-giving, and when they testify that all this is made clear for them through the life and witness of God’s Holy Prophet Muhammad, then I too can bear witness to the faith that Muhammad is a mercy to mankind.

Martin Forward

source: http://www.aurora.edu/cfa/published/muhammad.htm

Saturday, October 14, 2006

Why Men seems to be superior than Women

I lifted this straight from my book commentary writing assignment. Will prune it for easier reading when I have the time.

-------------------------------

On page 119, a drawn premise was that "culture is superior than nature". To leave this statement just as that without any qualifications would imply a holistic & absolute superiority, which is a questionable stance to adopt. Thus I believe a more reasonable statement would be that "in certain aspects, culture is superior than nature". Example of this case would be the desirable presence of a conscious free will and an active control on the cultural agent's part over himself and his environment, compared to the seemingly mindless automatic behavior of natural agents. Example to the contrary would be the self-sustaining and self-regulated ecosystem of natural agents as a whole as compared to the unbalancing actions of unethical elements of cultural agents.

Correspondingly, to say "men are superior than women" also requires having its situational qualifiers. I would agree to the passage's assertion that [in terms of capacity for self-control] *, a woman "spends more of her life engaged in natural processes than is true for men and male physiology", thus having less control over her physiological (alluding to hormonal, and then emotional) states. I am being cautious in my qualifier by stressing further that it is her capacity that is lacking, not her actual exerted self-control. Men, having less physiological issues to worry about, have more opportunities for higher level endeavors. Whether they actually make full use of this extra capacity is a different matter.

Why then it oftentimes seem (or societies lead us to believe) that men are overall superior to women? I would posit that men's superiority are often in areas of immediate concern or in simple low-cognitive-level matters, such as physical strength or courage. Women's advantages, on the other hand, are on subtler issues such as empathy and holistic thinking styles. This is further accentuated by our tendency to commit availability heuristic thinking, drawing upon our first few thoughts to make deductive judgments, rather than a lengthy, strained, and careful considerations of all possible ideas.

*My own qualifier added