Surya Namashkar 1-23-12

From Sectarian to Multi-Religious Congregations

Mirza A. Beg

January 18, 2012

Indian Muslim Observer Jan. 23, 2012

http://www.indianmuslimobserver.com/2012/01/opinion-from-sectarian-to-multi.html

The article “Surya Namaskar, Fatwa and Muslims “, by my friend Mike Ghause (printed below- http://www.indianmuslimobserver.com/2012/01/latest-editorial-surya-namaskar-and.html) brought to my attention a rather juvenile endeavor by the Madhya Pradesh Chief Minister Mr. Chauhan. He wants to congregate the largest assembly of worshipers, to garner a place in the Guinness book of world records, beating the record held by Kazakhstan. Mr. Chauhan has asked the schools to participate, perhaps because it is easy to assemble a large crowd by collecting obligated student.

Every one knows, certainly the Chief Minister of a state should know that a pluralistic society respects all religions equally. A call from the Chief Minister, the chief authority of the state with jurisdiction over the schools with multi-religious body of student is a form of coercion of students from other religions.

Apparently a respected Muslim Qadi (Legal Scholar) advised (Fatwa) that the bowing to any other entity except God is un-Islamic and the Muslim Students should abstain.

I substantially agree with Mike’s views in his article. I might add that the Indian democracy has come a long way, but has not matured enough. Often unnecessary small misunderstandings among different religious communities have been exploited by the sectarian interests to injure the cohesion of the communities. At times they deteriorate in riots and loss of innocent lives.

Press often unknowingly misconstrues the verbiage of religious leaders to mean what it does not. ‘Fatwa’ is one loaded word that evokes exaggerated sectarian passions. Unmitigated and ill-explained opinions even when right can sow unnecessary dissension.

As juvenile as the desire of the Chief Minister is to get into the Guinness book, it offers a teachable moment for our society particularly the youth. Some of the following is well known, but perhaps not fully understood in all its implications:

India is a Pluralistic Democratic Republic. It honors all creeds and their right to worship or not to worship. The government should not promote, impose or suppress any set of beliefs. Such a society works better when we as individuals also honor and respect the belief of others and try to understand them. And when religious scholars or jurists give their opinions on social issues they should be extremely careful in the nuances of their verbiage.

From my childhood my friends and I have worshiped in our own ways, but that did not stop us in participation in the religious festivals of others. It was that much more fun, it created deeper understanding of others and closer friendships.

I do not have Muslim, Hindu, Jain, Christian, Jewish, or friends with other prefixes, but have friends whom I value for who they are and for our unselfish bonds. They also happen to belong to many other religions and beliefs.

If he does hanker for a place in the Guinness book of world records, it would be a lot better if the Chief Minister Chauhan invites people of all religions to come together and offer prayers in their own traditions at the same place and the same time for the betterment and amity in the country and perhaps the world as Mike has suggested. What a grand spectacle and occasion of amity it would be. Guinness may even have to open another category for the Multi-religious congregation of worship.

Mirza A. Beg may be contacted at mab64@yahoo.com, His essays are available at http://mirzasmusings.blogspot.com/

Sponsor Top Post

Friday, January 20, 2012

Home / Columnist , Communalism , Editorial , Featured , Interfaith Relations , Issues , Latest News , Mike Ghouse , Photo Gallery / LATEST EDITORIAL: Surya Namaskar and Muslim response

LATEST EDITORIAL: Surya Namaskar and Muslim response

by IMO admin | January 20‚ 2012 at 2:55 PM 0 comments

Columnist Communalism Editorial Featured Interfaith Relations Issues Latest News Mike Ghouse Photo Gallery

By Mike Ghouse

The Surya Namaskar is a Hindu religious tradition, a beautiful act of bowing to the Sun and welcoming the first rays of dawn as an expression of gratitude to the energy it breathes in to life and everything about life.

India is a pluralistic society, where we have come to respect every which way one worships one, none or many representations of God. Even among Hinduism we have an amazing diversity of people who express their gratitude from no to an iconic to an abstract manifestation of that elusive creator.

The Chief Minister of the State of Madhya Pradesh, Mr. Shivraj Singh Chouhan called on the schools and the public to join him in the Surya Namaskar to beat the Guinness world record set by the Kazakhs who currently hold the world record in mass prayers. The intent of performing this act with a million people was not for spiritual need, but to get on the Guinness Book of World Records; a crazy passion of Indians.

At least Shivraj Singh Chouhan did better than Rick Perry, the governor of Texas who invited the evangelist exclusively to pray for the nation’s well being in a certain way to exclude all other Americans including Christians of different denominations. Indeed he duped the evangelicals in buying their support for his bid to the Presidency.

The Times of India reported that the city’s Chief Muslim cleric Qazi Abul Kalam Qasmi said, "Parents should take a call on sending kids to school, if there is apprehension that the child may be forced." The newly appointed Qazi maintained that Suryanamaskar, which involved 'bowing before the sun', was against Islamic tenets. "If a Muslim performs the 'suryanamaskar' the child and his parents would both be accountable in the act of felony." Qasmi maintained.

Indeed, the Qazi is right; it is not an Islamic practice to bow to any manifestation of God, but the God himself the non-visible energy. Everyone should have the freedom to pray or not pray in certain way and no one should compel or look down for not participating. That is our pluralistic ethos for over 5000 years and we need to be loyal to that heritage.

An alternate way to look at the opinion of the Qazi would have been to participate in the group act, but do it in a way that works from an Islamic point of view. This would have meant that we are all in this together for a better India and better place to live cohesively. However, no one should expect everyone to jump and do what they do. It would have been a good example of working together without compromising our faith.

Prophet Muhammad had led mass Prayers for rain and famine and for other goodness of the society. Two years ago, I was planning on going to Florida and witness a pastor burn the Quraan, if he was indeed burning, I was going to pray my two Rakat (unit) Nafeel Muslim prayers next door to his Church in an open space with prior permission from the City. We all would have prayed for his well being along with several fellow Muslims. Burning Quraan was not an act of bravery but stupidity and countering it with anger would have been greater stupidity. Unfortunately he postponed his act and I had a 9/11 Unity Day event the next day in Dallas as well.

There are examples set by Prophet Muhammad for situations like this. While he was travelling to Taif, a few miscreants pelted rocks at him causing him to bleed, his associates wanted to go get the boys, but Prophet stopped them and instead asked them and the Angel Gabriel to join him in prayers and pray for their well being. This is what Jesus meant when he said, turn the other cheek.

Prophet Muhammad was the ultimate peace maker, every act of his is a model for us to learn from, and he was the consummate conflict mitigater and goodwill nurturer.

When we attend weddings, some of us are strictly vegetarian and some eat variations of meat products from fish and poultry to beef. We wear different clothing’s and drink a variety of sodas to coffee with cream or black and same goes with the tea. Do we have a problem with that? Then we should not have the problem with this either as long as the Chief Minister is not getting his wish at the cost of public funds.

The right wingers among us need to honor Muslims, Christians, Jains, Sikhs and Hindus for their choices and each minority should not take this as an imposition in a free society. Nor any one should be negative if one does not participate.

May Shivraj Singh Chouhan’s dreams to solidify his political stand come true and those who are opposed to him politically can also hold a Chandra Namaskar to get what they want, but together, let Madhya Pradesh go on the Guinness book of world records. Bengal or any other state has a choice to out do it as well.

[Mike Ghouse is committed to building cohesive societies where no Indian has to live in anxieties, discomfort or fear of the other. He is a frequent guest at the TV, radio and print media offering pluralistic solutions on issues of the day. His work is indexed at www.MikeGhouse.net and his current articles at www.TheGhousediary.com. Mike Ghouse is now associated with IndianMuslimObserver.com as Foreign Editor. He can be contacted at MikeGhouse@aol.com]

Corruption - India 11-01-26

Rooting-out Corruption is Good, but

Parallel Government is Injurious to Democracy

Mirza A. Beg

Tuesday, August 23, 2011

Indian Express, Delhi, August 26, 2011

http://blogs.expressindia.com/showblogdetails.php?contentid=837637#

Milli Gazette, Delhi, August25, 2011

http://www.milligazette.com/news/2136-india-rooting-out-corruption-is-good-but-parallel-government-is-injurious-to-democracy

Anna Hazare has captured the imagination of the Indian body politic. His clarion-call to end the exponentially growing, endemic corruption in India has been reverberating and gathering supporters with each passing day. The news media in India has become his megaphone.

The corruption has been increasing over the decades in magnitude as well as pervasiveness. The developing economy, increasing disposable income of the middle class and much larger workforce provide more opportunities for bribes. At the top levels of the government the bribes have grown from thousands to tens of millions of Rupees.

On my visits to India, I enjoy asking probing social and political questions in conversations with a wide spectrum of very friendly and talkative fellow travelers. Everyone is against corruption as a simple nebulous principle. But the answers get clouded and muddled when it benefits their lives.

The Indian Government finally realized that the evil of corruption has reached the tipping point and drafted a legislation to create an independent office of Lokpal (ombudsmen) to watch over various agencies with independent, but limited authority. It would have the power to investigate. Based on evidence, it would recommend and direct the judicial system to take action. Obviously it would take time for such a system to mature and work. Unfortunately the judicial system is not beyond corruption either.

The office of Lokpal would be similar to the office of the Election Commissioner, which has worked rather well, notwithstanding all the ills of the society. Indian elections are by and large fair and have successfully changed the government many times.

Yet the corruption at all levels including the legislature has grown, because the most important driving force for voting for a candidate is not honesty, but sectarianism – a substantial majority votes based on religion, cast and regional advantages. Political parties put up candidates based on these considerations. Once elected, they distribute economic largess as well as jobs and contracts to their most important supporters and casts in their constituency. Ironically, it is not considered corruption by a large majority of the populace.

Anna Hazare and his companions proposed a much stronger and aggressive office of the Lokpal (ombudsman). They insist that all the branches of the government would be under its authority including the Prime Minister. It would have independent police and judicial powers. In effect, it would be akin to a parallel unelected government, and would have minimal check on its authority.

When aroused, people like simple and fast remedies. Anna Hazare’s remedy of cut ting the Gordian knot in one strike is simplistic and very appealing. To force his ideas on the government, he first threatened and then took up a fast unto death. It sounds enticing, especially coming from a person who has put his life on the line and has a long record of service to the poor and personal honesty.

Taking advantage of the situation, all sorts of people have jumped on his band wagon for their own purposes, while many opposed to him have unearthed records, where he appears to have supported unsavory ideas and people. Many in the minority community want to join him but are weary of some of the Anna’s unsavory backers. No one is perfect, and he has some explaining to do.

I applaud his taking a stand and galvanizing the placid electorate to demand reform. One needs to look at it not from sectarian perspective, but a long range national perspective. Means and ends should be carefully considered. They do matter. Democracy is not easy to nurture. A system that changes with the changing wind of public opinion does not last very long. An unaccountable parallel government is an idea fraught with danger. Impetuously designed laws with the best of intentions have unintended consequences. The road to hell is paved with good intentions.

That is why most stable democracies have a bicameral legislature, so that a part of the legislature, called the upper house or senate --is protected from the immediacy of the impetuous public emotions.

Democracy by its very nature is inefficient. The system of checks and balances is an impediment to quick solutions of long festering social problems. Simplistic and draconian solutions against an evil are easy to understand and support. Anna Hazare has projected himself as a leader in the Gandhian tradition. But there is a difference.

Gandhi Ji agitated and fasted to give voice to the people, against an unelected imperial colonial government. Hazare is holding hostage, a legitimately elected government of the people. With his popularity growing by the day, the government is being held on ransom with a false choice of Hazare’s bill or widespread chaos.

In a democracy, the government is only as good as the people vote for. If the electorate really wanted honesty and integrity, they could have voted for them as beacons. But they did not, they vote for personal aggrandizement on the basis of cast etc. Impetuous quick solutions often bring unintended consequences. Thoughtful people should take time to bring in change without injuring the constitution and the essence of democracy. The start has been made to check corruption. Anna Hazare should compromise to get a good bill instead of throwing the country in to chaos.

Mirza A. beg can be contacted at mab64@yahoo.com or mirzasmusings.blogspot.com

Bigotery in Election 11-6-20

Republican Debate - Stealth Agenda of Gingrich and Cain

Mirza A. Beg

Saturday, June 20, 2011

Counter Currents June 23, 2011

http://www.countercurrents.org/beg230611.htm

Media Monitor Network, June 23, 2011

http://usa.mediamonitors.net/content/view/full/87349

Tuscaloosa News, Sunday, June 26, 2011

http://www.tuscaloosanews.com/article/20110626/NEWS/110719975

OEN OpEdNews.com, June 28, 2011

http://www.opednews.com/articles/Republican-Debate--Stealt-by-Mirza-Beg-110624-554.html

The Republican debate of June 13^th moderated by John King of CNN was generally a collegial affair. It was essentially a “Knock Obama” rally, with understated minor differences among the candidates.

Except, when CNN moderator John King asked former Godfather Pizza magnate, Harman Cain, “You recently said you would not appoint a Muslim to your cabinet and you kind of backed off a little bit and said you would first want to know if they’re committed to the Constitution. You expressed concern that, quote, “a lot of Muslims are not totally dedicated to this country.” Are American-Muslims as a group less committed to the Constitution than, say, Christians or Jews?”

Cain backpedaled a bit and said,” I would not be comfortable because you have peaceful Muslims and then you have militant Muslims, those that are trying to kill us. And so, when I said I wouldn’t be comfortable, I was thinking about the ones that are trying to kill us, number one. Secondly, yes, I do not believe in Sharia law in American courts. I believe in American laws in American courts, period. There have been instances –“

John King turned to other candidates and asked their views on the subject. Some candidates were uncomfortable, but not former speaker of the House, Newt Gingrich.

Trying to resuscitate his dying campaign, stridently he said, “Now, I just want to go out on a limb here. I’m in favor of saying to people, if you’re not prepared to be loyal to the United States, you will not serve in my administration, period.” He added “We did this—we did this in dealing with the Nazis and we did this in dealing with the communists. And it was controversial both times, and both times we discovered after a while, you know, there are some genuinely bad people who would like to infiltrate our country. And we have got to have the guts to stand up and say no.”

For those who do not know, Gingrich was approvingly referring to the Red baiting campaign of early 1950s by the Republican senator Joseph McCarthy of Wisconsin and his cohorts. It has been widely condemned as the most shameful period in modern US history. It lives in infamy as McCarthyism. As Gingrich says, there were “some genuinely bad people”- but it is opposite of the way he construes. The bad people were, Senator McCarthy and his minions, who maligned and tried to destroy decent Americans by innuendos, as Gingrich does.

Yes, a few Muslim citizens have engaged in terrorism against the US, but an overwhelming majority of Muslims are productive and loyal citizens. It is no secret that Muslim bashing is popular among some in the Republican Party. They conveniently forget that some of the plots were thwarted by Muslims contacting the police.

Sadly not one candidate on the podium admonished Cain and Gingrich, as they would have, if such a sweeping statement was made to malign other minorities such as Jews or Blacks. Even sadder yet, it did not elicit much comment in the popular media either.

Not too long ago some Republicans did stand up to challenge such remarks, but the party has changed.

In 2007 Republican debates, while others remained quiet, John McCain condemned Mitt Romney’s remark that he will not appoint any Muslim to his cabinet. McCain said, “I’m proud of the Muslims who are currently serving in the United States armed forces and my sense is that if they can serve in that manner, they can serve in any position of responsibility in America.”

In December 2002, an intemperate remark by Senator Trent Lott cost him the leadership of the Republican Party in the Senate. Celebrating the 100^th birthday of South Carolina Senator Strom Thurmond, Senator Trent Lott, the Republican leader in the Senate said, “When Strom Thurmond ran for president, we voted for him. We’re proud of it. And if the rest of the country had followed our lead, we wouldn’t have had all these problems over the years, either.”

Those remarks were construed as racist, because in 1948 Strom Thurmond broke with the Democratic Party on the issue of enforcement of civil rights legislation and ran for the Presidency as a State’s Rights Party candidate.

The US Constitution is secular. Thankfully our laws are not based on religious preference. Although when not in conflict with the civil laws, in some jurisdictions it has accommodated people, who by mutual agreement wanted their personal disputes settled by arbitration by religious tribunal. Courts have enforced the result of such arbitration in case of Jewish, Mormon and other religions as in contract law.

The spurious injection of Sharia in the debate is a “Red Herring” to divert attention and garner cheap popularity from the considerable weight of the xenophobic wing of the Republican Party. There is no monolithic Sharia law. These laws were developed by different schools of thoughts in the 9^th century to check the creeping autocracy of the rulers. They are open to debate, and have evolved on diverse lines through the ages.

The irony is that most rightwing Republicans are opposed to the idea of separation of “Church and State” notwithstanding the first amendment. That is why Rev. Pat Robertson found so much traction in the Republican primaries in the 1980s. Rev. Charles Kimball writes in his book, “When Religion Becomes Lethal “ that Ralph Reed, the head of the Christian Coalition, famously referred to the practice of running “stealth candidates” where the radical agenda would be hidden from voters by focusing on hot button issues such as abortion or homosexuality. By the time the voters knew what victorious candidate really advocated, they would not know what hit them.

Some of the 2012 Republican aspirants are not much different. Some want the United States to be under the Biblical laws, while others in an effort to dupe them are stealthily raising a bogus threat from the Sharia laws. To protect all, multi-religious as well as irreligious citizens, would it not be better to, honestly adhere to the principle of “Separation of Church and State”, no lying, no ifs and no buts?

Instead of the loyalty test for ordinary law abiding citizens of any faith or no faith, the electorate should reject stealth candidates whose support for the US Constitution is dubious. If elected they would have to take the oath of office with fingers crossed.

Mirza A. Beg can be contacted at mab64@yahoo.com or at http://mirzasmusings.blogspot.com/

Egypt Uprising 11-2-2

Uprising in Egypt – Country at the Cross Roads

Mirza A. Beg

Tuesday, February 1, 2011

The Tuscaloosa News Wednesday, February 2, 2011

http://www.tuscaloosanews.com/article/20110202/NEWS/110209918

The American Muslim, Wednesday, February 2, 2011

http://www.theamericanmuslim.org/tam.php/features/articles/uprising_in_egypt_country_at_a_cross_roads/0018368

Media Monitors Net, Wednesday, February 2, 2011

http://world.mediamonitors.net/Headlines/Uprising-in-Egypt-Country-at-the-Crossroads

Cross Currents, Wednesday, February 2, 2011

http://www.countercurrents.org/beg010211.htm

Inspired by the spontaneous revolution in Tunisia, thousands of young Egyptians took to the streets in Cairo on January 25^th 2011, congregating in Tehrir (Liberation) Square. A 20^th century dictatorship was overwhelmed by 21^st century technology. Facebook and Twitter facilitated instant communication to overcome the government censors. Their protest against poverty, unemployment and government corruption erupted as a peaceful revolt against the thirty years of autocratic rule of President Hosni Mubarak. In unison they demanded Mubarak to leave.

Eighty-two year old Mubarak, caught by surprise sent his family to England, shut off the Internet and imposed a curfew. He employed his usual means to suppress the peaceful protesters by sending the feared police and Special Forces. Police used water cannons, tear gas and rubber bullets, but to their surprise they could not intimidate as in the past. It was reported that about a dozen protesters were killed. This simply made the protesters even more determined and the crowd grew even larger and at places the police were overwhelmed and even beaten.

Out of fear, or as a matter of policy, the hated police were withdrawn on the third day and the army was called out. Some damage to the government buildings was reported, including the world famous Museum of Antiquities. Looting of richer neighborhoods by nefarious miscreants is widely believed to be the act of agent provocateurs and the police, to discredit the peaceful revolution.

The military is one of the most respected and egalitarian institutions in Egypt. People welcomed the soldiers in their tanks and armored carriers as protectors. They did not interfere with the peaceful protest. It was amazing to see protesters joyously riding on the tanks along with the soldiers.

Three days later Mubarak reconstituted his government, appointing a Vice President for the first time. Omar Sulaiman, the new Vice President is respected in some US circles, but the Egyptians know him as the former intelligence chief known for his role in torture of prisoners, particularly in the US extraordinary rendition-for-torture program. Mubarak also replaced the Prime Minister. and the police chief.

Though the spontaneous revolution started with the young, gradually men and women of all ages and people of all political leanings have joined in. On Tuesday the 1^st of February, millions of Egyptians marched throughout Egypt, demanding Mubarak’s resignation with sporadic anti US slogans for the long US support for Mubarak. The newly appointed Vice President Sulaiman has offered to meet the leaders of the revolution to discuss ways to proceed with the reforms.

The army has announced that it would patrol to protect people and property, but would not fire on peaceful protest, confirming that Mubarak’s weakening power.

Though the revolution was spontaneous and leaderless, gradually Egyptians from all shades of the political spectrum, including the Muslim Brotherhood and the Communists have coalesced behind an internationally respected figure, El Baradei, a 2005 Nobel Laureate and former Director General of International Atomic Energy Agency.

Western governments, especially the United States were also caught flatfooted. Secretary of State Clinton’s first statement was insipid, but by the second day the US administration could read the writing on the wall. Obama strongly urged Mubarak to respect people’s right to peaceful protest and asked for the restoration of the internet connections. He also diplomatically threatened Mubark to behave or jeopardize the annual largess of one and a half billion dollars.

The US has traditionally considered Egypt as one of the most important allies in the Middle East for four reasons. First - Egypt is by far the most populous Arab country. Second - The US considers it a bulwark of peace with Israel. It provides enormous leverage to Israel’s occupation and activities in the occupied Gaza and West Bank. Third - After 9/11, Egypt has toed the US line in the war on terrorism, to the extent that it was one of the most important destinations for torture of “extraordinary rendition prisoners” in the Bush administration. And fourth – Suez Canal is a strategic passage for oil and commerce for Europe.

The nervousness in the US is understandable. The Obama administration is very carefully playing its cards. The US realizes that the era of preaching democracy and supporting dictators in Latin America, Middle East and Asia is over. The much-maligned Wikileaks expose, though embarrassing, shows that the US did urge dictators like Mubarak to ease up on the draconian laws and move towards democracy. It has not gone un-noticed among the intelligentsia in the Middle East and it bodes well for the future of US standing among the people in the region and puts potentates on notice. But the average Egyptian does not consider the US to be a friend. Obama administration needs to be more proactive and on the right side of the unfolding history.

Israel is naturally terribly concerned and considers Mubarak to be a close ally. NPR has reported that it is strongly encouraging the US and others to fully support Mubarak.

Leaders of most of the important parties, especially El Baradei have emphasized that they would honor all treaty obligations, including the peace treaty with Israel. In a democratic Egypt the government would be answerable to its people and would not be pliant to the US policy towards the Palestinians, and would not support Israel’s strangulating blockade of Gaza as Mubarak has. This would bring greater urgency to the peaceful solution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and give impetus to the US efforts.

Obviously a major change in the power equation cannot be fully predicted. It poses new challenges and new opportunities. No one doubts that democracy with all its problems and flaws has proven to be a better form of government. It takes time to take root and find its stride.

Some in the West are afraid that Egypt would follow the example of Iran. It is based on ignorance of history as well as geography. The Iranian revolution sprang against a tyrant that suppressed Islam. As it unfolded, instead of looking to the future, the US and Iranian policy makers became prisoners of their past, rooted in the1953 US interference in suppressing the budding democracy in Iran.

Egyptians have no such history. In 1956 Eisenhower forced the withdrawal of the tripartite invasion of Egypt by Britain, France and Israel. To its credit Obama administration has carefully supported the right to peaceful revolution. Though the death toll has reached more than hundred, a whole-sale suppression has not occurred because of a blunt US warning to Mubarak use of force on peaceful demonstrators will not be tolerated.

If handled with care democracy in Egypt is more likely to follow the Turkish model. The Muslim Brotherhood since 1960s has abjured force and has followed political means under an oppressive dictatorship. It is more akin to the Christian right in the US than the theocratic clergy in Iran. Though in a new democracy respect for constitution needs time to take root.

Democratic Egypt would be a positive force in bringing democracy to countries that have educated populations with large-scale unemployment and poverty, such as Syria, Algeria, Jordan, Yemen, and Sudan. The Gulf Countries and Saudi Arabia have small populations rich because of petro-dollars and would not follow the current wave of revolutions.

Egyptians are a proud people with a five thousand year of great history, and one of the best-educated young generations in the Middle East. Two years ago when I was in Cairo, I talked to Egyptians from a broad cross section of generational, educational and economic and religious background. They were friendly talkative and inquisitive. They talked about everything under the sun, but could not voice opinions on their government. Liberation is in the air and Egyptians have found their voice.

Mirza A. Beg can be contacted at mab64@yahoo.com and comments may be posted on mirzasmusings.blogspot.com

Islamic Center NY 10-9-10

Dear Friends,

Some of you have asked for my opinion on the contrived Islamic Center controversy. Thanks for asking, I dedicate it to your valuable friendship. If you find it worth reading please forward it to your friends, if you find flaws in it please educate me.

This essay reflects my deeply held views of the baser instincts in us that are prone to political exploitation of religions. An ignoble Florida pastor made to the front pages by his holding the US and all decent people, Christians and Muslims, hostage to the fear of repercussions of his action. I decided not to include him in the essay, because I do not want to add even a modicum to the publicity he seeks. Thanks and warm regards,

Mirza

_____________________________

Contrived Controversy - Islamic Center in New York

Mirza A. Beg

September 9, 2010

The Tuscaloosa News - Sunday, September 12, 2010

http://www.tuscaloosanews.com/article/20100912/NEWS/100919917

Media Monitor Network- Saturday, September 11, 2010

http://usa.mediamonitors.net/content/view/full/78158

Two Circles Network – Saturday, September 11, 2010

http://twocircles.net/2010sep11/contrived_controversy_islamic_center_new_york.html

Indian Muslims – Monday, September 14, 2010

http://indianmuslims.in/contrived-controversy-islamic-center-in-new-york/

Almost everyone except a minuscule minority is born to their religion and adheres to the social traditions of their culture. Religions may preach unity to their flock but give-in to sectarianism. The sects roughly fall into two cerebral groups.

At the upper end a thoughtful and introspective minority that considers humility and service to humanity as the essence of their being and the calling of their religion. At the other end the narrow-minded who consider their creed to have been chosen by God for domination and use selected passages from their scripture in zealous pursuit of political power.

In the middle lives a large majority of usually kind and decent people too busy in the chores of living to think critically the morality of their social setting. They follow religious rituals and usually admire the first group, but succumb to the propaganda of the second in traumatic times.

In dictatorial or feudal regimes the first group is persecuted and the second latches on to power and thrives. In democracies, the first group may draw people to a higher vision, but suffers the onslaught of unethical propaganda by the second, especially during elections in stressful times.

After eight long years of mismanagement, two wars of hubris and a complete economic collapse, the US electorate in the elections of 2006 and 08 threw the Republicans out of power. In the last year and a half the economy has been stabilized, but the jobless rate is still very high, the electorate is not happy. With this backdrop and the trauma of 9/11, the drummed up controversy and misinformation about the Islamic community center two blocks from ground zero in New York follows this pattern.

In the last two months opposition politicians with the help of pundits on the anything, but “fair and balanced” FOX news and talk radio have kept up the drum beat of misinformation and half truths about the Islamic Center. Unsurprisingly, there has been a gradual rise in anti Islamic Center opinion along with anti Muslim feeling in the ephemeral public opinion polls. Many local right wing groups have latched on in opposing Islamic centers in many smaller communities as well.

The fear mongers have found a more potent propaganda, better than the perennial illegal immigration that simmers on the back burner to be resurrected in elections. Even better than the invented new twist of a few months ago, “the Anchor Babies”, implying that people come to US to deliver babies to cash in years later, the eventual right of citizenship under the US constitution.

Muslims should not be disheartened at this turn of events. Immigrants in the past have been subjected to much worse. It is part of the endemic struggle between the idea of the great democracy that the founding fathers envisioned and the drag of the baser human tendencies.

The United States of America came into being as a democracy drawing on the high ideals of enlightenment. Yet the full implementation of the ideals in the constitution took another two centuries to unfold. The genius of the US constitution is that it guides and allows progress, evolving with the needs of times.

The drag of the baser part of our history is well known, the massacre of Natives, the horrible legacy of slavery, the ethno-religious persecution of Jewish, Catholic - Irish and Italian immigrants, and the indigenous Mormon. The exploitation and persecution of imported Chinese and Japanese laborers in the 19^th century is also a part of the same exploitative fabric.

The nation gradually evolved to reject these, once accepted practices. In hard economic times and in times of war it often regresses, but eventually it re-discovers its moorings. It takes time, often a long time. Blacks were forced to immigrate in chains and were kept in political chains up to the 1960s, until the passage of the Civil Rights legislations. During the hysterical fear of the “new age religions” of 1970s and 80s, charlatan “deprogrammers” made a lot of money preying on the fears of the parents whose children opted to experiment with new trends in thoughts. The current anti Muslim propaganda too shall pass.

So the present anti Muslim propaganda is not surprising. What should be celebrated is that in the wake of 9/11 the administration arrested about 1,200 innocent Muslims; justice prevailed and none of them were found guilty. However in the last three years some Muslims have indulged in reprehensible acts and are legitimately being brought to justice. There have been many attacks on Islamic centers and Mosques by the cowardly religious miscreants, but the law is actively pursuing justice.

Though right wing propagandists have succeeded in corrupting the public mind to gain about sixty percent support, it is a great tribute to the US democracy that about thirty to forty percent have not succumbed to the knee jerk reaction. Many Pastors, Rabbis and most editorials in the newspapers and commentary sections have decried this assault on the first amendment. It is a very high index of sanity in difficult times in any country. The founding fathers took special care to check the tyranny of the insidious emotional gullible majority by requiring two thirds majority in the Senate and ratification by three-fourths of the states to change the constitution.

It is important to realize that bigots on all sides are equally reprehensible. Each side considers the nameless, faceless bigots on the other side to be despicable propaganda figures. While the bigots on their side to be human beings who love their children and are good neighbors, therefore are more easily swayed by their rhetoric. In wars of supremacy each side succumbs to those who misuse religion and yields leadership to the most despicable charlatans among them.

The soul of the US resides in its strong and just constitution. Those with baser attitudes are a blight that infects all societies. Unlike many other countries, the US democracy has weathered them for more than two centuries, and has consistently been on an upward humane trajectory, respecting and celebrating the diversity and aspirations of all its citizens. Muslims in the United States know it and they have a lot to learn and contribute to this great nation of immigrants. When things are going well it is easy to be good, the real test of character is to be just and balanced when one’s own ox is being gored.

Mirza A. Beg can be contacted at mab64@yahoo.com, or at his blog http://mirzasmusings.blogspot.com/

Comments:

___________________________________________________

Mirza,

The ground zero mosque debate can be boiled down to a single issue - compassion. If there are so many families affected by the 9-11 attacks and so many of them opposed to the location of the mosque, then isn't it simply the compassionate thing to do to move the mosque?Even if there are but a few families that had love ones die on 9-11 that wish for the site to be moved, isn't that alone reason enough? Regards,

Casey Sears

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

Casey,

Thanks for your thoughtful note. It is easy to be for your sentiments, and I join you. If people, particularly those with power and resources, are really serious it can and should be achieved. I have heard different opinions from the loudest voices such as Bill Oreily to Newt Gingrich that it should be moved to at least 4 blocks to 10 blocks from ground zero.
As you would realize, it can be achieved if a similar property could be found as an almost even swap. I have not heard from any one a plausible proposal. If they really are honest in their expression, they should try to facilitate what they propose; this will put their criticism on solid ground and worth serious consideration. Thanks again,
Mirza

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

Dr. Siras Suspended! 10-02-22

The Suspension of Dr. Siras For Moral Turpitude
Misconstrued Collision Of Principles

By Mirza A. Beg

22 February, 2010
Countercurrents.org

http://www.countercurrents.org/beg220210.htm

Dr. Shrinivas Ramchandra Siras, reader and chairman of Modern Indian Languages at Aligarh Muslim University (AMU) was suspended for the moral turpitude of consensual homosexuality within the privacy of his home.

From early reports, is seems that the suspension of Dr. Siras may be quite popular. Religions do not agree on all moral principles. That is the reason for adoption of a secular constitution in a pluralistic democracy. If popularity was the yardstick of morality, some of the minorities would have no place in states dominated by sectarian forces in India. The essential questions are, was Dr. Siras flouting his life-style; was the evidence procured by legal means, admissible in a court of law and if not, should the illegally obtained evidence of “sin” be prosecutable in secular courts?

There are many principles, religious and secular at stake here, and they are not in conflict.

1. In most religions homosexuality is considered to be a sin, condemned by the society. Though homosexuality has always existed in all societies, but by and large has been tolerated as a private matter, if not flouted.

2. Blind Puritanism is discouraged, because it leads to widespread intolerance and discord. Religions and societies choose equanimity in social discourse for stability and peace.

3. Islam enjoins believers to respect the inviolable privacy of home. Muslims are enjoined not to gossip or brazenly expose private failings of others. Muslims are exhorted to be introspective and tolerant with humility in the belief that God is the ultimate all knowing judge. Social responsibility is to condemn only lewd public behavior.

4. Democracy and civil society also follow this Islamic principle. Private behavior and public acts are separate realms. Violation of privacy of the home is against the law. Even the state may not search a home, without a warrant from a judge.

The idea of tolerance and personal space is not a western import, Indian and most eastern cultures have lived by these principles more harmoniously in the past than the West.

I remember an incident from my high school years. A teacher was rumored to be homosexual. My father overheard a remark from one of my visiting classmates. Later he asked me if that particular teacher was a good teacher. I said yes. He admonished me that knowledge is all I needed from the teacher. He emphasized that it was not only unseemly, but also un-Islamic to indulge in gossip.

The idea that democracy is good, and civil rights are essential for democracy to function, are easy to parrot, but forbearance is difficult to practice. If we do not protect the rights of the weakest members of the society, the rights naturally gravitate to accrue only to the powerful.

Tolerance of those with whom we disagree or dislike, protects minorities. Social mores change with time. There are hundreds of examples of what was considered abominable, has become acceptable and what was barely acceptable, has become popular. The most obvious example is the rise of stars in the film industry, from allegations of being little better than courtesans to the new royalty ruling the hearts of millions.

Changing mores are not necessarily good or right. The function of leaders is to lead, nurture and guide the society in the direction they deem to be healthy, through a civil dialogue to change the laws they disagree with. Violating the law to entrap or assault those who are on the margins of the society, religion or popular culture is injurious to the basic principles of a civil democracy.

The notion that in pursuit of “good” unlawful means are permissible, is irreligious and unethical, and leads only to evil. Societies and countries that take such short cuts pay a heavy price and often fall to sanctimonious dictatorships that bring only repression.

In almost all civil societies, evidence procured illegally by corrupt means is inadmissible in a court of law. Often ill-informed people rail against the inadmissibility of misbegotten evidence, because at times they let the criminal go free. But it is an important principle. It forces the law-enforcement agencies to be honest. It requires due diligence and proscribes the protectors of the law from becoming violators of the law. It is much more dangerous for power to be used by corrupt means than for a thief to go free.

The function of an institution of higher education is to educate students not only in their chosen subjects, but also in morality and ethics of citizenship and the boundaries on the use of power. It is shameful when the government or educators of young minds violate these bedrock principles, thoughtlessly to appease the majority.

Essentially what we know of the circumstances of the charges leveled against Dr. Siras and his consequent suspension by the AMU administration is troubling. I wonder what the professors in the AMU law faculty would say about its probity. Dr. Siras’ duty was to be a good teacher and respect the norms and traditions of an educational institution. His life style within the privacy of his home, even if “sinful” was no one’s business.

There are laws that protect the society from predators preying on minors, women and the weak. They are not always easy to enforce, that is the challenge and requirement for the sustenance of a civil society. Muslims ought to be sensitive towards the violation of the civil rights of a minority despised by many. They have suffered enough by the police and those in the positions of power, who despise them.

The religiosity, ethics and respect for the laws are strengthened, when we defend those with whom we may strongly disagree, but stand to uphold their civil and legal rights

Morality is when one adheres to principles, even when no one is watching; and courage is when one protects the rights of the weak and even despised, when it is widely unpopular. India and most functioning democracies, particularly the minorities in these countries owe a debt of gratitude to those who courageously adhere to this principle.

Mirza A. Beg can be contacted at mab64@yahoo.com or http://mirzasmusings.blogspot.com/

Shahid Azmi Murder 10-02-12

Murder of Shahid Azmi,

Assault on the Heart of the Indian Democracy

Mirza A. Beg

February12, 2010

Counter Currents. February 14, 2010

http://www.countercurrents.org/beg140210.htm

Indian Muslims, February 12, 2010

http://indianmuslims.in/murder-of-shahid-azmi-assault-on-the-heart-of-the-indian-democracy/

Thirty-two years old, Shahid Azmi, the defense counsel to the accused, framed by the police in the Malgaon case in Maharashtra, was gunned down in his office by a five member assassination squad in broad daylight. In his very young career he became the voice of the downtrodden and defenseless, because he had suffered the heavy hand of the corrupt state police as a young boy of fifteen.

He reported to the police, many times, to no avail, about the threats he received from those who manipulate the justice system for sectarian purposes and kill those who get in the way.

Shahid Azmi, the defense attorney’s murder is more detrimental to the Indian democracy than many other terribly egregious murders that are in themselves the bane of Indian democracy and civil society.

All injustices, particularly murders are injurious to the functioning of a civil society. Even more detrimental to the functioning of democracy is state terrorism or the state turning a blind eye to the murder of citizens who try to keep the state honest. Injustices and mayhem perpetrated by the state against the minorities, as in Gujarat, under Chief Minister Mr. Modi, is almost universally known. There are many other states where political heavy weights run a parallel government through open intimidation, irrespective of the political party in power. Mr. Bal Thakery of Maharashtra is well known to wield such evil supra-state power.

The tribal people in Orissa and Chhattisgarh, Dalits in Bihar, Muslims and Christians in many states, particularly in Gujarat have suffered grievously. It has been well documented. The military and police have often been oppressive and brutal in states rife with long term ubiquitous rebellions. They end up feeding the cause that feeds the rebellion rather than being about a solution in states such as Kashmir, Nagaland and Mizoram as well the as the tribal belt of Central India.

Yet, with all these pitfalls and lamentable inadequacies, the Indian democracy has made great strides, because many brave and principled Indians have made great sacrifices to stand up and expose the corruption of power. Such efforts occasionally gather wider support and come to the notice of the Supreme Court of India. The Apex court occasionally feels obliged to intervene for the cause of justice, when the state government apparatus and the lower courts are completely overwhelmed by the sectarian attitudes, as in the case of Gujarat under Mr. Modi.

Indians owe a great debt of gratitude to these brave citizens, journalists and lawyers, the conscience keepers of the Indian democracy. They risk their safely to take up the cause and cases, to uphold the constitution of India that guarantees justice to the hapless accused, boxed in by the corrupt judicial system at the lower rungs of the justice system.

The murder of Shahid Azmi is not a murder of an individual only, it is a brazen effort to intimidate and ultimately obliterate the idea of justice and silence the voice of the Indian conscience. The central government of India should do its utmost to bring the murderers to justice, because it is an assault on the soul of the Indian constitution and state, much more grave than the terrorist that kills individuals or the thief that prowls in the darkness of night.

Mirza A. Beg can be contacted at mab64@yahoo.com or http://mirzasmusings.blogspot.com/