Somalia Online Weekly Bulletin: Informative articles only

[Valenteenah.]

Postman...WLC

 

Thanks for the articles nomads.

 

Raxmah...

 

Many thanks...that was a particularly great article.

[JustCause]

Hi All,

 

I am new here and I do not know whether posting my reply to an article posted here to be the right thing to do or not. But I will post my reply and apologise for it�as one of my teachers used to say is easier ask for forgiveness than asking for permission!

 

The article by Chuck Morse on Islamic Liberation Theology is the worst piece I have ever seen written by someone on the RIGHT. I don�t know who this Chuck Morse is, (if I have to guess I would say he is some American right wing) who has no idea what he is talking about. Let me make this clear before I go any further, I am what you call centre left, I fight for social justices and equality, as do my fellow comrades in the leftist movement!

 

Unlike the right, the left never tried to back dictators or murders in any form or shape�Chile just to mention one example in this case. I strongly believe that people from the right created most the problems the world is facing today. What is more, the right always courts the religious elements of any society and the living proof of this today is the Republican Party in the USA. Why do you think Bush today is supporting the Sharon policy on Middle East, love for the Jewish people? I doubt that very much. This support is not either based on the few votes, which, the Republicans might gain from the Jewish voters (most of American Jews vote for Democratic Party anyway).

 

However, this support is based on the bonkers beliefs of the fundamentalist Christian that Jesus will return to Earth one day. For this to happen though a state of Israel has be created and this state in turn should occupy the holy land and build the Third Temple on the site where Al-Aqsa mosque is situated. Once the Jews implement these two pre-conditions, Jesus will have the chance to return to Earth. From there onwards, the Jews either have the choice to believe in Christ or burn with the rest of non-believers!

 

If the above belief is not a fundamentalism, I do not know what is. What is more, sooner rather than latter (if not already doing so) this belief will lead the world to more wars and misery. So you tell me if we don�t blame the religious fanatics and their right wing allies who should we blame?

 

Blaming the left wing Soviets for launching the Islamic terrorism we are facing today, is a dishonest and distortion of history, to say the least. I am not advocating the Soviet system was fair or just, but it was not to blame for Islamic insurgence we face today.

 

The other thing this person needs to know is, when the left were opposed to Saddam�s brutal rule, why were his lot doing business with him if he was evil. Even better why is Bush doing business with Saudi Royal family, when the whole world knows them to be brutal rulers and non-democratic?

 

The way I see it, until the rightist admit the wrong they have done and continue to be doing, the world will be in a messier situation than we are today; this is just the beginning ladies and gentlemen!

[postman]

Feynman,

 

I have no idea what the rules are, but from what I gather I think you can reply to articles. Having said that. When I posted Chuck Morris’s article I posted it because I thought it was different. However this is not to say the left is blameless or benevolent. But I will not get into this since this is not a debate. So here is another article.

 

 

ISLAMIC ETHIC

by Asghar Ali Engineer

 

Every religion lays great emphasis on ethical aspects of human conduct in its own unique way. Generally there is great commonality between different religions as far as moral and ethical questions are concerned. In fact to mould a moral character is the most fundamental function of religion. All other functions are subsidiary to it. But it is also true that each religion has unique way of doing it and every religion puts differing emphasis on different aspects of human morality. Islam is also unique in this respect. It has its own ethical values and moral concepts, which are universal as well as specific to Islam. This paper will throw light on Islamic ethic.

 

Islam has unique morality of its own. It puts great deal of emphasis, for example, on equality and justice and emphasises dignity of all human beings. We will deal with these issues in the course of this paper. However, there are also universal moral values, which Islam lays emphasis on. The Qur'an gives us the concept of what it calls `amal salih which, translated into English, would mean 'good deeds'. But this translation does not adequately convey the meaning. The key word here is 'salih'. The root of the word is slh from which are derived many words with the meaning to be good, to repair, to mend, to improve, to be righteous, to be efficient, to be suitable, peace and friendliness, reconciliation etc.

 

Thus it will be seen that 'amal salih leads to a society which is reformed, good, efficient, suitable (to humanity), improved and above all which is peaceful and friendly to all human beings. The Qur'an uses the word 'amal salih' repeatedly. For a moral conduct, according to the Qur'an, 'amal salih' is very necessary. In the chapter 103 the Qur'an says, "By the time! Surely man is in loss, except those who believe and do good work ('amal salih'), and exhort one another to Truth and exhort one another to patience." Thus the key ethical concepts here in this chapter are 1) 'amal salih'; 2) to be truthful and 3) to observe patience. One can say that these are key elements of Islamic ethic. Man is surely in loss but those who perform good deeds are truthful and patient would not be. Thus for 'amal salih' truth and patience are highly necessary. One can say that this is most comprehensive statement of the Qur'anic ethic.

 

Here important question is why so much emphasis on 'patience'? Why truth and patience are made integral to each other? Because to be truthful is most arduous and challenging. One has to face great problems in order to be truthful. One will have to face opposition, even intrigues, from vested interests. It is, therefore, necessary, to be steadfast and patient and face all these challenges with fortitude and courage. All this requires great deal of patience. Hence the Qur'an lays so much emphasis on being steadfast and patient to follow the path of truth. Only a man of great patience can be truthful.

 

Truth is a universal value in all religions. Some religions like Hinduism also maintain that truth (Satyam) is God. The Qur'an also elevates truth (Haq) to the status of being God. Allah has been described as Haq in the Qur'an. No human being can claim to be Truth in absolute sense. Mansur al-Hallaj, the famous sufi saint who claimed to be ana'l haq (I am the Truth) was hanged because it meant claiming to be God. Thus truth has great significance in the Islamic ethical system. Here it should be remembered that truth is not mere conformity with observable facts as in empirical sciences. Truth in moral sciences, especially in religion, has moral or ideological dimension also which is not necessarily verifiable. It is this aspect of moral or religious truth, which separates religion from science. However, it should also be born in mind that truth should not be contrary to observable facts also. All one can say is that truth, in moral and religious discourse, is not mere conformity with fact. It is more than mere conformity with fact.

 

In Islamic system of morality, as in some other religions too, it is establishment of a moral society that is very fundamental. The emphasis of Islamic teachings is not personal salvation but establishment of a society that is just and free of zulm (oppression). Here we will like to deal with this aspect of Islamic ethic in greater detail, as it is most central to Islam. The Qur'an lays great emphasis on 'adl (justice). It is the central value in the Islamic ethic. The Qur'an says that "Be just; it is closest to being pious." (5:8). Thus in Islam there is no concept of piety without being just. The opposite of 'adl' is 'zulm' (oppression). Zulm is derived from the root z.l.m. that has several shades of meaning i.e. to do wrong, injustice, darkness, iniquity, oppression etc. The Qur'an often uses it in the sense of wrong doing and oppression.

 

Islam basically lays emphasis on establishing a just society free of all forms of oppression. The Prophet also says that a society can live with unbelief (kufr) but not with oppression (zulm). Thus Islamic ethic conceives of a society which will be free of all forms of exploitation and oppression. Islam basically is a non-violent religion. It does not approve of violence at all. The most basic attribute of Allah is mercy and compassion of which we will talk more little later. But Islam approves of violence (in a highly controlled sense, of course) only to remove zulm, the structures of oppression.. Thus the Qur'an says, "And how could you refuse to fight in the cause of Allah and of the utterly helpless men and women and children who are crying, "O our Sustainer! Lead us forth (to freedom) out of this land whose people are oppressors, and raise for us, out of Thy grace, a protector, and raise for us, out of Thy grace, one who will bring us succour!". (4:75)

 

Thus the Qur'an's emphasis is on fighting against injustice, against oppression. Everyone has right to live in peace in ones own country. If someone tries to throw them out just because they have their own inner conviction, they cannot be thrown out of their homeland. And if someone tries to do that, one has to stand up to that and fight against this injustice. Islam does not permit violence in matters of preaching of religion. It believes, as is obvious from the above verse also, in full freedom of conscience. In fact if this freedom is violated that Islam permits use of regulated force. As for preaching of religion it has to be done only through 'goodly exhortation and wisdom' (16:125). There is no question of use of violence or that purpose. If some one does that it is against the Divine injunction. It is zulm.

 

There is much misunderstanding about inter-connection between Islam and violence which needs o be clarified here since we are dealing with the question of Islamic ethic here. Islam does not approve of violence except in certain extra-ordinary circumstances. The word Islam has been derived from the root s.l.m. Which means to escape danger, to be free from fault, to deliver or hand over, to commit oneself to the will of God, to lay down arms, to establish peace. Thus the best meaning of the word Islam will be to establish or promote peace in harmony with the Will of Allah. Thus a Muslim is not a true Muslim if he commits acts of violence either for spread of Islam or for purposes of achieving power be it in the name of Islam. His primary duty is to establish peace so that justice prevails and humanity prospers. The Prophet has also said that the best form of jihad is to say truth in the face of a tyrant ruler. Tyranny could be both physical and psychological.

 

The Qur'an says that no human life can be taken except in keeping with law. Thus we find in the Qur'an that "whoever kills a person, unless it be for manslaughter or for mischief in the land, it is as though he had killed entire humanity. And whoever saves a life, it is as though he had saved lives of all men." (5:32) The Qur'an, it will be seen is against violence against humanity. It could be resorted to only for a just cause that too after great deliberation and if all other doors are closed. It is true the Qur'an has permitted retaliatory violence (for qisas). But the Qur'anic statements should also be seen at various levels. At the level of the Arabian society, with its customs, norms and traditions, permitting qisas (retaliatory violence) was necessary. The Qur'an had to deal with a given society. But at the higher moral level retaliation is not a good moral practice. It may be necessary in a society which is not highly morally developed. But in a morally developed society the virtue of pardon is he highest virtue. There is great moral worth in the act of pardon. One of Allah's attributes is that He pardons. He is Ghaffar i.e. He is forgiver. Forgiving is the great moral virtue. Retaliation may be human but forgiving is divine. Retaliation amounts to giving vent to ones anger but forgiving amounts to suppressing ones rage and suppressing ones anger or rage is described as great virtue by the Qur'an. Those who suppress their anger are called kazim al-ghayz. On moral level the Qur'an deals with this issue in the verse 3:133. The verse reads, "Those who spend in ease as well as in adversity and those who restrain (their) anger and pardon men. And Allah loves doers of good (to others).

 

This verse (3:133) deals with the moral aspect whereas the verse dealing with the question of qisas deals with the prevailing practice. The Qur'an's intention is not to perpetuate the practice of retaliation but to build a human character on the basis of restraining anger and forgiving. To absolutise the verse on retaliation and to maintain that it is the ultimate divine will is to do injury to the spirit of the Qur'an which is to cultivate higher morality among human beings. It is the verse 3:133 which represents this higher morality. This is further reinforced by Allah's own attributes of being Merciful and Compassionate on the one hand, and repeated assertion by the Qur'an of the concept of ihsan (doing good to others). Thus it will be seen that the Islamic scripture does not morally approve even retaliatory violence which has at least some justification.

 

Thus the question of violence has to be dealt with great caution as far as the Islamic tradition is concerned. At the level of the value Qur'an upholds non-violence and exhorts Muslims to use wisdom and benevolence (hikmah and ihsan) while dealing with others. Whatever violence has taken place in the Islamic history it is Muslims and the then Arab society and their norms that could be held responsible than the teachings of the Qur'an. It is highly necessary to make this distinction in order to properly understand the essence of the Islamic ethic. Certain concessions to the situation should not be mixed up with the transcendental ethical norms given by the Qur'an. In this connection it should also be borne in mind that the Qur'an's repeated advocacy to fight (qatilu) is not to give permanence to violence or the glorify it but in the situation the Qur'an was dealing with, there was absolutely no other alternative but to fight. Inter tribal wars went on for years. Violence, in other words, was very much in the air. Also, there were powerful vested interests who were out to destroy Islam in its infancy and to eliminate the Prophet physically. Any moral discourse would not have influenced such people. The only alternative was to first defeat or subdue such elements and then to build new moral human from out of the believers. It was very difficult task indeed.

 

If there has been blood shed, and there has been, in the history of Islam the problem lies with the type of the society rather than the quality of the religious teachings. Most of us read into religion what suits our interests. In other words we often instrumentalise religion for our own purposes. There is abundant proof in history if we care to examine it carefully. Buddhism, Jainism and Christianity laid great deal of stress on compassion, non-violence and love and yet these religions put together could not build a society based on these values. Society still is full of violence, conflict and clash of interests. However, there is one more aspect we have to deal with to clear Islam of the charge that it promotes violence. It can be said that the Buddhist, Jain or the Christian scriptures do not permit or talk of violence where as the Islamic scripture does. But here one has to keep in mind the historical and social situation those scriptures were dealing with and the Islamic scripture was called upon to deal with.

 

Here one has to refer to the Meccan context also. In Meccan verses there is absolutely no mention of meeting violence with violence. Therefore some of the religious thinkers like Mehmoud Mohammad Taha of Sudan have laid emphasis on the Meccan Islam. The Muslims were a persecuted minority in Mecca and they bore with great patience all the persecution let loose on them. Islam in Mecca was a great spiritual force. Those who lay emphasis on Meccan Islam would argue that had Muslims not migrated to Madina Islam would have remained a passive spiritual force like Buddhism or Christianity. There is great deal of truth in this argument. But there are some problems, if not flaws, in it. Firstly, even in Meccan stage Islam was not a religion of individual salvation. Right from beginning Islam laid great emphasis on building community. The concept of ummah was a collective concept. The concept of the community was always at the heart of the Islamic movement. In tribal society in which Islam arose in Mecca, individual is always subordinate to the collectivity. If Islam had laid emphasis on individual spiritual salvation the Meccan tribal lords would have hardly bothered to oppose it.

 

However, Islam had a social agenda. It aimed at reforming not only the individual but also the whole society. It knew that the roots of exploitation and oppression lay in social structure, not only in individual avarice. So it aimed at transforming the society along with the individual. If the Meccan verses are examined carefully the transformatory agenda of Islam becomes very clear. It forcefully attacks accumulation of wealth and exhorts the believers to spend their wealth on the poor, needy and orphans and widows. The rich of Mecca were neglecting them. This the Islamic agenda even at the Meccan stage was to set up a society which was based on socio-economic justice. Look at this powerful denunciation of accumulation of wealth in one of the Meccan chapters (104):

 

1 Woe to every slanderer, defamer!

2 Who amasses wealth and counts it –

3 He thinks that his wealth will make him abide.

4 Nay, he will certainly be hurled into the crushing disaster;

5 And what will make thee realise what the crushing disaster is?

6 It is the Fire kindled by Allah,

7 Which rises over the hearts.

8 Surely it is closed on them,

9 In extended columns.

 

More such chapters and verses could be cited from the Meccan verses. Thus it becomes clear that Islam was attacking the very roots of social and economic exploitation and trying to lay foundation for a just society. The Meccan lords were, therefore, determined to throw out such a movement lock, stock and barrel. They, therefore, severely persecuted Muslims and forced them to migrate. When the Prophet migrated to Madina he seriously busied himself in laying the foundation of a just society. In doing so he became threat not only to the Jews of Madina whom he had given full religious freedom in his covenant with them (known as Mithaq-e-Madina) but also continued to remain a threat for the Meccan vested interests. The Meccan vested interests were determined to thwart any attempt to set up a just society even in Medina as successful experiment in Madina could pose serious challenge to their own interests. They were lording over an exploitative system. Thus they went in full force and attacked Madina . The Prophet was again faced with a violent situation and had to defend himself and urge his followers to fight for defence of Madina and for defence of Islam. The Jews and hypocrites betrayed him and thus he had to face internal strife also. He had to mobilise forces to fight the Jews with whom he had no religious quarrel. The Jews, who otherwise free to practice their own religion, felt threatened that they could no longer dominate the Madinese market. The migrants from Mecca too were expert traders and were now posing challenge to the dominance of the Jews.

 

The Prophet of Islam had hardly any choice. In an attempt to set up a just society based on high ethical standards, integrity of character and spiritual values he had to take on most powerful vested interests out to rack his movement. Thus violence appears in the history of Islam not out of choice but out of compulsion. It is certainly not prescriptive violence but imposed one. Now as for the instances of Meccan model of Islam we do come across them in history, particularly in Sufi Islam. Sufi Islam is essentially build around the theory of individual salvation. A Sufi saint is engaged more in individual character building and spiritual practices and hence his whole emphasis on 'ibadat (prayers). The Prophet of Islam, it is interesting to note, was a perfect synthesis of a Sufi and an activist engaged in building a just society. That is why the Sufis consider the Holy Prophet as their Master from whom they derive their spiritual practices. But in later history of Islam we find either the Sufis or the activists or the 'Ulama (theologians) who theorised on the basis of the Qur'an and available reports of the Prophet's sayings and practices. The problem with the 'Ulama was that they froze Islam in its first century and lost track of its fundamental vision. Thus they could not keep pace with the changing society or new challenges emerging from different historical situations. The Prophet combined in himself both the Meccan and the Medinese Islam and thus he became a perfect model to follow. However, for those who came after him the Meccan Islam lost all relevance and they became more involved with building up a political community. The overemphasis in history of Islam on building up a political community created several problems and Islam became politicised rather than spiritualised. Hence its critics usually maintain that Islam is integrally associated with power.

 

However, it would be a serious mistake to associate Islam with power. Islam, like any other religion, has strong spiritual and ethical base. Its basic emphasis on ethical foundations of individual action cannot be ignored. The 'ibadat (which include praying, fasting, giving alms and performing hajj – pilgrimage - ) are very central to Islam. It is these 'ibadat which, according to the Qur'an, lead to inner peace (sakinat al-qalb). Thus the Qur'an says "He it is who sent down inner peace into the hearts of the believers that they might add faith to their faith." (48:4). Inner peace and spiritual solace are the very foundation stones of an ethical conduct.

 

Here we would like to point out that compassion like in Buddhism, is very central to Islam also. The key word for this is rehmah. This word has been derived from its root r.h.m. which in its root meaning means womb of the mother. And one of the ethical concept of Islam is sila-i-rahmi i.e. maintaining close relationship with those connected with ones mother's womb i.e. close relatives. Since mother nurtures and sustains life, she is more compassionate than man. Thus compassion and mother's womb are derived from the same root in Arabic. God is most compassionate (arham al-rahimin) as he is the creator and sustainer of all life. His Mercy and Compassion envelop everything in this universe (7:156). Thus a Muslim who worships Allah has to display compassion by all his actions. True worship does not mean merely physically bowing down before Allah. It means bowing down to His attributes and to imbibe these attributes in ones life. Thus a true Muslim is compassionate to all forms of life and he is committed to remove suffering from this earth. In other words a Muslim is quite sensitive to sufferings of all living beings and he should never be a cause of suffering of others. The Prophet is reported to have said that a good Muslim is one at whose hands others are safe.

 

The Islamic prayers ('ibadat) sensitivise Muslims to others suffering. The salat makes him sensitive to equality of all human beings since all Muslims, irrespective of their social status have to stand in one line to pray; fasting during the month of Ramadan make s him sensitive to others hunger and thirst and zakah makes him conscious of others financial needs. And we need these prime virtues in human beings to make them righteous and conscious of their duties to other human beings. The Qur'an also lays great stress on spiritual freedom and accepts different ways of worship. Spiritual freedom is very basis of a free human person responsible to himself as well as to whole humanity.

[JustCause]

I thought I should share this interesting article by the late Pakistani physicist and Noble Laureate Prof. Abdus Salam.

Part I

 

1. The Holy Quran and Science

 

Let me say at the outset that I am both a believer as well as a practising Muslim. I am a Muslim because I believe in the spiritual message of the Holy Quran. As a scientist, the Quran speaks to me in that it emphasises reflection on the Laws of Nature, with examples drawn from cosmology, physics, biology and medicine, as signs for all men. Thus

 

"Can they not look up to the clouds, how they are created; and to the Heaven how it is upraised; and the mountains how they are rooted, and to the earth how it is outspread ?" (88: 17)

 

and again,

 

"Verily in the creation of the heavens and of the earth, and in the alternation of the night and of the day, are there signs for men of understanding. " (3: 189-190)

 

Seven hundred and fifty verses of the Quran -(almost one eighth of the Book) -"exhort believers to study Nature, to reflect, to make the best use of reason in their search for the ultimate and to make the acquiring of knowledge and scientific comprehension part of the community 's life". The Holy Prophet of Islam (Peace be on him) emphasised that the quest for knowledge and sciences is obligatory upon every Muslim, man and woman.

 

This is the first premise on scientific knowledge with which any fundamentalist thinking in Islam must begin. Add to this the second premise - eloquently reinforced by Maurice Bucaille in his essay on "The Bible, the Quran and Science". There is not a single verse in the Quran where natural phenomena are described and which contradicts what we know for certain from our discoveries in sciences.

 

Add to this the third premise: in Islamic history there has been no incident like that of Galileo. Persecution, excommunication (takfeer), which unfortunately continues even today over doctrinal differences, but not, to my knowledge, directly for scientific beliefs. [1]

 

2. Modern Science, A Greco- Islamic Legacy

 

How seriously did the early Muslims take these injunctions in the Holy Quran and of the Holy Prophet?

 

Barely a hundred years after the Prophet's death, the Muslims had made it their task to master the then-known sciences. Founding institutes of advanced study (Bait-ul-Hikmas), they acquired an absolute ascendancy in the sciences that lasted for the next 350 years.

 

An aspect of reverence for the sciences in Islam was the patronage they enjoyed in the Islamic Commonwealth. To paraphrase what H.A.R. Gibb has written in the context of literature: "To a greater extent than elsewhere, the flowering of the sciences in Islam was conditional. ..on the liberality and patronage of those in high positions. So long as, in one capital or another, princes and ministers found pleasure, profit or reputation in patronising the sciences, the torch was kept burning".

 

The Golden Age of Science in Islam was doubtless the Age around the year 1000 CE, the Age of Ibn-i-Sina (Avicenna), the last of the mediaevalists, and of his contemporaries, the first of the moderns, Ibn-al-Haitham and Al Biruni.

 

Ibn-al-Haitham (A1hazen, 965-1039 CE) was one of the greatest physicists of all time. He made experimental contributions of the highest order in optics. He "enunciated that a ray of light, in passing through a medium, takes the path which is tlie easier and 'quicker'. [2] In this he was anticipating Fermat's Principle of Least Time by many centuries.

 

He enunciated the law of inertia, later to become Newton's first law of motion. Part V of Roger Bacon's "Opus Majus " is practically an annotation to Ibn al Haitham's Optics. [3]

 

Al Biruni (973 -1048 CE), Ibn-i-Sina's second illustrious contemporary, worked in today's Afghanistan. He was an empirical scientist like Ibn-al-Haitham; as modern and as unmediaeval in outlook as Galileo, six centuries later .

 

There is no question that western science is a Greco-Islamic legacy. However, it is commonly alleged that Islamic Science was a derived science, that Muslim scientists followed the Greek theoretical tradition blindly and added nothing to the scientific method.

 

This statement is false. Listen to this assessment of Aristotle by Al Biruni:

 

"The trouble with most people is their extravagance in respect of Aristotle's opinions, they believe that there is no possibility of mistakes in his views, though they know that he was only theorising to the best of his capacity".

 

Or Al Biruni on mediaeval superstition:

 

"People say that on the 6th {of January) there is an hour during which all salt water of the earth gets sweet. Since all the qualities occurring in the water depend exclusively upon the nature of the soil. ..these qualities are of a stable nature. ..Therefore this statement. ..is entirely unfounded. Continual and leisurely experimentation will show to anyone the futility of this assertion".

 

And finally, Al Biruni on geology, with this insistence on observation:

 

". ..But if you see the soil of India with your own eyes and meditate on its nature, if you consider the rounded stones found in earth however deeply you dig, stones that are huge near the mountains and where the rivers have a violent current: stones that are of smaller size at a greater distance from the mountains and where the streams flow more slowly: stones that appear pulverised in the shape of sand where the streams begin to stagnate near their mouths and near the sea -if you consider all this you can scarcely help thinking that India was once a sea, which by degrees has been filled up by the alluvium o f the streams".

 

In Briffault's words: [3] "The Greeks systematised, generalised, and theorised, but the patient ways of detailed and prolonged observation and experimental inquiry were altogether alien to the Greek temperament. ..What we call science arose as a result of new methods of experiment, observation, and measurement, which were introduced into Europe by the Arabs. ..(Modern) science is the most momentous contribution of the Islamic civilisation ...".

 

These thoughts are echoed by George Sarton, the great historian of science: "The main, as well as the least obvious, achievement of the Middle Ages was the creation of the experimental spirit and this was primarily due to the Muslims down to the 12th century".

 

One of the tragedies of history is that this dawning of the modern spirit in sciences was interrupted; it did not lead to a permanent change of direction in scientific methodology .Barely a hundred years after Al Biruni and lbn-al-Haitham worked, creation of high science in Islam effectively came to a halt. Mankind had to wait 500 years before the same level of maturity and the same insistence on observation and experimentation was reached once again with Tycho Brahe, Galileo and their contemporaries.

 

3. The Decline of Sciences in Islam

 

Why did creative science die out in Islamic civilisation? This decline, which began around 1100 CE, was nearly complete two hundred and fifty years later .

 

No one knows for certain why this happened. There were indeed external causes, like the devastation caused by the Mongol invasion. In my view however, the demise of living science within the Islamic commonwealth had started much earlier. It was due much more to internal causes -firstly, the inward-turning and the isolation of our scientific enterprise and secondly -and in the main -of active discouragement to innovation (taqlid). The later parts of the eleventh and early twelfth centuries in Islam (when this decline began) were periods of intense politically-motivated, sectarian, and religious strife. Even though a man like Imam Ghazali, writing around 1100 CE, could say "A grievous crime indeed against religion has been committed by a man who imagines that Islam is defended by the denial of the mathematical sciences, seeing that there is nothing in these sciences opposed to the truth of religion", the temper of the age had turned away from creative science, either to Sufism with its other worldliness or to a rigid orthodoxy with a lack of tolerance (taqlid) for innovation (ijtihad-), in all fields of learning - including the sciences.

 

Does this situation persist today? Are we encouraging scientific research and inquiry?

 

Of the major civilisations on this planet, science is the weakest in the Islamic Commonwealth. Unfortunately, some of us Muslims believe that while technology is basically neutral, and that its excesses can be tempered through an adherence to the moral precepts of Islam, science -on the contrary - is value-loaded. It is believed that modern science must lead to "rationalism", and eventually apostacy; that scientifically trained men among us will "deny the metaphysical presuppositions of our culture".

 

Leaving aside the fact that high technology can not flourish without high science and also leaving aside the insult to the "presuppositions of our culture" for implied fragility, I believe that such an attitude towards science is a legacy of the battles of yesterday when the so-called "rational philosophers", with their irrational and dogmatic belief in the cosmological doctrines they had inherited from Aristotle found difficulties in reconciling these with their faith.

 

One must remind oneself that such battles were waged even more fiercely among the Christian schoolmen of the Middle Ages. The problems which concerned the schoolmen were mainly problems of cosmology and metaphysics: "Is the world located in an immobile place; Does God move the primum mobile directly and actively as an efficient cause, or only as a final or ultimate cause? Are all the heavens moved by one mover or several? Do celestial movers experience exhaustion or fatigue?" When Galileo tried, first to classify those among the problems, which legitimately belonged to the domain of physics, and then to find answers only to those through physical experimentation, he was persecuted.

 

This persecution damaged the progress of science in Italy at least till the eighteenth century. Ideological restitution for this however, is being made now, three hundred and fifty years later. At a special ceremony in the Vatican on 9 May 1983, His Holiness the Pope John Paul II, declared:

 

"The Church's experience, during the Galileo affair and after it, has led to a more mature attitude. ..The Church herself learns by experience and reflection and she now understands better the meaning that must be given to freedom of research. ..It is through research that man attains to Truth. ..This is why the Church is convinced that there can be no real contradiction between science and faith. ..(However ), it is only through humble and assiduous study that (the Church) learns to dissociate the essential of the faith from the systems of a given age".

 

4. The Limitations of Science

 

In the remarks I have quoted, the Pope stressed the maturity which the Church had reached in dealing with science; he could equally have emphasised the converse -the recognition by the scientists from Galileo's times onwards, of the limitations of their disciplines -the recognition that there are questions which are beyond the ken of present or even future sciences and that "Science has achieved its success by restricting itself to a certain type of inquiry". And even in this restricted area the scientist of today knows when and where he is speculating; he would claim no finality for the associated modes of thought. In physics, this happened twice in the beginning of this century, first with the discovery of relativity of time and space, and secondly with quantum theory. It could happen again.

 

Take Einstein's discovery of relativity of time. It appears incredible that the length of a time interval -the age one lives -depends on one's speed -that the faster we move the longer we appear to live to someone who is not moving with us. And this is not a figment of one's fancy. Come to the particle physics laboratories of CERN at Geneva which produce short-lived particles like muons, and make a record of the intervals of time which elapse before muons of different speeds decay into electrons and neutrinos. The faster muons take longer to die, the slower ones die early. Incredible but true.

 

Einstein's ideas on time and space brought about a revolution in the physicist's thinking. We had to abandon our earlier modes of thought in physics. In this context, it always surprises me that the professional philosopher who in the nineteenth century and earlier used to consider space and time as his special preserve has somehow failed to erect any philosophical systems based on Einstein's notions so far!

 

The second and potentially the more explosive revolution in thought came in 1926 with Heisenberg's discovery of limitation on our knowledge. Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle affirms that while experiments can be made to discover where the electron is, these experiments will then destroy any possibility of finding simultaneously whether the electron is moving and if so at what speed. There is an inherent limitation fu our knowledge, which appears to have been decreed "il:' the nature of things". I shudder to think that what might have happened to Heisenberg if he was born in the Middle Ages -just what theological battles might have raged on the question whether there was a like limitation on the knowledge possessed by God.

 

As it was, battles were fought, but within the twentieth century physics community. Heisenberg's revolutionary thinking -supported by all known experiments -has not been accepted by all physicists. The most illustrious physicist of all times, Einstein, spent the best part of his life trying to find flaws in Heisenberg 's arguments. He could not gainsay the experimental evidence -but hope was entertained that such evidence may perhaps be explained within a different theoretical framework. Such framework has not been found; but no one -at least no physicist -would say that this is the end;

 

5. Faith and Science

 

But is the science of today really on a collision course with metaphysical thinking? Again the problem -if any -is not peculiar to Islam; the problem is one of science and faith in general. Can science and faith at the least, live together in "harmonious complementarity"? Let us consider some relevant examples of modern scientific thinking.

 

My first example concerns the metaphysical doctrine of creation from nothing. Today a growing number of cosmologists believe that the most likely value for the density of matter and energy in the Universe is such that the "mass" of the Universe adds up to zero, precisely. If the mass of the Universe is indeed zero -and this is an empirically determinable quantity -the Universe shares with the vacuum state the property of masslessness. A bold extrapolation, made ten years ago, then treated the Universe as a quantum fluctuation of the vacuum -of the state of nothingness in a space and time created ex nihilo ...What distinguishes physics from metaphysics however is that by measuring the density of matter in the Universe we shall know empirically whether the idea can be sustained in the physicist's sense. If it cannot be, we shall discard it.

 

My second example concerns the recent excitement in physics -which follows on our success in unifying and establishing the identity of two of the fundamental forces of Nature, the electric and the weak nuclear.

 

We are now considering the possibility that space-time may have ten dimensions. Within this context we hope to unify the electroweak force with the remaining of the two basic forces -the force of gravity and the strong nuclear force. Of the ten, four are the familiar dimensions of space and time. The curvature of these familiar space and time dimensions determines the size and life-span of our present Universe, according to Einstein's ideas. The curvature of the extra six dimensions one has newly postulated gives the electric and the nuclear charges we are familiar with.

 

But why don't we apprehend these extra dimensions directly? Why only indirectly through the existence of the electric and the nuclear charges?

 

Why the difference between the four familiar space-time dimensions and, the extra internal dimensions which, according to our present thinking, have sizes no larger than 10-33 cms?

 

At present, we make this plausible by postulating a self-consistency principle. The theory works if and only if the number of extra dimensions is six. However, there will be subtle physical consequences; for example remnants, like the recently discovered three degree black-body radiation which fills the Universe and which we know was a remnant of an early era in the evolution of the Universe. We shall search for these signs. If we do not find them, we shall abandon the idea.

 

Creation from nothing, extra dimensions - strange topics, for late twentieth century physics - which appear no different from the metaphysical preoccupations of earlier times. But so far as science is concerned, mark the provisional nature of the conceptual edifice, the insistence on empirical verification at each stage and the concept of driving self-consistency.a

 

For the agnostic, self -consistency (if successful) may connote irrelevance of a deity:

 

Faman yudlilhu fala hadiya lahu.

"Whomsoever Allah causes to err, there is no guide for him."

[The Qur'an/7/al-Araf/186]

 

for the believer, it is part of the Lord's design -its profundity, in the areas it illuminates, only enhances his reverence for the beauty of the design itself.

 

As I said before, personally for me, my own faith was predicated by the timeless spiritual message of Islam, on matters on which physics is silent, and will remain so. It was given meaning to by the very first verse of the Holy Quran after the Opening:

 

"This is the Book,

Wherein there is no doubt,

A guidance to the God-fearing,

Who believe in the Unseen".

 

"The Unseen " -"Beyond the reach of human ken" - "The Unknowable" -the original Arabic words are

 

yu'minuna bil ghaib

[who] believe in the unseen [The Qur'an/2/al-Baqara/3]

[Positive]

I ask myself: does the word IMPOSSIBLE mean what it implies, ? I mean : is there something which is impossible ? Many times I conclude that Life for us in here and now is about problem solving. Therefore it has to be save to say: everything is POSSIBLE. One/people can accept, in a limited time, the notion that there are things in Life that are impossible but by choosing such a paradigm one closes his/her eyes to prevailent possiblities and consequently the impossiblity of the things or actions endures for him/her untill there comes someone with a light who breaks the spell of the darkness.

 

The above assertions may sound philosophic but they deserve to be contemplated with. I would like to share with you the following article which may shed light on the subject. The article also sheds light on the hurdles which stand on the way for the one who decides to enlighten the others !

 

 

The Royal Institution is Not Amused

 

Few people visit the Royal Institution, in London's Albemarle Street, for amusement. There are not many laughs at Britain's second oldest scientific institution, founded in 1799, where Sir Humphry Davy demonstrated his discovery of the elements sodium and potassium and where Michael Faraday discovered electromagnetic induction. It's true there have been some lighter moments in the famous circular lecture theatre, especially since Sir William Bragg introduced Christmas Lectures for Children in the 1920s. But, on the whole, this is stuffed shirt territory.

 

One night in 1973 the stuffed shirts got a shock from which they have still not recovered. It was an experience at which, like Queen Victoria, they were not amused. Indeed it was so unamusing for them that it is the only occasion in the Royal Institution's two hundred year history that it has failed to publish a proceedings of a major lecture, or 'evening discourse'. The cause of this unique case of scientific censorship was the maverick professor of electrical engineering of Imperial College, London, Eric Laithwaite.

 

Laithwaite was no stranger to controversy even before his shadow fell across so distinguished an institutional threshold. In the 1960s, Laithwaite invented the linear electric motor, a device that can power a passenger train. In the 1970s, he and his colleagues combined the linear motor with the latest hovercraft technology to create a British experimental high speed train. This was a highly novel, but perfectly orthodox technology.

 

The advantages of such a tracked hovercraft are obvious to anyone who sees a hover-rail train running along,suspended in the air above the track -- it is quiet, has no moving parts to wear out and is practically maintenance-free. The significance of this last point quickly becomes clear when you learn that more than 80 per cent of the annual running costs of any railway system is spent on maintenance of track and rolling stock because of daily wear.

 

The British government at first invested in the development of his device but later, after a series of budget cuts, pulled out pleading the need for economy. Laithwaite, a blunt-speaking Lancashire man who did not shrink from speaking unpopular truths, told the Government and its scientific bureaucrats the mistake they were making in no uncertain terms, but its decision to cancel was unchanged.

 

Laithwaite refused to be beaten and took his invention one step further. He designed an even better kind of hover train -- one in which his linear motor was levitated by electromagnetism giving a rapid transit system that not only provides quiet, efficient magnetic suspension over a maintenance-free track, but which generates the electricity to power the magnetic lift of the track from the movement of the train.

 

Speaking in the early 1970s, Laithwaite said of his new 'Maglev' system, 'We've designed a motor to propel [the train] that gives you the lift and guidance for nothing -- literally for nothing: for no additional equipment and no additional power input. This is beyond my wildest dreams -- that I should ever see that sort of thing.'

 

Laithwaite's Maglev design was not quite perpetual motion, but certainly sounded enough like something-for-nothing to make the scientific establishment turn its nose up in suspicion. But this project, too, was cancelled by the government and further development was halted. Today, Maglev trains are being built in Germany and Japan but Britain continues to spend 80 per cent of its railway budget on maintenance of conventional transport systems -- several hundred millions every year.

 

With the Maglev project cancelled, the technology Laithwaite had devoted the previous twenty years to developing was put in mothballs. The object of his entire career for decades disappeared overnight. By an extraordinary chance at just the same time that the Maglev project was cancelled, Laithwaite received an intriguing telephone call out of the blue from an amateur inventor, Alex Jones.

 

Jones claimed to have a remarkable new invention to demonstrate which he had tried to interest scientists and engineers in, so far without success. Would Laitwaite like to take a look at it? While others had dismissed Jones as a crank, Laithwaite, now with time on his hands, invited him to come to Imperial College.

 

When Jones arrived in the laboratory he had a strange-looking contraption to show. It was a simple wooden frame on wheels that could be pushed backwards and forwards on the bench top, like a child's trolley. But suspended from the front of the frame was a heavy metal object that could swing from side to side like a pendulum. The metal object, Jones explained, was a gyroscope.

 

As Laithwaite looked on in puzzled amazement, Jones started the gyroscope spinning and then allowed it to swing from side to side. The wooden box moved along the bench top on its wheels although there was no drive to the wheels and no external thrust of any kind -- something that shouldn't happen according to the laws of physics.

 

'When Alex switched his machine on,' recalled Laithwaite, 'it was quite disturbing to one's upbringing. The gyroscope appeared to be producing a force without a reaction. I thought I'd seen something that was impossible.'

 

'Like everyone else I was brought up on Newton's laws of motion, and the third law says that for every action there's an equal and opposite reaction, therefore you cannot propel a body outside its own dimensions. This thing apparently did.'

 

Laithwaite started some gyroscope experiments of his own, making large spinning tops with most of the mass in the rim of the wheel, and he found that, 'these very definitely did something that seemed impossible.'

 

It was at this critical point in his career that he was invited by Sir George Porter, president of the august Royal Institution, to deliver a Friday Evening Discourse.

 

In retrospect it might seem to be rather risky for Sir George to have invited a blunt-speaking and controversial figure to address the Institution. But, until then, Laithwaite's clashes with the government and scientific bureaucrats over the development of his Maglev train had been a conflict over money and over innovation: not over scientific principles. He had fought the same kind of battle as most senior scientists in Britain for scarce resources.

 

He may have been the sort of outspoken individualist who finds himself in the headlines, but he was still a distinguished professional scientist, still a member of the club.

 

It was against this background that the Royal Institution invited him to deliver the lecture. But the Friday Evening Discourse is no ordinary lecture. It is a black tie affair, preceded by dinner amidst the polished silver and mahogany of the Institution's elegant Georgian dining room, under the intimidating gaze of portraits of the giants of science from the eighteenth and nineteenth century, staring down from the panelled walls.

 

When you are invited to be thus feted by your fellow members of the Royal Institution and to deliver a Discourse from the spot where Faraday and Davy stood, it is usually the prelude to collecting the rewards of a lifetime of distinguished public service: Fellowship of the Royal Society; Gold Medals; perhaps even a Knighthood. In keeping with such a conservative occasion, those invited to speak generally choose some worthy topic on which to discourse -- the future of science, perhaps, or the glorious achievements of the past.

 

But Laithwaite chose not to discourse on some worthy, painless topic but instead to demonstrate to the assembled bigwigs that Newton's laws of motion -- the very cornerstone of physics and the primary article of faith of all the distinguished names gathered in that room -- were in doubt.

 

Standing in the circular well of the Institution's lecture theatre, Laithwaite showed his audience a large gyroscope he had constructed -- an apparatus resembling a motorcycle wheel on the end of a three foot pole (which, is precisely what it was). The wheel could be spun up to high speed on a low-friction bearing driven by a small but powerful electrical motor.

 

Laithwaite first demonstrated that the apparatus was very heavy -- in fact it weighed more than 50 pounds. It took all his strength and both hands to raise the pole with its wheel much above waist level. When he started to rotate the wheel at high speed, however, the apparatus suddenly became so light that he could raise it easily over his head with just one hand and with no obvious sign of effort.

 

What on earth was going on? Heavy objects cannot suddenly become lighter just because they are rotating, can they? Such a mass can only be propelled aloft if it is subjected to an external force or if it expels mass, in a rocket engine for example. Had Laithwaite taken to conjuring tricks? Were there concealed strings? Confederates in trapdoors?

 

If Laithwaite expected gasps of admiration or surprise, he was disappointed. The audience was stunned into silence by his demonstration. When he went on to explain that Newton's laws of motion were apparently being violated by this demonstration, the involuntary hush turned to frosty silence.

 

'I was very excited about it,' he recalled, 'because I knew I had something to show them that was startling. And I did it rather in the spirit of "come and see what I've discovered -- come and share this with me." It was only afterwards that I realised no-one wanted to share it with me. The reaction was "the man's obviously a lunatic". "There must be some trick" was what people said.'

 

'I was simply trying to tell them, "look, here's something very unusual that's worth investigating. I hope I've got sufficient reputation in electrical engineering not to be written off as a crank. So when I tell you this, I hope you'll listen." But they didn't want to.'

 

'After the Royal Institution lecture all hell broke loose, primarily as a result of an article in the New Scientist, followed up by articles in the daily press with headlines such as "Laithwaite defies Newton". The press is always excited by the possibility of an anti-gravity machine, because of space ships and science fiction, and the minute you say you can make something rise against gravity, then you've "made an antigravity machine". And then the flood gates are unleashed on you especially from the establishment. You've brought science into disrepute or you're apparently trying to because you've done something that is against the run of the tide.'

 

The resounding silence of his audience continued long after that fateful evening. There was to be no Fellowship of the Royal Society, no gold medal, no 'Arise, Sir Eric'. And, for the first time in two hundred years, there was to be no published 'proceedings' recording Laithwaite's astonishing lecture. In an unprecedented act of academic Stalinism, the Royal Institution simply banished the memory of Professor Laithwaite, his gyroscopes that became lighter, his lecture, even his existence.

 

Newton's Laws were restored to their sacrosanct position on the altar of science. Laithwaite was a non-person, and all was right with the world once more.

 

For the next twenty years, Laithwaite carried on investigating the anomalous behaviour of gyroscopes in the laboratory; at first in Imperial College and later, after his retirement, wherever he could find a sympathetic institution to provide bench space and laboratory apparatus.

 

By the mid-1980 -- what he called 'the most depressing time' -- Laithwaite had conducted enough empirical research to demonstrate that the skeptics were right when they said that there were no forces to be had from gyroscopes.

 

'The mathematics said there were no forces and that was correct', Laithwaite recalled. 'The thing that wouldn't go away was: can I lift a 50 pound weight with one hand or can't I? Of all the critics that I showed lifting the big wheel, none of them ever tried to explain it to me. So I decided I had to follow Faraday's example and do the experiments.'

 

After retiring from Imperial College, laithwaite began a long series of detailed experiments. Sussex University offered him a laboratory and he formed a partnership with fellow engineer and inventor, Bill Dawson, who also funded the research. Laithwaite and Dawson spent three years from 1991 to 1994, investigating in detail the strange phenomena that had unnerved the Royal Institution.

 

'The first thing I wanted to find out was how I could lift a 50 pound wheel in one hand. So we set out to try to reproduce this as a hands-off experiment. Then we tackled the problem of lack of centrifugal force and the experiments were telling us that there was less centrifugal force than there should be. Meanwhile I started to do the theory. We devised more and more sophisticated experiments until, not long ago, we cracked it.'

 

The real breakthrough came, said Laithwaite, when they realised that a precessing gyroscope could move mass through space. 'The spinning top showed us that all the time, but we couldn't see it. If the gyroscope does not produce the full amount of centrifugal force on its pivot in the centre then indeed you have produced mass transfer.'

 

'It became more exciting than ever now because I could explain the unexplainable. Gyroscopes became absolutely in accordance with Newton's laws. We were now not challenging any sacred laws at all. We were sticking strictly to the rules that everyone would approve of, but getting the same result -- a force through space without a rocket.'

 

The research of Laithwaite and Dawson has now borne practical fruit. Their commercial company, Gyron, filed a world patent for a reactionless drive -- a device that most orthodox scientists say is impossible.

 

Sadly Eric Laithwaite died in 1997. His device remains in prototype form, comparable perhaps to the Wright Brother's first aircraft or Gottlieb Daimler's first automobile.

 

Shortly before his death, Laithwaite spoke philosophically about the long experimental road he had trudged virtually alone.

 

Why should people reject the idea of something new?' he asked. 'Well, of course, they always have. If you go back to Galileo, they were going to put him to death for not saying the earth was the centre of the universe. I'm reminded of something that Mark Twain once said; 'a crank is a crank only until he's been proved correct.'

 

'So now I myself have demonstrated that I've been correct all along. Anyone seeing the experiments would know at once, if they knew their physics, that I've done what I said I could do, and that I'm no longer a heretic.'

 

Laithwaite's reactionless drive is an extraordinary machine; a machine that orthodox science said could never be built and would never work. But though it may well eventually prove of great value -- perhaps even providing an anti-gravity lifting device -- it is a net consumer of energy, just like Griggs's Hydrosonic pump. There is no evidence at present that it is an over-unity device -- merely a novel means of propulsion that proves there are more things in heaven and earth than are currently dreamed of by scientific rationalism.

 

But there are other Laithwaites, and there are other engines: some even more extraordinary than the reactionless drive.

 

 

 

 

 

Alternative Science Website

http://www.AlternativeScience.Com

[Baashi]

Many thanks Positive, postman, and Feynman for the interesting posts.

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

 

The Hudaibia Approach

5/9/2004 - Political - Article Ref: IV0404-2291

Number of comments: 3

Opinion Summary: Agree:2 Disagree:0 Neutral:1

By: S. A. Abidi

Iviews* -

 

As a Muslim I agreed with my Spiritualist friend who was willing to offer whatever sacrifices were required for defending Islam. But I believe every Muslim must use his intellect and take into account the realities around him or her before taking any action. One must ensure that the ends as well as the means at his disposal meet the moral standards of Islam. For instance, it would be unthinkable for me to rob someone in order to buy a ticket for Hajj, or to attack a whole army with the help of two friends and getting killed without achieving anything. With such perceptions I found it difficult to share with my friend the perceptions of the dangers and the sacrifices that he carries with him.

 

My spiritual friend is well versed in theology, but has no clue of sociology and historiography that was founded by Ibne Khaldun who explained how societies succeed and fail. When he talks of knowledge, he is not referring to Algebra, which takes its name from the Arabic book Kitab aljabr wa al-muqabalah written by Al-Khwarizmi or for that matter Algorithms which is a highly developed mathematical concept worked out by the same Muslim Arab whose corrupted name it still bears. Yet the scholar was a product of a madrassah of 9th. Century Baghdad and this friend of mine graduated from a 21st. Century madrassah in Pakistan. He has not heard of these 1200 years of gems of knowledge that were borrowed by those nations who now rule the world, because the knowledge of religion has since been separated from the knowledge of the world around us, that was never the intention of Islam.

 

Perhaps his compartmentalized knowledge that excludes the realities of the changed world, is the cause of confusion in coping with the world that he hardly understands. No wonder he is frustrated in finding why has his society collapsed over him. A person with such a victimized perspective may buy or steal Klashnikoves in desperation to express his rage but may not be able to repair them when they malfunction. Such a person may aim guns at the enemy but may not know how to calculate the trajectory. In his frustration he is ready to lay down his life to bring back the glory of Muslims but he has no idea how it will come about.

 

Though his intentions of defending Islam are noble but his sacrifice of life may go to waste because the idea of defeating his perceived enemies with the destructive weapons that he borrows from them, is by itself self-defeating. It would have been a different story, had he chosen to borrow the instruments of construction from his adversaries to build his strength, like his adversaries did in the 15th. Century Europe.

 

First of all he must identify his true enemy that has put Islam in danger, which is his IGNORANCE of the technology of progress. That makes him an incomplete entity in the world community that is driven by knowledge. He must pick up the threads where he had left and make a run to join them with the present day realities, whatever it may take. It is not as formidable a task as it may look at first sight. He has sufficient means to educate himself and the sources of information are in plenty and faster than ever. All he needs is the will to overcome the obstacles in his way to recovery. This may however need sacrifices --- but a different kind of sacrifice.

 

He has to prevail upon the rulers who decide his destiny, not to misappropriate billions to keep in their personal accounts, but spend for educating the masses. It may cost them their power and treasures, but will make them more respectable and their nations more powerful. He has to join forces with his compatriots in other lands to bring about solidarity and to ensure cooperation in trade, industry and research that are the true sources of power of a people and only guarantee for peace. These efforts may no doubt put my friend in trouble. He may be put behind the bars, but such sacrifice of personal freedom will deliver freedom to Ummah in the long term. This may cost him even his life, but it will be a worthwhile sacrifice and will deliver what no suicide bomber has been able to achieve.

 

My spiritual friend asked me, how could he survive as a weakling, while the long process of change takes place. He does not have to go far looking for an answer. It is already spelt out in the great wisdom of the treaty of Mecca that can be called the "Hudaibiya Approach". When you do not have the wherewithal to prevail upon your adversary, there is no need to kill innocent people, which is against the teachings of Islam, or get killed yourself in vain. Use diplomacy --- simply make peace and persevere. This approach may be used to enhance the strength of your social and moral values and to re-structure your knowledge base, which will win you more friends and make your economy and defense capability stronger.

 

Those who are trapped in Wana, (Wana is located about 17 miles from the Afghan/Pakistan border on the eastern edge of a valley approximately 4,500 feet in elevation. In March 2004, Pakistan military carried out an operation in the region against suspected al Qaida and Taliban members) are sadly the victims of circumstances and their own miscalculations. Their clever friends made them believe that they were fighting a war against the Godless Communists and defending Islam. In fact they were sacrificing their lives in defense of Capitalism. When the truth was revealed and the friendship turned sour, they became the victims of the same Capitalism --- for Capitalism has no friends but the lust for wealth. Sadly, it is questionable whether these fighters did serve Islam then or are serving it now, despite their pious intentions. Valor may be a commendable quality, but watchfulness comes first. Not only should one know his enemy but should also be able to choose the battleground where he can win.

 

People who want to master their destiny must possess the KNOWLEDGE of how societies progress and grow from strength to strength in the fields of economy, science, technology, diplomacy and solidarity with friends, and how the greedy adventurers can be kept away. A deep faith in the essence of Islam should provide an anchor, which others may learn to emulate.

 

The author is an independent commentator based in Karachi, Pakistan

[Gediid]

I don't know whether this i is the right place to ask this question but I hope someone out there can answer it.

I have lived in the sub continent for a long time and have discovered that there are more Muslim sects out there than anywhere else in the world.Sects such as Deopandis,Ismaliyas, Ahmediyas etc which all have been labelled Bidcah(sp).One of the articles above has been written by a Professor ABDUS SALAM a Nobel Laureate in Physics but one who followed one of the many sects in the sub continent(cant remember which one tho)But now my question is as muslims can we quote such people in matters relating to Islam and Islamic theology?

[Baashi]

Gediid wrote:

"can we quote such people in matters relating to Islam and Islamic theology?"

 

NO. I'm assuming by "quote" you meant using their "fatwa" to prove a point or to validate an argument. Why would we quote them if we know for sure their thinking is not inline with the revealed Truth - Qura'an and Hadyu-al-nabi - as we know it. The intrepretation of the Islamic injunctions can be problematic for lay people who have to rely on the scholars for guidance. That's why it makes sense to stick with one school out of the many Islamic jurisprudence schools.

 

Just a thought...waa sidey ila tahay.

[Raxmah]

Distorted Image of Muslim Women

 

Naasira bint Ellison

 

Since the height of the feminist movement in the late 70's there has been a magnifying glass placed over the status of muslim women. Unfortunately, the magnifying glass that has been used is an unusual one. Unusual in the sense that it is very selective about which items it will magnify; other items it will distort to such a degree that they will no longer look familiar. I remember once reading in an "in depth" article about the lives of muslim women. This article "explained" that at any time a man can divorce his wife by simply stating "I divorce you, I divorce you, I divorce you". This article can lead anyone ignorant of the Islamic ruling regarding divorce to believe that in less than five seconds the woman is left with no husband and is left to care for herself (and possibly children) by any means necessary. The question that immediately popped up in my mind was, "Did the author innocently write that out of sincere ignorance or was it another of the many attempts to degrade the religion of Islam and its followers (muslims)?" It may be my own paranoia, but I tend to believe it was the latter of the two.

 

The truth of the matter is that Islam has the most humane and most just system of divorce that exists. Firstly, many options are taken and tried before coming to the decision of the divorce. If the man and woman decide that they can no longer live together successfully as a husband and wife, the husband (in most cases, not always) pronounces the divorce by saying "I divorce you". At this point the waiting period begins. The waiting period lasts for three menstrual cycles to assure the woman is not pregnant. This period allows the couple time to think about what they are doing and if this is what they really want to do. There are no lawyers involved to antagonize an already delicate situation.

 

In the case that it is realized, that the woman is pregnant, the waiting period lasts the entire time she is pregnant. During the waiting period (whether the woman is pregnant or not) the man is obligated to provide food, clothing and shelter to the woman as he did before the divorce pronouncement. If the couple carries the divorce through to the birth of the child and the woman suckles the baby, the man is obligated to feed and clothe both his ex-wife for the time the woman suckles (the maximum being two years). After this weaning, the child will be provided for by the father until he/she is no longer in need of support.

 

It is quite ironic that in such an "advanced society" as America, there are divorce cases in which women are being forced to pay alimony to their ex-husbands. Can this and many other things we know about the American system of divorce compare to the Islamic system of divorce?

 

I have also read stories wherein it is stated that women are forced to marry men without their consent. This in no way resembles the marriage system in Islam. In Islam the woman marries the man of her choice. She may even marry someone that her mother and/or father objects to. The point is that it is the woman who makes the final decision as to whom she will marry. Once the man and the woman decide that they are interested in one another for marriage, a dowry is decided upon. A dowry is not a brides price but, it is a gift from the groom to the bride. They agree upon a gift that is affordable by the groom. In the time of the Prophet (sas), often things such as livestock and money were given. This is a wise decision in the event that a woman becomes divorced or widowed, she has some financial security to fall back on even if it is for a limited amount of time. Once the man and woman are married, the man is required to clothe, feed, shelter and educate her (or allow her to be educated) in the same manner as he does himself.

 

The last distorted image that I will cover is that of the muslim women's dress. The western influenced media portrays our dress to be outdated and oppressive. Needless to say however, I differ with these adjectives. Our dress code does not hinder us from doing anything productive in our lives. Muslim women maintain a variety of jobs, non of which are devalued nor hampered due to their dress code. And as for the timing of muslims women's dress during these contemporary times, it seems most appropriate due to decreasing morals in the world today.

 

For those who say that Islamic dress is outdated, they speak from great ignorance. The decreasing molarity and trials of this time makes Hijaab even more in need. More than ever before sex crimes are rampant. Although this society tells women they can wear what they want to wear, anytime a rape occurs the woman is the one put on trial an one of the first questions is, "What were you wearing?" This concept seems as though it is a set up directed against the so called contemporary woman. Also there is a direct correlation between the respect a man has for a woman and the amount of her body her body she displays flauntigly.

 

In conclusion, I hope this article helped to clear up some distorted/misunderstood aspects of Islam and women. Women in Islam are respected and held in high regard. We will never find success and/or solutions to our problems until we realize that Allah knows best and that this disbelieving society will ruin itself.

[Paragon]

Dareen iyo Damiir .. Qore: Abdi Hassan, Holland

 

Source Somali Literary Forum/ Hadraawi Group

 

Dareen iyo damiir( emotion and conscience) waxay kamid yihiin astaamaha

gaarka ee admigu kagana duwan yahay noolaha kale. Qofka admiga wuxuu

leeyahay dareen, doonis, qiiro, qab, aragti, damiir iyo astaamo kale oo

lamid ah. Qofku wuxuu dareemaa dhacdo oo uu maqlay, akhriyey, ama joob

soo ahaa markay dhacaysay taasoo uu ku farxo, ka naxo, ka cabsoodo, ka

yaabo, ama yax yaxo . Dareenkuna waa turjumaha dhacdooyinka degaanka

iyo qofka admiga ah. Dhacdadii jirtay dareenkaagu wuxuu ku samaynayaa

inuu kuu fasiro oo aad macno siiso qaabkay u dhacday.

 

Waxaana jirta in dhacdo kastaa oo leh astaamahaas aan kor kusoo

sheegnay ay tahay dhex dhexaad laakiin aadmigu siiyo macno gaara oo uu

ku qiimeeyo. Qaabka qofka admiga ahi u turjuntaana waxay ku xidhantahay

waayo aragnimada iyo aqoonta qofkaasi u leeyhay dhacdada taagan markaas.

 

Wuxuu faylasuufkii waynaa ee Aristotels yidhi isagoo ka hadlaaya

dareenka:

"Waa hawlyartahay inaad cadhootaa, laakiin inaad ku cadhooto qofkii ku

habboonaa, qiyaas ku habboon, wakthtigii ku habboonaa, sababtay ku

habboonayd iyo qaabkay ku habboonayd maaha mid sahlan".

 

Haddaba qofkastoo aadmiyi wuxuu leeyahay dareen, feker, iyo ficil.

Saddexdooduna waa isku xidhan yihiin. Sida aad u wax dareento ayaad u

fekertaa sidaad u fakaraysaad fashaa ooficil ku muujisaa. Haddii wada

shaqayn waayaan saddexdaas aan soo sheegnay masaaloona qofkaasi ee

waxbaa kasiya.

 

Siduu sheegay aqoonyahankii Usteeriyaanka ahaa ee Sigmund Freud(

1856-1939kii) oo ahaa caalim ku xeel dheer cilmi nafsiga, ahaana ninkii

lahaa aragtida cilmi nafsiga ee loo yaqaan pyscho-analyse. Wuxuu sheegay

in maskaxda admigu ka kooban tahay saddex qaybood qaybta hore waxaa la

yidhaahdo ID. Qaybtani waxay qaabilsantahay inaad hesho waxaad

jeceshahay ama baahida markaas aad dareemayso sida diiraraan, gaajo iyo

harraad. Qaybtani waxay kortaa oo fir fircoontahay marka ilmuhu yaryahay

gaar ahaana ilaa markuu ilmuhu 5 sano gaadhaayo. Ilmaha yarna waxaa uu

muddadaas halgan kula jiraa inuu dhakhso u gaadho baahida haysa wuxuu

jecelyahay iyo degaanka uu ku nool yahay oo ku dhega adkaada oo aanu ka

helin waxa jamanayso naftiisu.

 

Marka ilmuhu ilaa shan sano gaadho ayaa waxaa kora oo qaybta kale ee

maskaxda ee la yidhaado Ego. Waxaa qofka ay bartaa inuu miisaamo

codsiyada ka imanaaya naftiisa ee ku dirqiyaaya inuu helo hawadiisa.

Waanay u caqli celisaa Ego ilmaha waxaanay tidhaahdaa waxaasi macquul

maahe Iday ee bal inoo kaadi, ilmhuna wuxuu noqdaa mid waaqici ah.

Waxaana halkaas ka dhasha isku dhac ay isku dhacaan ID iyo Ego. Ego

waxaa ay isku daydaa inay dhex dhexaadiso baaqyada iska soo hirjeeda ID

iyo degaanka markaas la joogo.

 

Dabadeedna waxaa samaysma wuxuu ugu yeedhay Freud super Ego oo ah

damiirka qofka. Waxaana ilmuhu noqdaa mid isu dheelitirma oo leh qaybaha

maskaxda oo dhan. Super Ego waxay dhex dhexaadisaa markaas iyana ID iyo

Ego waxaanay qofka ka dhigtaa mid miisaaman oo si degan u shaqeeya.

Gaadhina kara go'aan oo ka talin karo noloshiisa iyo si deg deg ah

mustaqbalka. Farriimaha degaankiisa, iyo baahida naftiisana waxay

noqonayaan kuwo aan isku dhacin oo iska soo horjeeda ee is baal socda.

Inta aan qofku yeelan Super Ego waxaa saxa oo haga waalidkii ama

rabbeeyihiisa qaan gaadhka ah.

 

Markaas haddaan arrinta aynaan u eegin dhinaca falsafada ee u eegno

dhinaca cilmiyada kale sida kuwa arrimaha bulshada ee cilmi nafsigu

kamid yahay. Dareen iyo Damiir waa wada socdaan. Damiirkuna waa

hoggaanka qofka haga ee ku kala garto xumo iyo samo. Damiirku waa

caqliga qofka waana qaybta ugu sarraysa maxkaxda. Qofkuna siduu wax u

dareemo ayuu u fekeraa, siduu u fekeraayo ayaa u dhaqmaa. Habka uu

dhaqmaayana waxaa kalataliya oo la kaashadaa damiirkiisa kaasoo ku

booriya qofka inuu ku kaco ficil ama ka joogo.

 

Tusaale si ay inoogu fududaadaan fahanka dareen iyo damiir. Abwaan

Mohamed Hadraawi oo kamid ah culimada falsafada ee Somalida baa

sannadkii hore markuu guursaday waxaa dawladda Maandeeq ugu deeqday

10,000 US dollers oo kaalo ah. Hadraawi isagoo dawladda ixtiraamaayuu ka

gudoomay deeqdii. Waxaana laga yaabaa inuu markaas u baahnaa. Laakiin

Hadraawi lacagtaas isagu waxba kagama soo leexan ee waxaa uu uqaybshay

ururadii bulsho ee u baahnaa.

 

Waxaanu yidhi Hadraawi damiirkayga ayaa ii diiday inaan qaato

lacagtaas. Haddaba waxaa is waydiin leh waxa Hadraawi u odhan waayey

dareenkayga ayaa ii diiday. Jawaabtuna waa iska caddahay oo dareenkiisu

waxaa laga yaabaa inuu ka duwanaa damiirkiisa. Waayo? Waxaa laga yaabaa

in Hadraawi markaas uu dareemayey baahi ba'an waayo? Waa abwaan loo

hanwayn yahay oo guursaday, laakiin aan lahayn hanti uu ku fuliyo

hawlihii looga baahnaa waxaana Somalidu ku maah maahdaa NIN GUURSADAY

XUUNSHANA XOOLO MOOD. Inkastoo Mr. Hadraawi saboolnimada dhibaato u

arkin oo uu mararka qaardkoodna kuba faanay waana kii ku yidhi maanso,

SOW INA WALANWAL MAAHAN AHI, WAX MAHAYSTE IMA DHALIN, HURRE LAMA WALAAL

AHI, waxaana laga yaabaa in 10, 000 US dollers ee dawladdu siisay uu

meelo badan ku gufayn kari lahaa laakiin xilligaas oo aan iska garan

karo in baahiyi haysay, waxaaseh u saamixi waayey kana xoog batay

damiirkiisa.

 

Ugu danbayn haddaad u baahato inaad wax badan ka ogaato mawduucan waxaan

kugula talinayaa inaad akhrido buuga uu qoray ninka Saykoolajiiska ah ee

Maraykanka ah ee Daniel Goleman ee ciwnaankiisu yahay Emotional

intelligence. Mr Goleman inkastoo uu fekerkiisa usoo bandhigay aragti

kusalaysan qaabka iyo fekerka Maraykanku u arko mawduucan aan ka

hadlayno haddana waxaa uu sameeyey baadhitaan buuxa waxaana uu keenay

Intelegence cusub oo ah dareenka qofka( social emotional intelegence)

halkii waagii hore laga eegi jiray IQ oo qudha. Waxaana laga yaaba in

qof IQ aad u sarreeyaa uu aad u hooseeyo dhinaca emotional intellegence,

waxaana dhici karta sidaas lidkeed. Waxaa kaloo jiri kara ruux ilaahay

hibo usiiyey uu ku hubeeyey labada intellegence ee jira.

 

N.B. Dhinaca eray bixinta ajanabiga ee maqaalkan ku jira waa luqadda

dutch, lagana yaabaa in af Ingiriisada ama luqadaha kale ay eray bixin

kale qaadan karto.

 

Macasalaama,

 

Abdi Hassan, Holland

[JustCause]

I thought I would share this long article!

-------

THE RELATION OF SCIENCE AND RELIGION

 

Some fresh observations on an old problem

 

by RICHARD P. FEYNMAN

 

"The Relation of Science and Religion" is a transcript of a talk given by Dr. Feynman at the Caltech YMCA Lunch Forum on May 2, 1956.

 

In this age of specialization men who thoroughly know one field are often incompetent to discuss another. The great problems of the relations between one and another aspect of human activity have for this reason been discussed less and less in public. When we look at the past great debates on these subjects we feel jealous of those times, for we should have liked the excitement of such argument. The old problems, such as the relation of science and religion, are still with us, and I believe present as difficult dilemmas as ever, but they are not often publicly discussed because of the limitations of specialization.

 

But I have been interested in this problem for a long time and would like to discuss it. In view of my very evident lack of knowledge and understanding of religion (a lack which will grow more apparent as we proceed), I will organize the discussion in this way: I will suppose that not one man but a group of men are discussing the problem, that the group consists of specialists in many fields à the various sciences, the various religions and so on à and that we are going to discuss the problem from various sides, like a panel. Each is to give his point of view, which may be molded and modified by the later discussion. Further, I imagine that someone has been chosen by lot to be the first to present his views, and I am he so chosen.

 

I would start by presenting the panel with a problem: A young man, brought up in a religious family, studies a science, and as a result he comes to doubt à and perhaps later to disbelieve in à his father's God. Now, this is not an isolated example; it happens time and time again. Although I have no statistics on this, I believe that many scientists à in fact, I actually believe that more than half of the scientists à really disbelieve in their father's God; that is, they don't believe in a God in a conventional sense.

 

Now, since the belief in a God is a central feature of religion, this problem that I have selected points up most strongly the problem of the relation of science and religion. Why does this young man come to disbelieve?

 

The first answer we might hear is very simple: You see, he is taught by scientists, and (as I have just pointed out) they are all atheists at heart, so the evil is spread from one to another. But if you can entertain this view, I think you know less of science than I know of religion.

 

Another answer may be that a little knowledge is dangerous; this young man has learned a little bit and thinks he knows it all, but soon he will grow out of this sophomoric sophistication and come to realize that the world is more complicated, and he will begin again to understand that there must be a God.

 

I don't think it is necessary that he come out of it. There are many scientists à men who hope to call themselves mature à who still don't believe in God. In fact, as I would like to explain later, the answer is not that the young man thinks he knows it all à it is the exact opposite.

 

A third answer you might get is that this young man really doesn't understand science correctly. I do not believe that science can disprove the existence of God; I think that is impossible. And if it is impossible, is not a belief in science and in a God à an ordinary God of religion Ñ a consistent possibility?

 

Yes, it is consistent. Despite the fact that I said that more than half of the scientists don't believe in God, many scientists do believe in both science and God, in a perfectly consistent way. But this consistency, although possible, is not easy to attain, and I would like to try to discuss two things: Why it is not easy to attain, and whether it is worth attempting to attain it.

 

When I say "believe in God," of course, it is always a puzzle à what is God? What I mean is the kind of personal God, characteristic of the western religions, to whom you pray and who has something to do with creating the universe and guiding you in morals.

 

For the student, when he learns about science, there are two sources of difficulty in trying to weld science and religion together. The first source of difficulty is this à that it is imperative in science to doubt; it is absolutely necessary, for progress in science, to have uncertainty as a fundamental part of your inner nature. To make progress in understanding we must remain modest and allow that we do not know. Nothing is certain or proved beyond all doubt. You investigate for curiosity, because it is unknown, not because you know the answer. And as you develop more information in the sciences, it is not that you are finding out the truth, but that you are finding out that this or that is more or less likely.

 

That is, if we investigate further, we find that the statements of science are not of what is true and what is not true, but statements of what is known to different degrees of certainty: "It is very much more likely that so and so is true than that it is not true;" or "such and such is almost certain but there is still a little bit of doubt;" or à at the other extreme à "well, we really don't know." Every one of the concepts of science is on a scale graduated somewhere between, but at neither end of, absolute falsity or absolute truth.

It is necessary, I believe, to accept this idea, not only for science, but also for other things; it is of great value to acknowledge ignorance. It is a fact that when we make decisions in our life we don't necessarily know that we are making them correctly; we only think that we are doing the best we can à and that is what we should do.

 

Attitude of uncertainty

 

I think that when we know that we actually do live in uncertainty, then we ought to admit it; it is of great value to realize that we do not know the answers to different questions. This attitude of mind à this attitude of uncertainty à is vital to the scientist, and it is this attitude of mind which the student must first acquire. It becomes a habit of thought. Once acquired, one cannot retreat from it any more.

 

What happens, then, is that the young man begins to doubt everything because he cannot have it as absolute truth. So the question changes a little bit from "Is there a God?" to "How sure is it that there is a God?" This very subtle change is a great stroke and represents a parting of the ways between science and religion. I do not believe a real scientist can ever believe in the same way again. Although there are scientists who believe in God, I do not believe that they think of God in the same way as religious people do. If they are consistent with their science, I think that they say something like this to themselves: "I am almost certain there is a God. The doubt is very small." That is quite different from saying, "I know that there is a God." I do not believe that a scientist can ever obtain that view à that really religious understanding, that real knowledge that there is a God à that absolute certainty which religious people have.

 

Of course this process of doubt does not always start by attacking the question of the existence of God. Usually special tenets, such as the question of an after‑life, or details of the religious doctrine, such as details of Christ's life, come under scrutiny first. It is more interesting, however, to go right into the central problem in a frank way, and to discuss the more extreme view which doubts the existence of God.

 

Once the question has been removed from the absolute, and gets to sliding on the scale of uncertainty, it may end up in very different positions. In many cases it comes out very close to being certain. But on the other hand, for some, the net result of close scrutiny of the theory his father held of God may be the claim that it is almost certainly wrong.

 

Belief in God à and the facts of science

 

That brings us to the second difficulty our student has in trying to weld science and religion: Why does it often end up that the belief in God à at least, the God of the religious type à is considered to be very unreasonable, very unlikely? I think that the answer has to do with the scientific things à the facts or partial facts à that the man learns.

 

For instance, the size of the universe is very impressive, with us on a tiny particle whirling around the sun, among a hundred thousand million suns in this galaxy, itself among a billion galaxies.

 

Again, there is the close relation of biological man to the animals, and of one form of life to another. Man is a latecomer in a vast evolving drama; can the rest be but a scaffolding for his creation?

 

Yet again, there are the atoms of which all appears to be constructed, following immutable laws. Nothing can escape it; the stars are made of the same stuff, and the animals are made of the same stuff, but in such complexity as to mysteriously appear alive à like man himself.

 

It is a great adventure to contemplate the universe beyond man, to think of what it means without man à as it was for the great part of its long history, and as it is in the great majority of places. When this objective view is finally attained, and the mystery and majesty of matter are appreciated, to then turn the objective eye back on man viewed as matter, to see life as part of the universal mystery of greatest depth, is to sense an experience which is rarely described. It usually ends in laughter, delight in the futility of trying to understand. These scientific views end in awe and mystery, lost at the edge in uncertainty, but they appear to be so deep and so impressive that the theory that it is all arranged simply as a stage for God to watch man's struggle for good and evil seems to be inadequate.

 

So let us suppose that this is the case of our particular student, and the conviction grows so that he believes that individual prayer, for example, is not heard. (I am not trying to disprove the reality of God; I am trying to give you some idea of à some sympathy for à the reasons why many come to think that prayer is meaningless.) Of course, as a result of this doubt, the pattern of doubting is turned next to ethical problems, because, in the religion which he learned, moral problems were connected with the word of God, and if the God doesn't exist, what is his word? But rather surprisingly, I think, the moral problems ultimately come out relatively unscathed; at first perhaps the student may decide that a few little things were wrong, but he often reverses his opinion later, and ends with no fundamentally different moral view.

 

There seems to be a kind of independence in these ideas. In the end, it is possible to doubt the divinity of Christ, and yet to believe firmly that it is a good thing to do unto your neighbor as you would have him do unto you. It is possible to have both these views at the same time; and I would say that I hope you will find that my atheistic scientific colleagues often carry themselves well in society.

 

Communism and the scientific viewpoint

 

I would like to remark, in passing, since the word "atheism" is so closely connected with "communism," that the communist views are the antithesis of the scientific, in the sense that in communism the answers are given to all the questions à political questions as well as moral ones à without discussion and without doubt. The scientific viewpoint is the exact opposite of this; that is, all questions must be doubted and discussed; we must argue everything out à observe things, check them, and so change them. The democratic government is much closer to this idea, because there is discussion and a chance of modification. One doesn't launch the ship in a definite direction. It is true that if you have a tyranny of ideas, so that you know exactly what has to be true, you act very decisively, and it looks good à for a while. But soon the ship is heading in the wrong direction, and no one can modify the direction any more. So the uncertainties of life in a democracy are, I think, much more consistent with science.

 

Although science makes some impact on many religious ideas, it does not affect the moral content. Religion has many aspects; it answers all kinds of questions. First, for example, it answers questions about what things are, where they come from, what man is, what God is à the properties of God, and so on. Let me call this the metaphysical aspect of religion. It also tells us another thing à how to behave. Leave out of this the idea of how to behave in certain ceremonies, and what rites to perform; I mean it tells us how to behave in life in general, in a moral way. It gives answers to moral questions; it gives a moral and ethical code. Let me call this the ethical aspect of religion.

 

Now, we know that, even with moral values granted, human beings are very weak; they must be reminded of the moral values in order that they may be able to follow their consciences. It is not simply a matter of having a right conscience; it is also a question of maintaining strength to do what you know is right. And it is necessary that religion give strength and comfort and the inspiration to follow these moral views. This is the inspirational aspect of religion. It gives inspiration not only for moral conduct à it gives inspiration for the arts and for all kinds of great thoughts and actions as well.

 

Interconnections

 

These three aspects of religion are interconnected, and it is generally felt, in view of this close integration of ideas, that to attack one feature of the system is to attack the whole structure. The three aspects are connected more or less as follows: The moral aspect, the moral code, is the word of God à which involves us in a metaphysical question. Then the inspiration comes because one is working the will of God; one is for God; partly one feels that one is with God. And this is a great inspiration because it brings one's actions in contact with the universe at large.

 

So these three things are very well interconnected. The difficulty is this: that science occasionally conflicts with the first of the three categories à the metaphysical aspect of religion. For instance, in the past there was an argument about whether the earth was the center of the universe à whether the earth moved around the sun or stayed still. The result of all this was a terrible strife and difficulty, but it was finally resolved à with religion retreating in this particular case. More recently there was a conflict over the question of whether man has animal ancestry.

 

The result in many of these situations is a retreat of the religious metaphysical view, but nevertheless, there is no collapse of the religion. And further, there seems to be no appreciable or fundamental change in the moral view.

 

After all, the earth moves around the sun à isn't it best to torn the other cheek? Does it make any difference whether the earth is standing still or moving around the son? We can expect conflict again. Science is developing and new things will be found out which will he in disagreement with the present‑day metaphysical theory of certain religions. In fact, even with all the past retreats of religion, there is still real conflict for particular individuals when they learn about the science and they have heard about the religion. The thing has not been integrated very well; there are real conflicts here à and yet morals are not affected.

 

As a matter of fact, the conflict is doubly difficult in this metaphysical region. Firstly, the facts may be in conflict, but even if the facts were not in conflict, the attitude is different. The spirit of uncertainty in science is an attitude toward the metaphysical questions that is quite different from the certainty and faith that is demanded in religion. There is definitely a conflict, I believe à both in fact and in spirit à over the metaphysical aspects of religion.

 

In my opinion, it is not possible for religion to find a set of metaphysical ideas which will be guaranteed not to get into conflicts with an ever‑advancing and always‑changing science which is going into an unknown. We don't know how to answer the questions; it is impossible to find an answer which someday will not be found to be wrong. The difficulty arises because science and religion are both trying to answer questions in the same realm here.

 

Science and moral questions

 

On the other hand, I don't believe that a real conflict with science will arise in the ethical aspect, because I believe that moral questions are outside of the scientific realm.

 

Let me give three or four arguments to show why I believe this. In the first place, there have been conflicts in the past between the scientific and the religious view about the metaphysical aspect and, nevertheless, the older moral views did not collapse, did not change.

 

Second, there are good men who practice Christian ethics and who do not believe in the divinity of Christ. They find themselves in no inconsistency here.

 

Thirdly, although I believe that from time to time scientific evidence is found which may be partially interpreted as giving some evidence of some particular aspect of the life of Christ, for example, or of other religious metaphysical ideas, it seems to me that there is no scientific evidence bearing on the golden rule. It seems to me that that is somehow different.

 

Now, let's see if I can make a little philosophical explanation as to why it is different à how science cannot affect the fundamental basis of morals.

 

The typical human problem, and one whose answer religion aims to supply, is always of the following form: Should I do this? Should we do this? Should the government do this? To answer this question we can resolve it into two parts: First Ñ If I do this, what will happen? à and second à Do I want that to happen? What would come of it of value à of good?

 

Now a question of the form: If I do this, what will happen? is strictly scientific. As a matter of fact, science can be defined as a method for, and a body of information obtained by, trying to answer only questions which can be put into the form: If I do this, what will happen? The technique of it, fundamentally, is: Try it and see. Then you put together a large amount of information from such experiences. All scientists will agree that a question à any question, philosophical or other à which cannot be put into the form that can be tested by experiment (or, in simple terms, that cannot be put into the form: If I do this, what will happen?) is not a scientific question; it is outside the realm of science.

 

I claim that whether you want something to happen or not à what value there is in the result, and how you judge the value of the result (which is the other end of the question: Should I do this?) à must lie outside of science because it is not a question that you can answer only by knowing what happens; you still have to judge what happens à in a moral way. So, for this theoretical reason I think that there is a complete consistency between the moral view à or the ethical aspect of religion à and scientific information.

 

Turning to the third aspect of religion à the inspirational aspect à brings me to the central question that I would like to present to this imaginary panel. The source of inspiration today à for strength and for comfort à in any religion is very closely knit with the metaphysical aspect; that is, the inspiration comes from working for God, for obeying his will, feeling one with God. Emotional ties to the moral code à based in this manner à begin to be severely weakened when doubt, even a small amount of doubt, is expressed as to the existence of God; so when the belief in God becomes uncertain, this particular method of obtaining inspiration fails.

 

I don't know the answer to this central problem à the problem of maintaining the real value of religion, as a source of strength and of courage to most men, while, at the same time, not requiring an absolute faith in the metaphysical aspects.

 

The heritages of Western civilization

 

Western civilization, it seems to me, stands by two great heritages. One is the scientific spirit of adventure à the adventure into the unknown, an unknown which must be recognized as being unknown in order to be explored; the demand that the unanswerable mysteries of the universe remain unanswered; the attitude that all is uncertain; to summarize it à the humility of the intellect. The other great heritage is Christian ethics à the basis of action on love, the brotherhood of all men, the value of the individual à the humility of the spirit.

 

These two heritages are logically, thoroughly consistent. But logic is not all; one needs one's heart to follow an idea. If people are going back to religion, what are they going back to? Is the modern church a place to give comfort to a man who doubts God‑more, one who disbelieves in God? Is the modern church a place to give comfort and encouragement to the value of such doubts? So far, have we not drawn strength and comfort to maintain the one or the other of these consistent heritages in a way which attacks the values of the other? Is this unavoidable? How can we draw inspiration to support these two pillars of western civilization so that they may stand together in full vigor, mutually unafraid? Is this not the central problem of our time?

 

I put it up to the panel for discussion.

[Faheema.]

This article might be a little out dated, nevertheless it's informative.

 

INCREASED USE OF BIOMETRICS TO TACKLE ASYLUM ABUSE (21/01/04)

 

Visitors to the UK from five East African countries and those traveling on refugee documents issued by other countries will have to provide fingerprint data before they enter the UK, the Home Office announced today.

 

This move is part of a Government action plan to tackle unfounded asylum claims from Somali nationals and fraudulent claims by individuals claiming to be Somalis. It also represents the next step in the Government’s phased roll-out of biometric technology to tackle immigration abuse. Hi – tech biometrics can help identify people who have entered the country legitimately then destroy their travel documents to claim asylum in a false identity, or make it more difficult to remove them if their asylum claim is refused.

 

From February:

Those applying for visas to come to the UK from Djibouti, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Tanzania and Uganda will be required to provide a record of their fingerprints when applying for a visa. Evidence shows that a significant proportion of asylum seekers who claim to be from Somalia are in fact from other east African countries - a recent pilot language analysis exercise suggested that the number may be over ten per cent of all ‘Somali’ claimants.

 

 

Individuals seeking to enter the UK using ‘1951 Convention travel documents’ will have their fingerprints recorded and their documents photocopied. Intelligence suggests that asylum claims are being made in the UK – often in false names - by those who already have refugee status in other countries.

Home Office Minister, Beverley Hughes stated:

 

“The progressive roll-out of biometric technology is a powerful tool in tackling abuse of our asylum and immigration system. It will make it more and more difficult for people to hide their identity by destroying their documents after they have legally entered the UK.

 

“The move complements the Government’s radical programme of reform to tackle abuse of the asylum system. Legislation currently before Parliament will tackle the final parts of the system in need of reform.

 

“We know that a significant proportion of asylum seekers claiming to be Somali are actually from neighbouring east African countries. Together with the roll-out of specialist language analysis, recording the fingerprints of visa applicants from this region is part of a concerted Government strategy to cut fraudulent asylum applications from this region.

 

“We also believe that individuals are exploiting international refugee travel documents to claim asylum in the UK under a false identity. Ensuring we have a secure way of recording someone’s identity will close help this loophole.

 

“Dealing with those who are abusing the system is vital to build public trust and confidence in our immigration and asylum policies, so we can welcome those who have a legal right to be here.â€

 

The east Africa biometric visa initiative follows a successful pilot to record the fingerprints of those applying for visas from Sri Lanka. Since the initial six month project started in July 2003, it has led to the identification of seven undocumented asylum applicants who destroyed their passports after entering the UK, and a further two people have been prosecuted. As a result of this success, the project in Sri Lanka will be extended.

 

Biometric technology is already used successfully to combat abuse of the asylum system. All asylum seekers in the UK are fingerprinted and issued with a high-tech ID card containing a biometric chip. Asylum seekers’ fingerprints are now also recorded on “Eurodacâ€, the EU-wide database, designed to combat asylum shopping.

 

The Government also announced today that it had signed an agreement with the Sri Lankan Government, under which there will be a faster and more efficient system for issuing travel documents to Sri Lankan citizens who do not have the right to enter or remain in the UK. The agreement will help return up to 100 people a month, and is the result of the co-operation from the Sri Lankan government on illegal immigration, which has contributed to a significant reduction in unfounded asylum claims from that country.

 

The Asylum and Immigration (Treatment of claimants, etc) Bill which is currently before Parliament, seeks to help tackle organised immigration criminals, ensure that criminals do not gain from dishonesty and introduces a new speed and finality to the appeals and removals process. The Bill also contains enabling powers to introduce tagging or tracking to maintain better contact with those subject to immigration control.

 

Notes to editors:

 

The Government’s strategy to increase the use of biometrics to tackle immigration abuse was set out in August 2003 (Home Office press notice 228/2003).

 

The biometric visa trial in Sri Lanka was announced in July 2003 (Home Office press notice 196/2003).

 

The legislation to facilitate greater use of physical data (biometrics) is included in section 126 of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002. A Statutory Instrument allowing for the collection of fingerprints from these visa applicants and holders of 1951 CTDs will be laid in the House of Commons today, 15 January 2004. The regulations are expected to come into force at the end of February. Visa applicants of all nationalities will be required to give fingerprints when submitting applications from March 2004 in Addis Ababa (Ethiopia), Asmara (Eritrea), Dar Es Salaam (Tanzania), Djibouti and Kampala (Uganda). We also propose to extend this to Nairobi (Kenya) in due course, regulations will be laid to allow this at a later date.

 

The most recent latest quarterly asylum statistics showed a 60 per cent increase in asylum applications from individuals claiming to be Somali, despite no significant change in the circumstances in the country. The Government believes that some of these claims have been made by people from other east African countries or from Somalis who have already been granted asylum elsewhere in Europe.

[Baashi]

Many thanks to Feynman and 2985 for posting...

 

Here is another insightful article.

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

 

Principles of Success

 

8/22/2004 - Religious - Article Ref: IC0408-2424

Number of comments: 24

Opinion Summary: Agree:23 Disagree:0 Neutral:1

By: IslamiCity

IslamiCity* -

 

 

According to the Quran, Prophet Muhammad was the most excellent example for all of humanity. Even non-Muslim historians recognize him to be one of the most successful personalities in history.

 

In 1946 Reverend R Bosworth-Smith in "Mohammed & Mohammedanism." wrote about the Prophet:

 

"Head of the state as well as the Church, he was Caesar and Pope in one; but, he was pope without the pope's claims, and Caesar without the legions of Caesar, without a standing army, without a bodyguard, without a palace, without a fixed revenue. If ever any man had the right to say that he ruled by a right divine It was Mohammad, for he had all the power without instruments and without its support. He cared not for dressing of power. The simplicity of his private life was in keeping with his public life."

 

In 1978 Michael Hart in his book " The 100 Most Influential Persons In History", selected Prophet Muhammad as the most influential person in history and had this to say about his choice:

 

"My choice of Muhammad to lead the list of the world's most influential persons may surprise some readers and may be questioned by others, but he was the only man in history who was supremely successful on both the secular and religious level... It is this unparalleled combination of secular and religious influence which I feel entitles Muhammad to be considered the most influential single figure in human history."

 

The Prophet's words and actions show us the way to achieve success, not just in this world but in the hereafter as well.

 

In short, the Prophet of Islam was a positive thinker in the full sense of the word. All his activities were result-oriented. He refrained from all negative elements of behavior that are counter-productive to achievement such as hate, envy, arrogance, greed, etc.

 

All the actions of the Prophet were solely based on a pure intention to please God.

 

By studying the life of the Prophet we can identify some of the principles of success.

 

The First Principle: Take the easier path.

 

This principle is well explained in a saying of A'ishah. She said:

 

Whenever the Prophet had to choose between two options, he always opted for the easier choice. (Bukhari)

 

To choose the easiest option means that you should evaluate your options and choose the most feasible. One who begins from this starting point will surely reach his goal.

 

The Second Principle: See advantage in disadvantage.

 

In the early days of Makkah, there were many problems and difficulties. At that time, a guiding verse in the Quran was revealed. It said:

 

With every hardship there is ease, with every hardship there is ease. (94:5-6).

 

This means that if there are some problems, there are also opportunities at the same time. The way to success is to overcome the problems and avail the opportunities.

 

The Third Principle: Change the place of action.

 

This principle is derived from the Hijrah. The Hijrah was not just a migration from Makkah to Madinah, it was a journey to find a more suitable place to put Islam into action.

 

Physical migration and perseverance is an important element in establishing Justice and Peace. This also planted the roots of intellectual migration from the subjugated minds to an awakened spirit.

 

The Fourth Principle: Make a friend out of an enemy.

 

The Prophet of Islam was repeatedly subjected to practices of antagonism by the unbelievers. At that time, the Qur'an enjoined upon him the return of good for evil. And then, as the Quran added:

 

You will see your direst enemy has become your closest friend. (41:34)

 

It means that a good deed in return of a bad deed has a conquering effect over your enemies. And the life of the Prophet is a historical proof of this principle.

 

The greatest example of amnesty was shown by the Prophet after the blood-less conquest of Makkah. All enemies of Islam were granted pardon including Hinda, the wife of Abu Soofyaan who had disemboweled the martyred body of Hamza, the Prophet's uncle. In spite of her detestable mutilation of Hamza's body, the Prophet forgave her.

 

The Fifth Principle: Education is central to success.

 

After the battle of Badr, about 70 of the unbelievers were taken as prisoners of war. They were educated people. The Prophet announced that if any one of them would teach ten Muslim children how to read and write he would be freed. This was the first school in the history of Islam in which all of the students were Muslims, and all of the teachers were from the enemy rank.

 

The Sixth Principle: Don't be a dichotomous thinker.

 

In the famous battle of Mutah, Khalid Ibn Walid decided to withdraw Muslim forces from the battlefield because he discovered that they were disproportionately outnumbered by the enemy. When they reached Madinah, some of the Muslims received them by the word 'O deserters!' The Prophet said: 'No, they are men of advancement'.

 

Those Madinan people were thinking dichotomously, either fighting or retreating. The Prophet said that there is also a third option, and that is to avoid war and find time to strengthen yourself. Now history tells us that the Muslims, after three years of preparation, advanced again towards the Roman border and this time they won a resounding victory.

 

The Seventh Principle: Do not engage in unnecessary confrontation.

 

This principle is derived from the treaty of Hudaybiyyah. At that time, the unbelievers were determined to engage Muslims in fighting, because they were in an advantageous position. But the Prophet , by accepting their conditions unilaterally, entered into a pact. It was a ten-year peace treaty. Until then, the meeting ground between Muslims and non-Muslims had been on the battlefield. Now the area of conflict became that of ideological debate. Within two years, Islam emerged as victorious because of the simple reason of its ideological superiority.

 

The Eighth Principle: Gradualism instead of radicalism.

 

This principle is well-established by a Hadith quoted in Bukhari. A'ishah says that the first verses of the Qur'an were related mostly to Heaven and Hell. After some time when faith had taken hold in peoples hearts, God revealed specific commands to desist from unjust and self-deprecating social practices that were prevalent in the Arabian dark ages. This is a clear proof that for social changes, Islam advocates the evolutionary method, rather than the revolutionary method.

 

The Ninth Principle: Be pragmatic in controversial matters.

 

During the writing of the Hudaybiyyah treaty, the Prophet dictated these words: 'This is from Muhammad, the Messenger of God.' The Qurayshan delegate raised objections over these words. The Prophet promptly ordered the words to be changed to 'Muhammad, son of Abdullah'. This simple change placated the Qurayshan delegate.

 

These are just some of the principles by which the Prophet of Islam conducted his life. His achievements have been recognized by historians as the supreme success. We would be wise to live by following his example.

You have indeed in the Messenger of God a beautiful pattern (of conduct) for any one whose hope is in God and the Final Day .. (Quran 33:21)

 

Adapted from the "Principles of Success in the Light of Sirah" by Wahiduddin Khan - Renaissance Islamic Journal

[Alle-ubaahne]

The Ten Principles of Hassan al-Banna.

 

1.) The Unity of the Ummah. He considered it in itself a primary and important goal that we must strive for. "Do no disagree, then you fail and lose the wind (in your tail."

 

2.) The Agreement on Principal Matters. Such that we start by considering everyone who declares shahadah - La ilah illaAllah, Muhammad arrusulAllah - as our companion and part of the Muslim group.

 

3.) Assume First that You, Not Your Muslim Brother, May be Wrong. And see how you find the truth impartially.

 

4.) The Manners for Disagreement. That you should be as keen about listening to your brother's evidence and argument as you are about giving your evidence and argument, and be pleasant and smiling whether the result is for you or against you.

 

5.) Avoiding Arguing, Self-Righteousness, and Belittling of Others. Al Banna said: "No nation went astray after being guided, except after it fell to cursing and arguing." And: "He will have a place in Heaven that leaves arguing when he is wrong, and a higher place in Heaven if he leaves arguing when he is right."

 

6.) The Possibility of Mulitiple Correct Answers. He referred to the Prophet telling the sahabah to pray Asr in Bani Quraiza, how some of them prayed Asr when it's time came, while others prayed it when they reached Bani Quraiza after sundown, and how the Prophet praised both parties.

 

7.) The Group Participation in Agreed Upon Matters and to Excuse One Another in What is Disagreed Upon. He emphasized, "We all agree on prohibiting alcohol, adultery, and gambling, and we agree on the duty to govern according to Quran so let us invite governments to implement it; we agree that honor and respect are due to Muslims, so let us impart these ideals to Muslims, we agree that jihad is the means to accomplish honor so let us train the individual, and to raise children with the necessary spiritual and physical training."

 

8.) Thinking of the Danger of the Common Adversary. He reminded Muslims of the present external enemies who do not differentiate between Muslims or different views or different national origin. The enemy considers Muslims enemies of his religion, and their homelands a prize to be dominated for its resources. He emphasized the need for unity to deter aggression.

 

9.) Opening the Avenues for Work and Productivity. He recognized the duel purpose of working hard, to produce more and to stay free from the evil of idleness. He encouraged members to excel in schools and jobs, and to seek earning from lawful sources and to shun laziness and dependence on others. He encouraged them to fill in duties that others have not even identified, such as visiting brothers far and near, volunteerism, and to allow time each day for examining how they have done for the sake of Allah.

 

10.) Sympathy for Those Who Do Not See the Light. Rather than being angry with them or exposing their shortcomings. He never attacked his accusers or distractors on personal matter, but rather sought Allah's help in making His message clearer to those who were listening.

 

 

What do you think guys? A worth sharing set of principles, or what?

[Maymuunah]

I found this article very intersting..hope you guys don't worn out..it is long

Report on somali diet

 

Methods

The following information was collected during more than 70 nutrition education groups for Somali patients taught by dietitian Aliya Haq at the WIC clinic at Harborview Medical Center (HMC), between 1999 and 2002. WIC is a supplemental nutrition education program for pregnant and postpartum women, infants, and children up to age five. Nutrition education is an integral part of the WIC program, which also provides healthy food vouchers to low income families. More than 400 Somali patients have attended the nutrition education groups at Harborview since they began in September 1999. See below a Discussion of Group Education Intervention.

 

Providers are encouraged to assess the needs and behavior of all patients individually, and to consider that the information presented here is not intended to be a full account of the dietary practices and beliefs of all Somali immigrants. As Westernization appears to have influenced some aspects of Somali immigrants' diet already, it will be important to observe if and how further acculturation impacts diet in the future.

 

The Somali Diet

Limited or no published data is available regarding the dietary beliefs and practices of Somali people residing in the United States. For this reason, the following information has been compiled to convey the lessons learned during nutrition education groups with hundreds of Somali patients. The information is organized into four sections:

 

 

Religious Proscriptions discusses the influence the dominant Muslim religion has on Somali immigrants' diet; includes descriptions of halal and haram foods, and fasting and breastfeeding practices.

Foods Commonly Consumed and Methods of Cooking lists foods that are commonly eaten in Somali immigrant households, including common ingredients and cooking methods for these foods, with indication of which foods are considered high in fat, high in carbohydrates and fat, high in salt, and high in protein. This section also discusses consumption of fast foods and elements of an acculturating diet.

Common Dietary Beliefs describes some of the commonly held beliefs regarding diet and nutrition that have been expressed by Somalis participating in the group education.

Common Nutrition/Diet Related Health Problems lists common problems observed among Somali immigrant patients.

 

Religious Proscriptions

 

Almost all Somalis are Sunni Muslims. For many people (including Somalis) who practice Islam, religion has a much more comprehensive role in life than is often typical in the Americas or Europe. Religion influences Somali dietary practices.

 

"Halal" foods are foods that one is allowed to eat. Halal foods include all foods of plant origin and some of animal origin only if they conform to the religious method of slaughtering. Lamb, goat, camel, cow and chicken are halal animals when slaughtered in the proper way. The Islamic mode of slaughtering involves two steps:

 

 

mentioning the name of Allah before beginning the slaughter

severing of the throat, wind pipe and the jugular veins in the neck, without cutting the spinal cord.

 

"Haram" are forbidden foods or drinks, including pork, blood and animals not slaughtered in the proper way, alcohol and drugs, and foods containing ingredients obtained from other haram foods. Many Somalis avoid foods such as some baby formulas, yogurt and cheese because of the concern these foods may have pork in them. Animal shortening and gelatin are the ingredients of concern. Mono and diglycerides in prepared foods are also objectionable unless specified as "vegetable mono/diglyecerides".

 

Fasting is a common religious expression and is also a common dietary factor for Somalis. All adult Muslim Somali people must fast, meaning to abstain from eating, drinking and smoking, from dawn to sunset everyday of Ramadan, the ninth month of the Islamic (lunar) calendar. Sick persons and travelers can defer fasting during Ramadan and make up for it later. Pregnant and breastfeeding women can also defer fasting during Ramadan, however most Somali women insist on observing the fast. Ramadan fasting is often a great concern for providers. A detailed discussion customized to the individual needs of a patient often helps overcome the concerns of both patients and provider.

 

Holding a routine in-service for providers and interpreters each year prior to the month of Ramadan would greatly help eliminate problems and be an opportunity to discuss specific concerns. Concerns discussed could include fasting by pregnant women especially those diagnosed with gestational diabetes, and excessive weight gain by some people who consume high fat snacks/foods after breaking the fast at sunset. Some of these foods include "mandazi", "Sambosa", homemade cakes, "Burkaki" and "Maqhumri", all being high calorie foods due to their high fat high sugar content. Weight loss can also be a concern for people who fail to eat adequately. Dehydration is often a concern for breast-feeding women.

 

Breastfeeding a child for two years is also recommended in the religion. (Qur'an 2:233) In Somalia, babies are breastfed, or given cow's milk diluted with water when moms go out to work.

 

Foods Commonly Consumed and Methods of Cooking

 

Family meal is still the norm. Frying is the most common method of cooking. Lamb or goat meat is considered the best meat to eat. Tea is the most common drink with lots of sugar. Drinking 4-6 cups of sweet tea a day is common. Homemade cakes are often eaten as snacks.

 

In the list of foods below, the dietitian considers:

 

 

Malawa, Chapathi, Roti Shanai, and Halwa are high carbohydrate/high fat foods.

Sambosa, Burkaki, and Maqhumri are high fat foods.

Ambola, Fool, Iskudahkaris, and Soor are high fiber foods.

Meat sauce/curry, Sukhar, and Kabaab are high protein foods.

 

Angera is made several ways as follows:

 

 

Teff and corn flour

Teff and Sorghum

Self rising flour, corn flour, and eggs

Corn flour, eggs, wheat flour

Self rising flour, water or milk, and sugar

 

Westernization of foods and dietary practices is happening including making anjera with pancake mix or all purpose flour instead of corn, teff and other ingredients of traditional anjera.

 

Sauce with Angera is made of 1/2 cup tea, 1 tsp. Butter, and 2-3 spoons sugar added to the tea during preparation.

 

Ambola is made with red beans boiled in water, and is sometimes mixed with rice and a pinch of salt. It is smeared with sesame oil (called masara) and sugar when served.

 

Malawa looks like a pancake and is made with flour, sugar, oil and eggs. It may or may not be served with honey.

 

Fool is made with Pinto beans, tomatoes, and onions in water. The onions are fried before being added to the other ingredients.

 

Mufo is bread made with corn flour, salt and sugar and is baked like a cake.

 

Meat sauce/Meat curry is made with ground beef and mixed vegetables and lots of spices. It is also made with goat meat that has been fried or baked.

 

Rice is eaten steamed or fried. Fried onions and spices are added to the rice before adding water. Plenty of oil is used.

 

Iskudahkaris (called Pilau in Tanzania) is a combination of onions and vegetables that are fried in oil, to which rice and water are then added.

 

Roti is pan cooked bread without oil.

 

Chapathi is a pan fried bread using vegetable oil or butter to fry.

 

Roti Shanai is similar to chapathi or East Indian paratha; it is served with butter and honey.

 

Sambosa are curry puffs stuffed with meat and vegetables and then deep fried.

 

Pasta is served with tomato and meat sauce that may have vegetables added to it. Carrots and potatoes are the commonly used vegetables.

 

Halwa is made with wheat flour, clarified butter and sugar.

 

Sukhar is a beef and tomato sauce, or a beef and vegetable sauce.

 

Soor is made with corn.

 

Burkaki (Mandazi in Kenya) are two types: 1. Balls made out of Angera mix and deep fried, and 2. Chapati rolled out of Angera dough, cut into triangles and fried.

 

Maqhumri is dough made out of flour, sugar, eggs and baking powder. Small balls of dough, about 2-3 inches in circumference, are deep fried in oil.

 

Kabaab is ground lamb or beef that is mixed with spices and baked or grilled.

 

Fast Foods/Acculturated Diet: A common concern of most Somali parents is that while they like to cook and eat Somali foods, their kids are moving more towards a diet of fast foods. French fries and the like are readily becoming popular in Somali homes in the USA, and so also the consumption of soda pop and high-fat snacks.

 

Cheese is now being included among foods regularly eaten by Somalis in Washington State.

Pepsi and the sweetened red drink "Vimto" are common drinks in addition to sweet tea.

Excessive fruit juice consumption by kids, a westernized habit, is an emerging concern. The practice is observed as contributing to feeding disorders in kids.

Westernization of staple foods is happening including making anjera with pancake mix or all purpose flour instead of corn, teff and other ingredients of traditional anjera.

Pediasure, a pediatric nutritional supplement, is a very popular drink among Somalis, used to promote weight gain. It often replaces meals.

Common Dietary Beliefs

 

"Fat and healthy" is how parents prefer their kids to be, even to be overweight or obese by Western standards. Increased interest by Somali parents in the use of high- calorie nutrition supplements for their children to boost weight gain, has been observed. This practice is leading to feeding mismanagement.

 

Abdominal obesity in women is considered okay, especially post childbirth.

 

Camel milk is believed to be the best of all milks.

 

Eating chicken injected with hormones is believed to be bad for the human heart and to contribute toward being fat.

 

Breast feeding women believe the tea increases milk production and therefore they increase their consumption of tea, which is usually very much sweetened with sugar.

 

Women in the education groups have reported not liking the idea of pumping breast milk, for fear of disfigurement.

 

Common Nutrition/Diet Related Health Problems

 

Anemia

Constipation

Poor dental health

Allergies

Lipid abnormalities

Diabetes

Childhood and Postpartum Obesity

Failure to thrive (FTT)

Feeding Disorders/Feeding Mismanagement

Daycare feeding concerns

Eating disorders (among Somali teens, this is a fairly new and upcoming concern)