Watching spectators young and old, men and women who came to Dr. Aafia Siddiqui’s trial in New York I recognized the rapidly increasing significance of religion as a marker of identity among Muslims in the US.
Judge Richard Berman, by ordering additional security measures for this trial, underscored the ideological profiling of a religious minority that has suffered immense public devaluation and disparagement since the 9/11 attacks.
I must admit that I do not completely understand the complex and diverse reasons for the foregrounding of religion in identities of Muslims in America. But I feel that the post 9/11 policies of the US government, fear mongering by conservative media, have led to increased in-group solidarity and identification on the basis of religion.
I have always argued that identify is fluid and contextual. I am a Pakistani when someone in New York asks me ‘where are your from?’ When the same question is posed in Lahore, I am from Karachi. I am a ‘man’ when around women- I am a ‘straight man’ around gays and an ‘old man’ around young kids.
But here is the sticky point – whether I practice religion or not, I am a Muslim because of my name, place of origin, and possibly because of clothes that I wear.
Faced with ideological profiling, discrimination, devaluation,and disparagement, religious identity has become the key marker for young Muslim men and women. I met several young Pakistani women who were born and raised in New York who not only cover their faces in hijab completely but also do not show picture IDs to male security guards.
I asked a young woman behind veil where she was from – she said “Brooklyn.” No, she didn’t say Pakistan. She was born in Coney Island Hospital to parents from Pakistan. Her father who used to be a lecturer in Pakistan has driven a cab for the past twenty years on the streets of New York. She has lived on the intersection of Coney Island Avenue and Newkirk Avenue all her life. From Kindergarten to college – she attended the public education system.
Let me not exaggerate- even among Muslims in America she is an anomaly. The majority of Muslim women dress modestly, some wear scarves, and plenty dress in ways that are consistent with their American peers.
But my sweet little Pakistani-Americans with faces covered in hijab are growing in numbers. I completely respect their right to cover themselves – and also understand the anxieties of those who fear what maybe behind the veil.
I can see how religious discourse can play a vital role in negotiating and resisting parental and community restrictions. A family friend recently told me that she knows several young Pakistani girls who cover themselves so they don’t have to worry about what clothes they must wear to school – or whether they have a boy friend or not. “It simply relieves them of all sorts of peer pressure,” our friend said. And, yes it is plausible.
But I feel it is more than not having brand name jeans with matching socks and bra-straps that force these bright and immensely intelligent women to wear hijab. For many it is a sign of dissent- a sign of courage- a sign of protest and yes of course for many it is their religious duty. These young women use the discourse of religion and identity for personal empowerment.
And, of course there were some young Muslim men at the trial with beards flying all over their faces and prayer beads in hand. There was one who had a ‘miswak’ (a piece of dried stem used 1400 years ago to brush teeth). The Marshal who had searched his bag was puzzled to see this ‘miswak’ and asked what do you do with it?
And, yes this young man was born in Queens. He has lived in New York – studied in several American schools and colleges. Like thousands of other young Muslim American, he also feels his religious identity provides a positive role model, compared to his parents’ under-employment and as an alternative to the street and drug cultures in his neighborhoods.
Parents of these young men and women are ecstatic that their off-spring are following religious and cultural values and are “keeping away from danger”. But the search for identity makes these impressionable young men and women vulnerable to radicalization as well.
The search for identity is part of the process of defining one’s relationship with the world that usually takes place without necessarily leading to ‘radicalization’. One would argue that ‘radicalization’ requires an interpersonal interaction with other actors who stimulate and influence the process. And, this is where the rub lies. Devaluation, disparagement and ideological profiling, lack of equal opportunities for career advancement and integration with mainstream society are those factors that can stimulate and influence the process of radicalization.
By ordering additional security for Dr. Aafia Siddiqui’s trial Judge Richard Berman inadvertently became that external actor.
Let’s face it – Muslims today are facing a crisis that has few parallels in history. They are caught between the forces of extremism from within and the crushing onslaught of the West. Many Muslims find previous explanations of injustices (rich and poor) class based economic systems inadequate to explain their current experience. For Muslims living in the US this experience is compounded by religious discrimination, ideological profiling, and a lack of confidence in the government.
These young men and women I met during the trial simply seek to construct a sense of what it means to be Muslim in the US today. However, they are in danger of radicalization because traditional Islamic institutions are failing to connect with them to address their challenges. Many young men and women who grew up on the streets of New York and have found Islam empowering are not in a position
to objectively evaluate whether extremist interpretations represent an accurate understanding of Islam.
I found a young Pakistani-American who was born in Harlem Hospital and grew up in Bronx recently argue that Islam abolished slavery and that is why there are more blacks embracing Islam than whites. And, there was a young Pakistani girl who argued Islam emancipated women because before the advent of Islam girls were buried as soon as they were born. She got agitated when I suggested that it was1400 years ago and asked what progress has been made to further emancipate women. “Quran is final,” she said and no progress, changes can be expected in the lives of pious Muslim men and women.
I can’t blame Judge Richard Berman for a less than rational worldview of these young men and women. But more ideological profiling will create more disenfranchised, alienated, marginalized and angry individuals.
But, those of us who cherish the secular tradition of the US have a responsibility. We need to define what Islam means to our children born and raised in this society. We must define what it means to practice religion in a secular country. We must open doors for young men and women to integrate religion with local traditions. We must encourage them to allow American influences into their lives and ideology. We must encourage them to fully participate in the society and political system. We must encourage public service.
Simply put- it is our responsibility and only we can defeat Islamic extremism; not soldiers with M4 rifles, not pilotless drones and robots. And, we can do that by accepting and acknowledging the ground realities- we should be able to explain that context will not erode the core of Islam. That Islam will potentially benefit from some localization.
Ibrahim Sajid Malick is a Pakistani-American writer, technologist, and social entrepreneur. He has been writing on Pakistani society and politics since 1986. He has held several media, communications, and technology positions for organizations large and small. Mr. Malick graduated from New School for Social Research with a master’s degree in anthropology. He holds several technology and management certifications. He works for a leading technology firm and blogs at www.ibrahimsajidmalick.com
Add to the mix the deterioration of democratic system within the world’s mightiest government and the picture becomes complete. A proactive approach for securing democracy from the shackles of corporatism could provide these kids with a noble objective and help them integrate with mainstream American politics. Perhaps.
who the hell are you to say Islam needs to change? you cannot not be Muslim.
very well written article. muslims have to take responsibility and change.
شاندار ابراہیم ساجد ملک صاحب
آپ کے گزشتہ بلاگ کی طرح یہ مضمون بھی شاندار ہے اور امریکہ میں موجود مسلمانوں کے درپیش مسائل کو سمجھنے کا موقع فراہم کرتا ہے ۔۔ اس مضمون کا ایک جملہ مجھے سب سے زیادہ پسند آیا ہے ۔۔
The search for identity is part of the process of defining one’s relationship with the world that usually takes place without necessarily leading to ‘radicalization’
۔۔ ویسے اس بارے میں علامہ اقبال کے تجربے پر بھی ذرا روشنی ڈالئے وہ بھی جتنا جتنا مغرب میں اترتے گئے اسلام سے اتنا ہی زیادہ قریب ہوتے چلے گئے ۔۔ اس بارے میں آپ کی رائے درکار ہے ۔۔ کیونکہ ری کنسٹرکشن آف رلیجیس تھاٹس ان اسلام مجھے سمجھ نہیں آئی تھی ۔۔
Mr. Anjum and Mr. Murad,
Please do not encourage this kafir to write about Islam. Read this thesis again. This kafir wants to localize Islam. Islam is a universal religion- and The Holy Quran is the final divine book.
Agent of jews and hindus- Mr. Malick wants to confuse us. PLease be aware!
May Allah SWT protect you and guide you.
جناب علیم و نسیم
ابراہیم ساجد ملک نے ایک خیال پیش کیا ہے ۔ اپنی رائے دی ہے ۔ اگر آپ اسے غلط اور ناپسندیدہ سمجھتے ہیں اس کے مقابلے میں اپنا خیال پیش کریں ۔ افکار کا مقابلہ افکار اور دلائل کا مقابلہ دلائل سے کیا جاتا ہے ۔۔ محض طعن و تشنیع ، کفر کے فتووں اور بھد اڑانے کا مطلب ہی یہ ہوتا ہے کہ آپ کے پاس کوئی جواب نہیں ہے ۔۔ مجھے بھی اس مضمون کے بہت سے اجزاء سے اختلاف ہے جس کا میں اظہار بھی کروں گا کیونکہ میرا اختلاف ’’ مجرد ‘‘ نہیں ہے ۔۔ اگر آپ فتووں کی زبان استعمال کریں گے تو بات کہنے اور سننے کی گنجائش ہی کہاں رہے گی ۔۔ ایسے ہی ایک رویئے پر میں نے چند دن قبل ہی اپنے بلاگ پر ایک مضمون لکھا ہے ۔۔ ذرا ایک نظر ملاحظہ فرمایئے ۔۔
http://www.abushamil.com/maududi-haneef/
علیم صاحب اور نسیم صاحب نے جس کیفیت میں تبصرے کئے ہیں ۔۔ اس طرح کی کیفیت میں سندھ کے عظیم دانشور شیخ ایاز نے اپنے مخاطب کو کیا خوبصورت جواب دیا تھا ۔۔
’’ تمہاری سب سے بڑی سزا یہ ہے کہ میں تمہاری بات کا انتہائی سکون سے جواب دوں اور تم پر یہ واضح کردوں کہ تمہاری سوچ ایک تنکے سے زیادہ نہیں ہے کہ میرے وجود میں کوئی لہر پیدا کر سکے ‘‘
علیم صاحب کی ایک بات بالکل درست ہے اور اس بارے میں کم از کم میں کسی بحث کی ضرورت نہیں سمجھتا ۔۔ اور یہی دیگر امتوں اور اسلام کا جوہری فرق ہے ۔۔ قرآن کے اصول ، اور احکامات حتمی ہیں ۔۔ شریعت محمدی ﷺ کا حرام اور حلال قیامت تک کے لئے ہے ۔۔ پوری امت مل کر سود کھانے لگے پھر بھی سود حلال نہیں ہوگا ۔۔
religion is opiate of masses and will lead to darkness no matter what the religion or the context.
This is exactly why Aafia Siddiqui got into the mess she got into (not saying she’s guilty, just saying she brought religion into every aspect of her life)
dear bro marx – good going with religion. but see you are living in abstract not practical life. you see bro- if i discount religion i can’t rally masses behind our cause and their will be no revolution.
so i would say if religion is an opiate- let’s use it mobilize people for changing system. revolution doesn’t have to be marxist revolution- what do u think bro?
Dear lalukhait 10 number- I had to edit your post because of links to videos that are not appropriate.
You have put me in serious problem: I truly believe in your right to free speech. Many people here have cursed and threatened me- and I am OK with that. I have never deleted a comment. I take my commitment to freedom of expression very seriously.
But you have stretched my limit. Those who wear burqas are my sisters, daughters. When my mother was on the ambulance going outside last time in her life- she yelled at me for not bringing her burqa.
But just because my mother wore burqa it does not mean you can’t express your opinion. I will delete some words for now. And, I will sleep over it. I want to reach a decision that is considered and rational.
I hope you will forgive me for editing your comment.
Regards,
Ibrahim Sajid Malick
============================================
Dear Mr. Author,
Do you know what goes on behind veil – burqa or hijab
all pakistani hot girls wear burqa and shalwar. no shirt or bra and no panties. in all the cyber cafes and dating points these girls come in burqa so no one can tell who was there. from inside they are very hot and sexy. i think burqa makes pakistani girls very sexy.
I want u to watch this blueprint. sex video of a pakistani girl in burqa taking it from XXXXX. u see sir- burqa is just an excuse.
…..links to video deleted for now ……..
Dear Mr. Naseem and Aleem Sahabs,
Thank you for commenting. I really appreciate your passion. I believe Islam is a tolerant religion and we can’t live in isolation. I reproduce this line without attribution because I don’t remember where I read this:
“Allah is not the God of the Jews or the Christians or the Muslims only, any more than the sun shines or the rain falls for Jews or Christians or Muslims only.”
Objective realities demand that we adjust to our environment. Isolationist strategies have never worked- and they will fail us again.
Janab Zubair Anjum Sahab-
Your blog is wonderful and your thoughts demonstrate maturity that we need so badly. Please expand your thoughts on Iqbal, if you will. Because I am not advocating polarity – east-west, us-them type categories. In my humble opinion, there is an immediate need for Muslims in America to recognize the dangers of isolation.
Regards,
Ibrahim
Respectfully I wanted to ask you a Question “What Do You Think Islam Is ??”
This was the first time I actually started to like your article until i read your last paras. All i read in your article is that Islam is a religion but to us Muslims,Islam is a COMPLETE CODE OF LIFE which includes Politics,Economics,Social Life,Education System and everything else. And what democracy are you talking about?? & you really think that those people carrying guns and Armour with beard are Muslims?? You don’t even try to get the facts right. You are talking about change…who really need to change…Did Afghans ask U.S. to meddle in their country?? Did they found Nukes in Iraq…Why don’t you write any thing on that?? all you write about that Islam needs a change and how Muslims turning into extremists…& Muslims need a change…I’m looking forward to your reply!
DO WATCH THE FOLLOWING LINKS:
A TRUE FACE OF DEMOCRACY.This is the real Extremism,the real Terrorist:
http://www.facebook.com/video/video.php?v=107690379241030&ref=mf
& A little Piece Of History Of Islam:
http://www.facebook.com/video/video.php?v=103207463041276&ref=mf
Pushing Secularism towards Islam … never going to happen!!
Sure U can play with words and even enforce UR Secular world order by the use of Military, but we will defend our religion till the last breath.
And remember if U are a true Muslim then U must submit UR self completely in the Path of Allah (SWT), A Muslim can adopt technology/ language/ materialistic things from the west (or any other culture) but accepting their SECULAR Ideology is not in a true Muslim’s agenda.
So as a message to all my Muslim brothers who support such Culture (Democracy in general) …. Remember what democracy stands for, Democracy means “Rule of the Majority” where as we Muslims have been blessed with the Holy Quran and the Sunnah … so we do not need any democracy but simply a kind of governance that implements the Quran/ Sunnah based rules on the general public … and what better system could there be for doing this then “THE KHILAFAT”
I totaly agree with Mustafa Hussain. Democracy is the system of “Ghair Ullah” which means the rule of everyone but Allah, which is not acceptable for muslims, as muslims submite their will to Allah once they become muslim and running the system of democracy is contradiction with this agreement.
@Mustafa Hussiain Modan: Sir please read a book or two before making such idiotic statements. You sound like an enermy of Islam.
You and anti-Islam Westererns present Islam as an anti-democratic and inherently authoritarian ethos that precludes democratization in the Muslims World.
By misrepresenting Islam in this way you conspire to show that Islam as a set of values is inferior. This argument is also helpful to Israel, which regardless of its egregious human rights violations against Palestinians, continues to enjoy the reputation as the sole democracy in the Middle East. As a so-called democratic nation, Israel with its horrible record is preferred over Islam, which has an exemplary history of tolerance and freedom.
Using extremely broad, simple and crude notions of secularism and sovereignty, you reject democracy as rule of Man as opposed to Islam which is rule of God.
You falsely assume that secularism and democracy are necessarily connected. Secularism is a liberal tradition not a prerequisite for democracy.
Religion does play a significant role in democratic politics.
Do you understand the distinction between dejure sovereignty and defacto sovereignty. For example even though God was supposedly sovereign in Afghanistan, in fact it was the Taliban who awere sovereign there till 2001. Those who thought that Allah was sovereign in Taliban’s Afghanistan worshiped Mulla Omar.
I would urge you read some books – start with Iqbal- he will show you the difference between sovereignty in principle and sovereignty in fact. Sovereignty is always man’s whether in a democracy or an Islamic State. Rejecting democracy because man is sovereign is a big mistake. What we really need to worry about is how to limit the defacto sovereignty of man.
Democracy with its principles of limited government, public accountability, checks and balances, separation of powers and transparency in governance does succeed in limiting man’s sovereignty. The Muslim world plagued by despots, dictators and self-regarding monarchs badly needs the limitation of man’s sovereignty.
Half of the self proclaimed Islamic states also claim to be democracies. The point is simple; contrary to the claims otherwise, the democratic ideal is quite widely upheld in the Muslim world.
Even prominent Islamic revivalists of the twentieth century like Maulana Maududi and Imam Khomeni have advocated the cause of democracy.
Maulana Maududi was the first to write about the concept of a Theo democracy – a God centered democratic polity.
Imam Khomeini established separation of powers, a parliaments, elections and public accountability along with the institution of Vilayat-e-faqi after the Islamic revolution of Iran. Indeed there is nothing in Islam and in Muslim practices that is fundamentally opposed to democracy — justice, freedom, fairness, equality or tolerance.
Mr. Malick I appreciate your concern for Muslims in America. But I think you crossed the line by advocating that we change our religion. Islam is a way of life- Din – it is not merely an ideology. Quran is the ONLY guidance and we must follow every line of it.
Please go enjoy wine with your American friends and leave us to worry about Muslims. DO NOT EVER WRITE ON ISLAM …. IDIOT!
Though Indonesia, India, and Turkey, each in their different ways, present welcome examples of compatibility between Islam and democracy, it is often democracy molded to accommodate local cultures and customs. It is freedom, but not necessarily democracy as defined in Washington or the capitals of western Europe.
@Subhan: Iqbal strongly believed in collective ‘ijtihād’. He argued that in the contemporary times, the right of ijtihād should not be concentrated only in the hands of individual scholars and experts of the Qur’an and Sunnah alone. Along with the experts of the Qur’an and the Sunnah, it seemed essential to seek the opinions of experts in physical and social sciences on the given issue as the case may be.
Hence according to Iqbal, legislative assemblies constituted by experts of various disciplines including the experts of the Qur’an and the Sunnah and Uṣūl al Fiqh can play an important role in exercising collective ijtihad.
However, later Iqbal realized some practical problems that might arise in the legislative assemblies where Muslims are in minority like British India. He proposed the formation of an assembly of Ulema who should be independent of the legislature. “The idea” of the assembly, according to Iqbal, “is to protect, expand, and, if necessary, to reinterpret the law of Islam in the light of modern conditions, while keeping close to the spirit embodied in its fundamental principles.”
For this reason, many scholars including Mūḥammad Khālid Mas‘ūd contend that “the significance of Iqbal’s contribution in this discussion thus lies in his re-construction of ijtihād as a collective effort in the form if ijmā‘, rather than an individual attempt.”
Here, Iqbal’s contention that the abolition of Khilafah in Turkey and its replacement with the republican form of government is based on ijtihād, needs critical assessment. There is no doubt that the Khilafah in Turkey remained only in namesake since the whole institution of Khilafah was distorted and degenerated. It can also not be disputed that Islamic political system is based on consent and elective principle.
But was it not clear to Iqbal that Mustafa Kamal Ataturk was not interested in restoring Islamic political system, rather he aimed and established a thoroughly secular republic based on the Western model?
If Kamal Ataturk had abolished the distorted and torn out Caliphate in 1924 in order to establish the genuine Caliphate based on Shūra with the supremacy of Sharī‘ah, this would have been welcomed by the Muslim world whole heartedly. But, history bears witness to the fact that all the attempts of Ataturk were manoeuvred on Western model of modernization.
But, it does not however mean that Iqbal accepted secularism and secular foundation of democracy which shall be soon discussed later in the paper. Perhaps to Iqbal, the abolition of the distorted caliphate and the formation of a republican government is Ijitihād, not of course the formation of Western styled secular republic which is repugnant to Islam.
Freedome, good govarenence, fairness dose not belonge to democracy only, these were qualities of Khilapah long before democracy. If some or all muslim majority countries have democratic system it does not mean that democracy is the best. In my opinion Kamal Attaturk was worng when he took the decision of switching from Khilafah to democracy. You also miss-interpreted Allama Iqbal.
Ijtehad have different forms in different situations, Ijtehad in Fiqah is not job of a common man, yes a common men can take decisions by mutual consences about the issues which are not directly or indirectly addressed by the Qur’an and Sunnah.
Secularisim is the base of Democracy according to its definition, and if the socity is religious they can mold it according to their whishes but that will not be pure democracy as westren democracy, and one thing to remember here is that Islam is not an optional thing once you become a muslim, you have to enter islam whole heartedly.
The prophet (p.b.u.h) said that currently I am among you after me you will be ruled by a system based on my methodology (Minhaj) after that there will be harsh imperialism (By an Individual or group of people) and again after that a system based on my methodology (Minhaj) will be established.
My question is that why we cannot establish Khilafah, what is wrong with it? Don’t look to the personalities look to the systems. We have some horrible examples of democratic systems like making gay marriages leagal in some countries and allowing Ribah etc. In the name of ‘freedom of speech’ our channels became totaly unislamic, our parks are full of illegal couples and the Ribah is common, there is no ‘bait ul maal’ system to help poor etc etc.
I think you must read Qur’an and few books of Sunnah to understand Khilafah better.
The minhaj or methodology of a Muslim is to adhere to Qur’an and Sunnah of the Prophet and Messenger Mohammed (p.b.u.h) and the first three generation of rightly guided muslims (as-Salaf us-Salih).
Linguistically and in the shariah: An-nahju, al-manhaj and al-minhaaj mean the clear and manifest way. Allah subhana wa ta’ala says in the Qur’an:
The Noble Qur’an – al-Maa’idah 5:48
… To each among you we have prescribed a law and a minhaaj…
Hadith – Bukhari and Muslim:
A person asked Allah’s Apostle (peace be upon him) as to who amongst the people were the best. He said: Of the generation to which I belong, then of the second generation (generation adjacent to my generation), then of the third generation (generation adjacent to the second generation).
Our minhaj should “Quran and Sunnah.” And that is what Khilafah is all about, it is the best system for humanity. And by the way Allama Iqbal says:
“Apni millat par qayas aqwam-e-maghrib se na kar … Khas hay tarkeeb main Qaum-e-Rsool-e-Hashmi”.
@ Asad Ullah:
I like your argument. And you seem like a sensible and educated person. Here is the most accepted definition democracy in all the books of political science and constitutional law: “a system under which the people freely choose their representatives and leaders, in which there is an alternation of power, as well as all freedoms and human rights for the public.”
Do you find anything in Islam to oppose democracy (as described above), and is it in our interests to do so.
I feel democracy is an appropriate way to fulfill certain obligations of the faith in the contemporary world.
The Islamic tradition contains a number of key concepts that are key to “Islamic democracy.” It is important for Muslims not simply to copy what non-Muslims have done in creating democratic systems, because there are different forms that legitimate democracy can take.
Iran’s President Mohammad Khatami, in a television interview in June last year said that “the existing democracies do not necessarily follow one formula or aspect. It is possible that a democracy may lead to a liberal system. It is possible that democracy may lead to a socialist system. Or it may be a democracy with the inclusion of religious norms in the government. We have accepted the third option.”
My dear brother, the world democracies are suffering from a major vacuum, which is the vacuum of spirituality, and Islam can provide the framework for combining democracy with spirituality and religious government.
The synthesis of spirituality and government builds on a fundamental affirmation at the heart of Islam: the proclamation that “There is no divinity but The God” and the affirmation of the “oneness” of God.
This concept, called tawhid, provides the foundation for the idea that one cannot separate different aspects of life into separate compartments.
Ali Shariati, who made important contributions to the ideological development of the Islamic revolution in Iran, wrote in On the Sociology of Islam, that tawhid “in the sense of oneness of God is of course accepted by all monotheists. But tauhid as a world view . . . means regarding the whole universe as a unity, instead of dividing it into this world and the here-after . . . spirit and body.”
In this worldview, the separation of religion from politics creates a spiritual vacuum in the public arena and opens the way for political systems that have no sense of moral values. The Oneness of God requires some form of democratic system.
No Muslim questions the sovereignty of God or the rule of Shari’ah. However, most Muslims do (and did) have misgivings about any claims by one person that he is sovereign. The sovereignty of one man contradicts the sovereignty of God, for all men are equal in front of God. . . . Blind obedience to one-man rule is contrary to Islam.
The doctrine of tawhid virtually requires a democratic system because humans are all created equal and any system that denies that equality is not Islamic.
@Asad Ullah: