Originally published in February 2011.

Our Culture Of Arrogance, Anger And Online Arguments

Dawud Wharnsby once wrote in one of his songs:

We use so many words but have so little to relay
as angels scribble down every letter that we say.
All the viral attachments sent and passionate insults we vent
It’s easy to be arrogant behind user passwords we invent.
But on the day the scrolls are laid, with every word and deed displayed,
when we read our accounts, I know, for one, I’ll be afraid.

That day I’ll be so afraid to read. (Album: The Prophet’s Hands, 2003)

One of the tragedies of the Internet is that it strips away much of the social contract we have put into place in order to make our interactions more pleasing and less confrontational. If someone upsets us online or gives an opinion we disagree with, there is no physical danger in refuting them, in calling them an idiot, a kaafir or any other host of names. If someone quotes a scholar we happen to believe is a “sellout,”or gives us a sport statistic about a player we don’t particularly like – many of us have no problem publically labeling the elderly knowledgeable scholar as a sellout and making sure the world knows through vile vocabulary that we think the player sucks. Of course when we insult them, we do not acknowledge that we are neither knowledgeable scholars nor professional sports players.

We would not say these things in front of the people we’re talking about; if these were our parents, we would adamantly make excuses and prevent gossip. So why do our fingers move fluidly to vent insults, accusations and even high-level political analysis about events that we have merely done a few Google searches on?

A few months ago, a young brother from my community was killed in a train accident while walking. Readers on the local newspaper’s website casually commented that it may have been his fault if he wasn’t watching the train coming. This was on the day of his death. Would they have said this to the face of his crying mother? Would they have spread this thought outside the funeral, so everyone within listening distance could hear? We would hope none of them would have the cruelty to do this. But by typing their comments on the Internet, this is exactly what they have done.

Similarly, many young Muslims youth throw accusations against Muslim scholars, spend hours online insulting Sunnis, Shi`ites, Ikhwanis, Sufis, Salafis, Tableeghis, Deobandis, and every other flavor of the Muslim spectrum one can imagine. Many actually dedicate a portion of their day updating their Facebook status, insulting so-and-so through a clever blog post, warning others, listing out their faults – all this with the conviction they have “enjoined the good and forbidden the evil!” And don’t deny it, many of us cannot resist commenting on websites, or Facebook statuses, where our Islamic political, social, economic, creedal, and legal opinions – usually set in stone – are MORE sacred than the other because “we learned it from a teacher.” Yet the majority of us did not have any formal, conclusive training in the Islamic sciences – which even if we had, would not justify the bitter tone and behavior.  As Imam Suhaib Webb says, “We are like firemen arguing about what hose to use, while the house burns down.”

What we must realize is that when we take part in this culture of debate, arguing, than arguing again, day after day after day, we are slowly devastating our own hearts. On social networks we feel a rush of adrenaline waiting for the counter-argument or foreign person to respond. We create intellectual forums then wait like vultures to check another person’s clearly messed up thinking to respond back with a counter-proof: “That’ll show them!” That AWESOME feeling after a lengthy response is not enjoining good or even productive: we are simply letting OUR nufoos (our souls and desires) tear apart the heart and run wild to see if they can prove ascendancy over someone else.

In order to truly understand the psychology behind this, we will approach this from two angles. First, let us see what the Qur’an tells us about this behavior. Secondly, we will explore a few points that can remind us why and how we need to stay away from this culture.

Let us examine Surah Luqman:

“O my son! Establish regular prayer, enjoin what is just, and forbid what is wrong: and bear with patient constancy whatever betide thee; for this is firmness (of purpose) in (the conduct of) affairs.

And swell not thy cheek (for pride) at men, nor walk in insolence through the earth; for Allah loveth not any arrogant boaster.

And be moderate in thy pace, and lower thy voice; for the harshest of sounds without doubt is the braying of the donkey.” (Qur’an, 31:17-19)

Benefits of the Passage:

1. We see that Luqman orders his son to enjoin good, forbid evil, and be patient. Why does he tell him to be patient? Because anyone who TRULY takes on the job of enjoining good and forbidding evil in a society will be faced with calamities, trials, and tribulations. I assure you, being overweight, being sleepy, or having hurting fingers in the morning as a result of excessive typing and online arguing is NOT the calamity Luqman is discussing. Rather, he is telling his son to remember that people will end up physically oppressing you if you stand up for what is right, and to be ready to bear that trial patiently.
2. Luqman tells his son not to “swell one’s cheek” in pride or be insolent. Yet, when we tell people that Shaykh X is a sellout, and that “I don’t take from him,” or that “He is not a traditional scholar so I would ignore what he says,”we have done just that. We have attempted to establish our superiority over a learned person with our words and have demonstrated our own intellectual bankruptcy. We could not counter the proof, so we fell to countering the man. As Muhammad al-Shareef once stated: “When one proof fails, a person often falls back to anger. Anger is not a proof.”
3. Finally Luqman tells his son to be “moderate in his speech, and lower his voice.”

What is the purpose of lowering one’s voice? So that one is not displaying one’s words to everyone in the vicinity, and bothering them with our displays of arrogance. Yet, every single time we write something publicly (including on this blog), we are displaying words for all to see. We are yelling at the entire world, asking the world to witness our words. Are we going to ask the world to witness us calling to good things? Or will we ask the world to witness us defaming scholars, insulting this group of Muslims or that group of people who we’ve decided are not Muslims? Will we spend our time showing the world how the Prophet ﷺ lived? Or show the world how we have our own personal problems, inadequacy issues, and a need to demonstrate how we are on the “right path” and all others need to fall in line?

We all need to seriously evaluate our souls in this culture of online argumentation and identify why we spend our time the way we do. A few realizations we must begin to change include:

Continuously leaving controversial and provoking messages in our online personalities, whether through networks, forum posts or blog comments. This is NOT “forbidding the evil”; this is opening a gate for evil. Any trained mental-health professional will point out that this is attention-seeking behavior from a person who wants to feel like they are making a difference and are important. Ask yourself do I need to respond? What would Prophet Muhammad ﷺ do?

While the refined soul wants to do dhikr (remembrance) of Allah (swt), the diseased soul wants others to do dhikr of itself. It feels proud that it has stood against evil by posting YouTube links, by invoking walaa wal baraa (loving and hating for the sake of God) and by invoking creedal differences we barely understand to excommunicate entire groups from being Ahl-As-Sunnah(people of the Prophetic way). In all our interactions, we must make Allah our focal point, not ourselves.

The soul thinks it is making the world a better place, but it is simply trying to make itself feel useful through the use of the Internet and is involving itself further and further in argumentation. Al-Awza’i said: “When Allah desires ill for a people, He opens the door of argumentation for them and prevents them from doing good deeds.”

An online action is no different than one which is written down with a pen and signed, and sent to the receiver. The act is witnessed by the Honored Scribes, the angels who write our deeds, and is recorded in the scrolls of our actions, and will be present for us to read on the Day of Judgment. An online insult against a person, a scholar, or simply an acquaintance has the same weight as a letter would. To think otherwise is a deception from Shaytan.

We are not God’s police on the Earth. We are His worshippers and the representatives of the Prophet ﷺ.  Would the Prophet ﷺ spend his time telling everyone that Group X is not doing a good job for the Ummah and Group Y is better? Would he spend his time insulting scholars? Did he even curse the people of Ta’if who threw stones at him? Rather, he ﷺ would reflect on the revelation and build Muslim men and women through constructive, productive coaching in real life, rather than gain retribution for every wrong against him. And this is a man ﷺ whose words were heavier than ours, yet even he did not stoop to argumentation.

If we are not ready to stand before historic imams: Ghazali, Ibn Taymiyyah, Ibn ul Qayyim, or contemporary shuyukh Albani, Qaradawi, Yasir Qadhi, Hamza Yusuf, Taqi Uthmaani, Suhaib Webb  – or any of the ‘ulama, jama`ahs or senior students of knowledge (that we like to discredit) – on the Day of Judgment, with the Angels of Allah and Allah’s Might before us and say: “Ya Allah – My word against his, this imam/sheikh/person is an innovator and led people astray, and I was your servant and I called to Your way with sound understanding that exceeds his” – then we should keep our mouths SHUT. I am not referring to scholarly differences of opinion that are dealt with through the referencing of proofs and legal methodology. I am referring to the bickering of people that many often resort to in judging the sacrifices, efforts, and studies others have made to serve Allah and further his deen.

Our own identity crises can make us feel we need to belong to a stronger group that is “correct” which in turn may encourage our online behavior in seeking conflict, being difficult and wasting everyone’s time. Many people feel alone, especially online, and to seek strength they resort to joining those who mock other groups. Their nafs feels it is better than other misguided people and revel in the pride that it is on a better path. This is dangerous thinking and needs to be checked.

We may have anger or emotional issues that we need to vent online to feel better. We may leave comments in the hopes of people thinking better of us, or for some other inadequacy that we seek to fulfill. It would behoove us to quickly do an examination of ourselves and our online personalities. Our various online anonymities allow our true selves to come out and act in ways that our common sense prevent us from doing in real life. So now you need to ask yourselves, why am I typing that? Who is it really for? Me, or them?

Lastly, we may just need to “get a life!” It is possible that you want to serve the deen, be involved in daw`ah, helping our communities and societies through Islamic values, but do not know how. The solution is relatively simple: get involved in local masaajid, your communities, engage with real people, serve your people and get away from the internet.

Additionally, seek knowledge for the sake of God, not for the sake of argumentation. I recommend searching this website’s Islamic Studies section for more on seeking knowledge, as well as reading a broad range of Islamic books. Study Islam in depth, pick a field and specialize in that area. Finally, read the Qur’an more often – after wudhu, Book in hand, computer switched off.

The threat of the nafs glorifying itself is an ever-present threat to every writer, speaker, and presenter who shares information about Islam. All of us must consistently take caution, advice, and spend time with people who discourage argumentative behavior and know us well enough to remind us of our own weaknesses, so that we do not let such behaviors manifest themselves in our lives. Many of us are surprised that the internet remembers everything. But to a Muslim, we should already know that nothing we do, type or utter ever escapes the pen of the angels who write, or the sight of Allah (swt). As Dawud Wharnsby says, when we are handed our accounts, will we be afraid to read?

(c) Rehan Shaikh

Originally posted in September 2012.

At the risk of aging myself, in the 90’s, the term “unplugged” referred to a show where artists musically entertained a small audience without the aid of electric instruments.  These days however, when families are encouraged to go “unplugged” they are persuaded to spend time together free of “electronic distractions” or as my older brother, an electrical engineer, says, “e-distractions,” for short.  Such distractions include the myriad of miniature instant gratification devices otherwise known as Nintendo DS’s, iPods, tablets, phones, not to mention larger distractions, like television, gaming consoles such as Wii, Xbox, etc., and the classic home computer.  We all know the merits of quality family time on a real-time basis, but the question is: how?

First, it is important to understand the ramifications of the entire family’s increased relationship with electronics.  Studies show that family bonds are weakening since members are spending more screen time and less face time.  Children and adults alike are losing the ability to engage in small talk and are gaining an increased apathy towards others.  An increased desire for visual stimulation and a decreased attention span are also compelling reasons to push for familial electronic time-outs.  Feelings of detachment of family members from one another leads to an increased reliance on comfort in superficial “e-relationships” and fleeting moments of gratification from Facebook posts, game console victories, and endless text conversations.

To console those who enjoy the above-mentioned activities, this article is not intended to condemn them.  Instead, it is meant to point out the importance of giving our technological toys a “time-out” and to tune-in to the family on a consistent basis.  The beauty of this concept is that every family, regardless of its size, can custom make a “reconnect plan” of their own.

For example, consider setting guidelines for the family, which include times where technology use is not allowed.  Such times can include family meals, a specific hour in the evening, or better yet, an entire day of the week.  For some of you, the mere thought of spending more than a few minutes away from your tablet or phone causes increased anxiety.  Sadly enough, this is now documented as a new disorder called “cell phone separation anxiety disorder,” where sufferers experience increased anxiety if they are away from their phones.  Yes, separation from instant gratification devices can be painful, but like lower primates, we can be trained to return to our natural e-distraction free state.  We have to re-learn basic skills like getting over boredom, engaging with others in a meaningful conversation, touching dirt and looking for bugs, and even having to talk to our parents’ out-of-town guests or long lost relatives.

Now, you may ask, how can we accomplish such a feat when toddlers, teens, and adults have become inseparable from their various screens?  First, give before you take away.  A classic concept in discipline is to replace an undesirable habit with a desirable one.  Simply said, provide fun alternatives for your family.  I have heard parents complain that their children only want to play on their electronic devices all day long.  Yet these same parents do not spend the time to take their children to the park, play a board game with them, let alone purchase such games, or even make the effort to engage their family members in an interesting discussion.

Below are some easy, family re-connect ideas.  But be forewarned, you will receive resistance from at least some of your family members.  Even the adults!  One key to the success of Operation Unplug and Re-Connect is to first discuss with your family guidelines to be followed.  Come up with a Re-connect plan that outlines how often you wish to have family time, e-distraction free.  For example, smaller or younger families may wish to have such times once a day.  Busier families, on the other hand may be content with a once-a-week schedule.  Next, have your family discuss activities that at least most members can agree upon.

Re-Connect Ideas

• Plan a family camping trip (a Mulla absolute favorite!).
• Go for a picnic at the beach or park and pack everyone’s favorite treat.
• Go outdoors and discover your surroundings. See who can find the most living things in 5 minutes.
• Engage your family in a discussion (if you could live anywhere, where would it be and why?).
• Go for a walk (some family members need more of a temptation like walking to an ice-cream or coffee shop).
• Play a board game.
• Look at family photos and reminisce.
• Divide and conquer if necessary: Play ball with some and play building blocks with others.

The bottom line is adding meaningful family quality time to our life, minus the electronic devices.  We would see healthier home lives and more well-rounded members of the community.  Changing familial habits is not easy, but well-worth it.  Unplug, re-connect, be patient, and enjoy.

General Quality of Movie: 6

Islamic Teachings: 3

Morals/Values: 8

Overall Benefit: 7

Imams MUST Connect with the Masses

When I first heard this movie was being released, I asked the laymen of our community – young and old – if they were going to see it. Actually most of them said they would either go out of curiosity or go in thinking it would be a morally based form of entertainment. The praise is God’s that He guided us to make a real connection with the average Muslims who are struggling with spirituality and are actually looking for guidance. This silent majority among us often feels shunned and/or alienated from religion by the chastising judgmental “conservative” Muslims whom I call the HARAM police. Many Imams pander to these peoples’ narrow and often rigid understanding of Islam. Sadly, if a status-quo Imam asked a layman about something, the answer of which could in any way be perceived as immoral, they will lie in fear of blame. This disconnect from the guidance of inclusive understanding of spiritual leadership is hindering the healthy growth of the Muslim community. Surely the Prophet ﷺ (peace be upon him) knew the evils and vices of Makkah, but outside of polytheism and grave immorality he would not deal with the new Muslims with a judgmental attitude which is precisely why many chose to continue to so devoutly follow him even with such grave consequences. The Sunnah is:

“It was an act of God’s mercy that you were gentle and easy going with them. Had you have been rigid or harsh hearted then they wouldn’t have followed you…”(3:159)

It is of the utmost importance for Imams to not only connect with the masses, but to also build an environment that is conducive to spiritual growth. An environment that respects differences of opinion to encourage and empower all facets of the community.

Watching a Movie Depicting a Prophet

I have discussed this issue with some of my teachers and read the fatwas (rulings) of others. The basis of the majority position of prohibition is not that the Qur’an or Sunnah forbade it per say, but rather, they fear the harmful response which could be caused by the ignorance of the Muslim world.

I would say that this particular movie stayed true for the most part to the biblical Noah (peace be upon him) which, as we will see in the review, is quite contrary to the Qur’anic Noah (pbuh). So the point of this movie was by no means to make jest or speak ill of the life or person of Noah. Rather it was an attempt at capturing his greatness according to the Bible with a modern Hollywood touch to get the current generation to appreciate Noah and his story.

I can’t speak for the eastern world because I don’t understand their circumstances and how this ruling would apply to them. For the educated, diverse place I was raised in and live in, I would say that the concerns of the scholars in the East do not apply. For example, I grew up watching the 10 Commandments and Jesus of Nazereth. At no point did I believe that the actor was really the prophet and I have never seen anyone with a picture of those actors in their homes. I have never met or heard of an American who worshipped a picture of anyone. Finally, there are some hardline people here, Muslim and non-Muslim, who didn’t like the movie and disagreed with its depiction. None of those people caused any real harm as a result in terms of rioting and vandalism.

I would only advise a Muslim planning to see it or those who have seen it that if you don’t know the true story of Noah as depicted in the Qur’an then you shouldn’t take it as some sort of learning experience since it is far from the Qur’anic message of Noah (pbuh).

The Need for Muslims to Enter the Real World of Influence

Back in the 1950’s, when cinema and TV started to take root, the vast majority of scholars across the Muslim world addressed the issue of acting and filming as prophets, companions, or the great sages and leaders. They agreed that none of these should be portrayed. In the 1970’s, the scholars of Azhar agreed that there is a benefit to be derived from making some sort of depiction of the Seerah (the life of the Prophet Muhammad ﷺ). So they agreed that neither the Prophet ﷺ nor the major companions who were given glad tidings of heaven could be depicted, but that they will make an exception for Hamza and Bilal radi Allahu `anhum (may God be pleased with them). This didn’t make much sense because indeed these were of the greatest companions, both of whom were also given the glad tidings of paradise, according to the Qur’an and Sunnah. So a few years ago, a group of prominent scholars including Sh. Salman al-Ouda gave their blessing for the content and plan to make a series on Umar’s (ra) life. Sh. Salman has given talks and advised Muslims to use film/television for da`wah (making people aware of Islam). Here is one of those: http://en.islamtoday.net/artshow-431-4760.htm

In another article he says, “Fatwas have never stopped the general Muslim public from watching romantic movies and television series, most of which were imported from Turkey, South America, and Korea. The Gulf States were the largest market for such films, with almost no oversight or monitoring. At the same time, gifted Muslims with creative vision and a noble message to convey were being stifled. Investors were hesitant to support their projects because of the questions surrounding Muslim drama, and this potentially huge market was being left untapped.

“If poetry had been the repository of Arab culture in the old days, then film/tv has become the repository of culture of most of the nations of the Earth today. It is in these movies and television series that people’s customs, lifestyles, and approaches to problem solving are depicted. It is where their fears, anxieties, and dreams are given expression.

“It has an enormous potential to express ideas, effect change, and form public opinion. It engages multiple senses, not just hearing or sight in isolation, and it addresses all human interests. It entertains, educates, and persuades all at the same time.”

Detailed Review of “Noah”

As a movie among movies, it was often boring, seemingly long, and drawn out. There was some good action sequences and some awesome special effects. The plot and main character was dark and hard to stomach, but the ending was good.

As far as general compatibility with our morals and values, it was void of profanity or any considerable nudity other than what you might see in public. Strangely it seemed not to endorse the institution of marriage as Noah’s son just made relations with his adopted sister and thus they were considered a couple with no sort of marriage. The violence was intense, but not so graphic. There was a segment where a spiritual experience was induced by some sort of hallucinogenic drink and in the end the lead character got drunk to relieve the pain of his depression.

The biggest concern for a Muslim regarding this movie is the major difference in the depiction of Noah (pbuh) and his message between the Bible and the Qur’an. First and foremost is the source of the conflict. The movie is depicting all of the people as believing in God, The Creator, whereas the Qur’an teaches that Noah’s people had deviated into polytheistic beliefs. Similarly the movie depicts a group of fallen angels whom God punished by turning into rock creatures. The Qur’an teaches that angels, by nature, act in full accordance to God’s will without exception and they are not tested with choice. Thus there is no such thing as a fallen angel in Islam.

The movie’s plot is that God has decreed irreversible damnation for the people’s corruption and iniquity from the get-go. It depicts Noah, not as a messenger of God, but rather as a servant to carry out His will in saving life to start over without humanity. The Qur’an teaches that God sent Noah as a messenger of divine mercy to teach his people pure monotheism and morality in order to save them from destruction and damnation. The movie makes the mission of Noah as an outsider nomad; there with his family simply to build the ark to save the means for future life on Earth without people. The Qur’an teaches that Noah lived integrated among society calling them to monotheism and submission to God. Only after hundreds of years of obstinate rebellion does Noah express his hopelessness in his people and God responds by informing him to build the Ark.

The movie depicts Noah’s people believing in Noah’s warning of a flood and so they devised a plan to survive by taking the ark by storm. The Qur’an teaches that the people mocked and ridiculed Noah while building the ark and even when the rain and floods began they still saw it as coincidence and sought to survive on the mountain. The movie depicts the end of humanity with no followers of Noah whereas the Qur’an teaches that there were many believers who embraced the prophethood and message of Noah and thus joined him on the ark.

The movie is in accordance with the Qur’an in that Noah himself was a very strong and devoutly obedient servant of God. The movie depicts him as a dark, semi-confused man who sees no hope for anyone from the very first time he receives revelation, whereas the Qur’an teaches that he was a merciful man who worked hard calling people to repentance and divine forgiveness. The movie depicts Noah as getting drunk to alleviate the pain of his confusion in understanding God’s will. The Qur’an teaches that all prophets of God are blessed and strive spiritually to moral excellence, and although capable of human error and minor sin; none committed a major sin. They are God’s emissaries on Earth and are the best human examples of piety.

The movie depicts a worldwide flood that destroys everything except what is on the ark. Some Muslim scholars made that common Biblical interpretation as the verses could be interpreted as such, yet they stipulate the condition that Noah’s message had reached all of mankind and they rejected it. Otherwise many Qur’anic commentators cite various points in the linguistics of the story that show the flood to be localized to the vicinity of Noah’s people.

The Overall Benefit

I saw huge benefit in this movie in that it confirmed my faith in the Qur’anic version that fits a comprehensive form of reasonable morality. This movie emphasized why people struggling with faith talk about “the god” of the Bible being illogical and merciless. Obviously we believe that God revealed the original scriptures that now make up the Bible, but it is clear through the miracle of the Quran, historical evidence, and common sense that man has altered its message.

The second lesson is in the huge potential of conveying the message of Islam, if we were to take Sh. Salman’s guidance and if many prominent scholars and donors can get over the scripturally baseless ruling prohibiting people from acting as prophets. It would be hugely advantageous to Islam and the Muslims if we made high-quality, well-funded, scripturally proper, and well-acted depictions of the prophets and our great history.

These are just my personal honest and sincere reflections, and God knows best.

Some scholars and many zealous laymen claim that there is a consensus among jurists as to the prohibition of listening to any music with musical instruments. Some Imams say the opinion that allows it is a strange (شاذ) opinion, which is rejected as baseless by all prominent scholars and schools of thought. If this is true, how can so many Imams and scholars allow this new phenomenon of Islamic music using instruments?

Answer:

بسم الله و الحمد لله و الصلاة و السلام على رسول الله

In the name of Allah, and all praise and thanks is due to Allah,  and may He send peace and blessings upon the Prophet Muhammad

It is quite true that—historically—the prevalent (جمهور) opinion in Islamic jurisprudence regarding the use of and listening to musical instruments is that of prohibition (حرام). It is the official opinion of the four schools of thought, although various scholars from different schools held it is only disliked (مكروه) and many others deemed it permissible with the condition that the song is not immoral. It is not true that there is a consensus on it or that the opinion of permissibility is a strange opinion, which is a divergence from clear teachings of the Qur’an and Sunnah. In today’s world there are a growing number of prominent scholars that allow listening to instruments that don’t accompany sinful poetry (song).

We will—with divine support—show that this issue is a matter of legitimate disagreement based on scholarly derivation and interpretation (اجتهاد). Unfortunately, one of the main reasons for this research is that there is actually a movement among modern scholars to dismiss, suppress, or misrepresent the opinion of permissibility!

There is a claim that no prominent scholars ruled for the permissibility of musical instruments except for Yusuf al-Qaradawi, who is purported to solely rely on a strange opinion of Imam Ibn Hazm. This is false. There are hundreds, dare I say thousands, of scholars who held the permissibility of listening to music as long as the song is morally upright. The following are some of the most prominent scholars (mujtahideen) in our history who, not only deemed it permissible, but in some cases wrote a whole research to prove it!

• Abdullah bin Ja’far bin Abi Talib (al-Aqd al-Fareed 6/12)
• Sh. Abu Hamed al-Ghazali (vol. 6 pg. 1150 al-Ihyaa’)
• Imam al-Shawkani (Ibtal da’wa al-Ijmaa ala mutlaq al-Sama’)
• Imam ibn Hazm (Al-Muhallah)
• Imam Abdul-Ghani al-Nablusi (Idaahat al-Dalalaat fee sama’ al-alaat)
• Sultan al-Ulema al-Iz ibn Abdul-Salam (Rislat al-Sama’)
• Al-Qadi Ibn Qutaiba al-Daynoor (al-Rukhsah fi al-Sama’)
• Imam Ibn Tahir al-Qaysirany (pg. 31 al-Sama’)
• Imam al-Thahabi (al-Rukhsah fil-Ghinaa wa al-Turb)
• Abu Talib al-Makky (Qoot al-Quloob)
• al-Qady Ibn Al-Araby al-Makky (Ahkam al-Quran vol. 3 pg. 1494)
• Sh. Yusuf al-Majishoon the prominent Muhaddith (#3399 ibn al-Khuthayma)
• Ibn Daqeeq al-Eid (Iqtinas al-Sawanih)
• Sh. Jad Ali jad al-Haqq (fatawah #3280)
• Sh. Mahmood Al-Shaltoot (pg. 375 fatawaah)

May God shower them all with His Mercy!

Some scholars try to say that many of these scholars were simply saying that it is permissible to listen to songs a cappella—and some of their works do make that point in addition to the permissibility of also using musical instruments. Each one of these references refers to the opinion of permissibility for songs with instruments.

The following are the juristic proofs used to illustrate prohibition and the response from the scholars who are not convinced by the evidence or who see the evidence in a different way:

From the Qur’an: There are two verses which are interpreted as justifying prohibition supporting the clearer hadith (narration) on the subject. They are as follows:

“There are some people who buy distracting/entertaining speech without knowledge in order to mislead people from the path of God…” (Qur’an 31:6)

Only a couple out of the dozens of exegetes thought this had anything to do with musical instruments.

Many exegetes took the more common path of general meaning in the absence of an authentic text and said it refers to preferring or liking to listen to false speech, thus distracting one from Islam.

The vast majority of exegetes said it is talking about the singing of jahiliyyah (pre-Islamic days). Imam al-Qurtubi said that this and the other verse are those that the scholars use as evidence for the disliked (مكروه) nature of singing. Imam al-Qurtubi also narrates that this verse was revealed in the life of the Prophet ﷺ when a man bought a slave known for singing unIslamic songs of jahiliyyah (ignorance).

Many exegetes pointed out a weak hadith that is strengthened by the aforementioned circumstantial cause of revelation. The weak hadith states:

“.لا يحل بيعُ المُغنّياتِ ولا شِراؤهنّ وثمنهنّ حرامٌ”

“It is prohibited to buy or sell women singers of jahiliyyah. The price of such transaction is prohibited.”

The evidence for prohibition of Islamic Music in this verse is very weak. Any true scholar will surely admit that the verse is not evidence in and of itself; rather it is supportive to a couple hadiths and the position of many Companions.

The second verse is:

“(God is saying to Satan) Incite whoever you can among them with your voice…” (Qur’an 17:64)

Some scholars from the early generations said this is literal and it means that Satan is whispering to us to follow him and disobey God as is mentioned in the famous verse in Surah Ibrahim, “I had no authority over you except that I called you and you followed me…” (Qur’an 14:22). The great Imam of tafsir (exegesis) al-Tabari took the position as is his style that it is general and since there is no clear evidence specifying what is meant by “your voice” then it is taken literally and generally.

Many other scholars noted that the verse is talking about playing (لعب) and wasting time (لهو). Once again, no real scholar will claim that this verse in and of itself can be used to prohibit listening to music.

Let’s see what evidence we can find from the Sunnah (traditions of the Prophet ﷺ):

There is a hadith mentioned as an attachment (معلق) to a section in the authentic collection of Bukhari under the chapter of drinks #5590 titled those who seek permission of drinking alcohol by calling it another name. Imam al-Bukhari did not put the Hadith as an official Hadith in his authentic collection. According to Imam al-Muhallab the reason was because Hisham was not sure of the name of the companion (Al-Ibtal Al-Shawkani pg. 9) The hadith goes:

“…ليكونَنَّ من أمَّتي أقوامٌ ، يستحلُّونَ الحِرَ والحريرَ ، والخمرَ والمعازِفَ”

“There will be a group of people from my nation who will deem silk, alcohol and musical instruments as permissible…”

Some hadith scholars found a connected chain for this type of hadith. The most famous is the book by Ibn Hajr in his book “closing the attachments” (تغليق التعليق). There are scholars who argued against his assertions, but even if we were to accept his findings about a connection between al-Bukhari and Hisham bin Ammar there is still a problem with Hisham as a narrator among some prominent hadith scholars.

There are many concerning issues with this hadith. According to Imam al-Thahabi in his famous 4-volume book Mizan al-I’tidaal which accounts for all the weak narrators he could gather. Imam al-Thahabi mentions that Hisham bin Ammar used to be a veracious narrator, then he changed. He has narrated 400 hadiths that have no basis. He used to not narrate unless someone paid him. He was accused of changing the text. Imam Ahmad said he was reckless. Some narrated that he said the Qur’an has words from Gabriel and Muhammad ﷺ and is created speech.

Ibn Hajar acknowledges this, but justifies his ruling of the hadith through a different narration that has someone else narrating it other than Hisham. That hadith varies in text but does mention the people deeming musical instruments as permissible (which linguistically and logically doesn’t necessarily mean that it is prohibited). The next problem with this hadith, which is not solved by Ibn Hajar’s book, is a narrator named Atiyah bin Qays.

Atiyah bin Qays was a righteous man who hadith scholars agreed regarding his character and honesty (عدالة), but there is an issue among some scholars about his precision of memory and narrating (ضبط). Some famous scholars of hadith call him trustworthy (ثقة) just because he is a known pious man while the issue of his precision with hadith is unknown (مجهول). Some of them said although he is acceptable (far from Saheeh ) to be careful in narrating from him. This is mentioned by the hadith scholar Abu Hatem al-Razi in his book al-Jarh wa al-Ta’deel 2/37 and by Abu Bakr al-Bazzaar in his book Kashf al-Astar 1/106.

This is the best proof that the proponents of prohibition bring forth according to them. Other hadiths are relying on this one. For example:

“.ليكونن في هذه الأمة خسف، وقذف، ومسخ، وذلك إذا شربوا الخمور، واتخذوا القينات، وضربوا بالمعازف”

“There will be disgrace and defamation in this nation when they will drink alcohol and listen to music (literally female singers while beating on instruments).” (al-Suyooti al-Sagheer 7720)

Even a layman can see that the linguistic connotation does not in any way show a prohibition for listening to music, but rather a prohibition of the “party” scene. There are many other hadiths like this one that show that the combination of alcohol and music is a shameful and immoral scene. On this fact there is a consensus among scholars.  Even in the narration of the other hadith seen as the strongest proof, there are variations which focus on drinking alcohol by a different name and don’t even mention musical instruments. Thus Imam Bukhari’s precise classification.

Many people feel that even though we see the issues in the proofs used for prohibiting music, still it is the official opinion of the 4 main schools of thought and that shows that it was clear to those scholars who know better than us. The assumption here is that every scholar from the different schools of thought over the centuries was a mujtahid and was willing to challenge the opinion and evidence of his own school. This was simply just not the case as Dr. Mana’ al-Qattan narrates in his book on the history of legislation in Islamic history. He elucidates on the well-known unfortunate part of our history known as the closing of the doors to juristic reasoning (إغلاق باب الاجتهاد). For close to 8 centuries, most of the scholars passed down by memory and book most of the rulings of Islamic Law. For various reasons, they were uncomfortable with people changing or questioning popular rulings. Some of those who didn’t agree with this methodology like Ibn Taymiyyah (ra) or al-Suyooti (ra) were seen as dissidents. There is also some historical evidence that this ruling of prohibition of all music was heavily promoted toward the end of the Abbasi Caliphate because of the widespread immorality with music and drinking as many of the hadiths indicate. In my research, which really requires a whole book, there is more than meets the eye on the prevalence of the opinion prohibiting all instrumental music.

Proofs for the Permission of Good, Morally Upright Music:

1. There is a false claim that the Companions all prohibited it. Abdullah bin al-Zubair used to keep women playing guitars (lutes) and singing in his presence. (Idahaat al-Dalalat al-Nablusi 96)
2. There is no disagreement about the Ibrahim bin Sa’d bin Abdul Rahman bin Awf listening to songs with guitars (al-Sama’ Ibn Tahir 63)
3. Jews have always attributed music to Prophet David ‘alahi assalatu wassalam (peace and blessings be upon him). It is in the Bible, “The priests stood in waiting at their assigned places, along with the descendants of Levi who carried musical instruments used in service to the LORD that King David had made for giving thanks to the LORD—because his gracious love is eternal…” (2 Chronicles 7:6). So in the following hadith and commentary we have some solid evidence for the praise of good music:

“يا أبا موسى ، لقد أوتيتَ مِزمارًا مِن مزاميرِ آلِ داود”

“Abu Musa, Surely you have been given a voice like the music of David.” (Bukhari 5048)

Many scholars want to say that this hadith is simply referring to a beautiful voice. When we look into Ibn Hajar’s explanation of this hadith he comments with another sound hadith, “I entered Abu Musa’s house and I have not heard a cymbal, lute or a flute better than his voice.” (al-Fath)

The clear linguistic indication here is that the Prophet ﷺ is talking about musical instruments as though they are beautiful and delightful. That cannot be the case in something prohibited. It would be like him saying to his companion who earned a lot of money, “That’s even better than hijacking a caravan!”

4. Imam al-Thahabi’s recordings about scholars in his book on prominent Muslims. Here are two examples:

“Ishaaq al-Nadeem an Imam who was a great scholar master of many sciences. Known for music with untainted poetry…” (Siyar 11/118)

“Ulayyah sister of the commander of the faithful Haroon al-Rasheed ‘Well-refined poetess known for singing and music with a pleasant voice. A modest pious women of precedence…’” (Siyar 10/187)

There are hadiths that led many scholars from the schools of thought to permit listening to drums. Other prominent Malikis and Shafi’ees (two different schools of thought) allowed trumpets, flutes and tambourines. Those are all musical instruments and the Islamic legal practice of analogy (قياس) allows other instruments in the absence of a clear text prohibiting them.

Whichever opinion you feel is stronger, you are welcome to follow. Please don’t judge someone else because they follow a different opinion than you. Our scholars teach us the following principle in dealing with law—there shall be no rebuking in matters of legitimate disagreement.

.لا إنكار في مسائل الاختلاف

Islam has a rich tradition of knowledge that by divine decree has differing interpretations as to the details of law. Only God owns the absolute truth.

If you choose to listen to music, observe piety and do not listen to immoral music or choose to be in immoral environments. There is no doubt that much of today’s music is prohibited by Islam and even some Islamic music still brings bad environments.

By Lena Khan

More than 1400 years ago—before the significance of it was ever being debated in our community—the Prophet ﷺ (peace be upon him) enjoyed and utilized the arts. For him, this was often in the realm of poetry. It was something he appreciated. He encouraged its purification. He understood its influence. And he used it. Many centuries later, although I am far from being like him in any way, in my capacity as a filmmaker also engaging in the arts: I am surely trying.

The Prophet ﷺ and the Arts

It can be said that the Prophet ﷺ enjoyed his share of the arts. When riding with the father of `Amr bin Sharid, it is reported that he asked `Amr, “Do you remember any poetry of Umayya bin Abi Salt?” `Amr replied in the affirmative, and the Prophet ﷺ asked him to recite. “Go on,” the Prophet ﷺ would say. By the end, `Amr had recited one hundred couplets to the Prophet’s blessed ears.

This appreciation of the arts of his time was not restricted to an isolated incident. On noted occasions, the Prophet ﷺ prayed for talented poets. Though he was not a poet himself by any means, he recited the poetry of Ibn Rawaha at the Battle of Khandaq. At weddings and celebrations, he encouraged the use of permissible songs and poetry.

Most noteworthy of all, however, might be the fact that at least in poetry, the Prophet ﷺ did not restrict himself to only that which came from Muslim poets, or was overtly about Islam. Instead, he mentioned in one version that Umayya ibn Salt was “almost a Muslim in poetry.” What mattered for the Prophet ﷺ, it seems, is that what he listened to was good. Pure.

This means, of course, that the Prophet ﷺ did not allow a blanket allowance of poetry. “Poetry is at the same status as ordinary speech,” he said. “The good of it (poetry) is like the good of speech, and the despised of it, is like what is despised speech,” (Bukhari). Rather than eschewing the arts in general, perhaps the Prophet ﷺ encouraged us to purify them.

The Prophet’s ﷺ involvement with poetry didn’t stop at mere appreciation. Rather, understanding its deep influence and importance to the people, he utilized them. At the time, enemies would fight each other not only in battle, but in poetry. To participate, the Prophetﷺ   appointed Hasan ibn Thabit to satirize the Quraysh, even setting up another minbar (pulpit) in his mosque to do so. “Lampoon them (through poetry) and Gabriel is with you,” he said (Bukhari). Hasan and several other companions thus used their poetry as forces of social impact for years on end.

New Media, Similar Ideas

What was poetry to 7^th century Arabia, however, may possibly be the literature or cinema of today. Poetry, of course, was not a Muslim invention. Just as they did in the realms of dress, language and other aspects of culture, the first Muslims embraced the good of the culture and arts in which they were, and from them brought forth their own cultural identity. Why then, cannot the storytellers, artists, and filmmakers of today do the same?

For my part, I am trying. Currently, I am working on a full-length feature film, entitled The Tiger Hunter. Most find the script is funny and compelling…but for the purposes of this article, it is quite clean. Good. If Muslims can accept “the good” of poetry, I wondered, can we perhaps do the same for movies?

Clearly, it is not something only I wonder. As I write, a new generation of artists are pioneering a permissible (halal) medium in entertainment and arts, and a new cultural identity—striving to maintain their religion while also struggling to maintain their culture. Like the poetry that the Prophet ﷺ sometimes appreciated, their art, books and films are not necessarily (or even usually) about Islam. Such is also the case with my film. But from what I’ve seen so far, they are good. And from what I see of the sunna (the tradition of the Prophet ﷺ), and in creating our own cultural strength, this may be what truly matters.

As for my film, it goes a bit further, in that it features a subtle depiction of a Muslim character in a positive lead role. This wasn’t what inspired the film (like Islamic civilizations of old, I was simply trying to practice my art in a halal manner), but I do think it is significant. The more we support artists who are trying to pursue excellence with integrity and God-consciousness, the more we will see projects of value, stories with good morals, and yes—start to see ourselves represented on screen.

I aspire toward the Prophet’s use of the poetry of Hasan ibn Thabit as a force of social influence. In present times, films and TV shows like Seinfeld, The Cosby Show, even Harold and Kumar each contributed to normalizing the ethnic and faith groups that star in them. In contrast, Muslim depictions on screen are largely negative. True, one movie itself does not change the world, but one need only look at the trajectory of acceptability of the gay community in the past two decades to understand the impact of the media. Whether in movies like The Kids are All Right or shows like Will & Grace, Modern Family, or Glee, few can deny that positive depictions of gay characters in entertainment are an undeniable factor in their overwhelming change in public perception. Can we not also have positive representations of ourselves on the silver screen?

To ever succeed in this effort, however, we need to not only move forward in the arts, but also encourage a new standard of excellence. The Prophet ﷺ, in his wisdom, did not merely employ Hassan because he was willing—but because he was talented, having already been known for his poetic skills. In the film industry, one need not only have artistic talent, but also a strong network and an astute understanding of the business and its economics. As we support our youth going into the arts, we must also make sure to encourage art that is good—in every sense of the world. Whether in selecting poets or generals, the Prophet ﷺ chose those who were excellent. We must do the same for our artists.

With The Tiger Hunter, we have done our best to follow this example. We have gathered a strong team, one that includes a few of the most talented Muslims with a true shot at making it in this incredibly competitive industry (and some who already have). We also have six Muslim interns, and try to do our best towards sharing what we know with young filmmakers who come to us. In turn, we seek advice from those who have already “made it,” and are working toward launching a boutique production company in the coming years. In this way, we hope to strengthen both the standard and impact of our work, graduating from a community of kids with cameras (who are told they “should have been doctors”) to professionals with sustainable endeavors, in an industry our community is still learning to seriously deal with. In this way, our community can enter the mainstream film industry and allow our presence to truly make an impact.

My film is not the only one trying to make an impact, but it is one of them. Some have heard about it because we are currently running a Kickstarter (online crowd-sourcing/fundraising) campaign to help get some of its final funding. Making a film with the resources that allows it to be competitive, to be considered excellent, in the mainstream market is hard. As it is, our budget is already quite tight. While we have many investors filling in the rest of the budget, we turned to the community for the support we need to accomplish our goals. We still need much more to at least reach our goal (and we do hope others can visit the site below and join us in whatever capacity they can), but I hoped to explain the vision behind a new generation of artists we are now starting to notice.

As Imam Suhaib mentioned, “Art can do for the Ummah (community) what the minbar can’t.” It is a truth seen in the time of the Prophet ﷺ, and speaks of a potential we now see. By having storytellers, characters, and values from our community in the arts—the possibilities of uplifting our image, and forming a true and organic cultural identity in our society, are similarly limitless. If only we can help make it happen.

Support and learn more about Lena’s film, The Tiger Hunter, by visiting her Kickstarter page here.

By Lena Khan

On the day that I write this, I received an email from a sister giving me advice (nasiha). I can (maybe) make documentaries, she told me—but certainly not fictional films. I should refrain from imitating the kuffar (disbelievers) in making movies. And for certain, I should be careful of engaging too much in the dangerous American culture. Lest I forget, our Prophet ﷺ told us, “Islam began strange, and it will become strange again…”

To be sincere, as a practicing (in sha’ Allah, God willing) Muslim in the film industry, I try my best to navigate my career while conforming to the principles and guidelines set down by my religion. Am I certain that I am making every correct decision in doing so? No, and I hope scholars will continue to guide me and start discussions to help others. Do I feel that Islam asks us to be foreigners, staying away from the arts, language and culture of the communities in which we reside? Absolutely not.

Instead of eschewing culture, Islam has always recognized the importance of it to the vibrancy and identity of the people. When the “sons of Arfida” (a reference to Ethiopians) beat drums and danced with spears in the Prophet’s mosque, Umar ibn al-Khattaab radi allahu `anhu (may God be pleased with him) wanted to stop them. The Prophetﷺ  stopped him instead, mentioning that the performers were the “Sons of Arfida”—that is, they were not of his people, his culture. “Play your games, sons of Arfida,” the Prophet ﷺ mentions in one narration, “so the Jews and Christians know there is latitude in our religion.”

Such was the sunna (tradition) of the Prophet ﷺ: accepting pre-Islamic Arab cultural norms, except that which violated the religion. Be it language, names, or practices, the Prophet ﷺ generally left the people to their culture. In recognition of this truth, the respected jurist Abu Yusuf “understood the recognition of good, local cultural norms as falling under the rubric of the sunna.” ((Abd-Allah, Umar Faruq. “Islam and the Cultural Imperative.” 4))

Most interesting, however, are the actions of Angel Jibril. In a famous tradition, Jibril comes to the Prophet ﷺ in the form of a man and questions him about his religion. Since angels can only act upon the orders of Allah subhanahu wa ta`ala (exalted is He), one aspect is telling: Allah ordered Jibril to dress in the clothes of the people with whom he was speaking. ((Lecture: Imam Suhaib Webb, Alim Winter Conference. 1/19/12. Paraphrasing is my own, and may fall victim to my errors of interpretation)) The affirmation of the culture of a people, it seems, has strong precedence in our faith.

In accord with this attitude of the Prophet ﷺ and the religion, Islamic cultures of history followed suit. In China, instead of replacing the indigenous culture, Chinese Muslims created one of their own. The Chinese of centuries ago up until the modern artist Hajji Noor Deen cultivated Chinese calligraphy, and also (but not always) incorporated Arabic. When one looked upon a Chinese mosque, he or she might find the ideograms kai tian gu jiao: “the primordial religion from the world’s beginning.” ((Abd-Allah 8.)) Chinese Muslims, it seemed, consciously made their faith intelligible and organic to those around them. In these acts, Chinese Muslims affirmed that their faith was not foreign, but part and parcel of their indigenous culture.

In this way, the Prophetic and Islamic civilizations of old embraced the culture of the land in which they lived. This, however, was always done in accord with the divine Law. The Prophetﷺ  purified cultural practices that went against the religion and its values. He left people and even converts to their own names, except when they had ill or blasphemous meanings. He encouraged poetry, but not all poetry. The Prophet, in his wisdom and guidance, did not come to erase culture. He took what was good of it, and created a new one. And thus the Muslim identity stayed strong for centuries.

Nowadays, however, our youth do not feel the same comfort. While Chinese Islam feels Chinese, and Indian Islam is distinctly Indian… American Islam is asked to be Arab (or maybe South Asian). As Dr. Umar Faruq Abd-Allah writes in his article, “Islam and the Cultural Imperative,” “In history, Islam showed itself to be culturally friendly and, in that regard, has been likened to a crystal clear river. Its waters (Islam) are pure, sweet, and life-giving but—having no color of their own—reflect the bedrock (indigenous culture) over which they flow.” If this analogy has any truth, American Islamic culture is in danger of being a murky and shallow pond, reflecting nothing, and providing no refreshing life force to those who drink of it.

Just as Islamic civilizations have done for centuries, it is incumbent upon Islam in America to create its own cultural authority—not through losing ourselves to the culture without regard for our religion, but by developing it from the culture. In this way, we—and especially our youth—will feel like we truly belong.

Islam has always been a practical religion, dealing with the realities of the world. We, too, must also deal with reality: we can either define and develop our own strengthened cultural authority, or we can lose ourselves and our youth to another. Culture allows us to define ourselves, and have strength in who we are. “Identities that are rooted in deep cultural contradictions,” writes Dr. Umar, “are easily thrown into states of confusion and doubt.”

We have then, a choice. Culture, especially the arts, will always be part of the human experience. Whether it is through Muslims who have made it into the mainstream—such as Yusuf Islam, Lupe Fiasco, Khaled Hosseini, G. Willow Wilson, Hakeem Olajuwon, or the Abdullah Brothers, or filmmakers and artists who are on their way to mainstream recognition—like I hope myself and others, in sha’ Allah, our youth are starting to have examples for how to embrace our indigenous culture and from it create our own.

Knowing many of these figures, I know that our work itself is a struggle. We strive to become excellent in our fields, while maintaining what we believe our religion asks of us. It is likely that some may disagree with our choices. Music, or no music? Is a bad word in a novel that more or less requires it worth the good that comes, or is it even allowed? The solution is not topush away culture and the arts, but to have the discussions that will guide us through them and emerge with a halal (permissible) alternative and guidelines in the arts and our cultural authority. This is what we find in the Prophetic example, as well as in Islamic civilizations for centuries.

Perhaps some may disagree with those figures most powerfully developing this cultural authority. If that is the case, we should understand that we are in a new era where we have Muslim artists who are not operating outside of Islam, but trying their best to apply it—practicing their craft without sacrificing Islamic principles as they understand them. Let us have the critical discussions to guide them all. As Oscar Wilde famously said, “Life imitates art far more than art imitates life.” Our society, and youth, will continue to find identity and strength in cultural icons and artists. Do we worry about what figures, and what art, is currently defining them? Then let us support those who may give them a more acceptable alternative, and help create an Islamic and indigenous cultural redefinition that will strengthen us all.

Lena Khan is a writer and director, working on a full-length feature film, “The Tiger Hunter” and currently running an online crowd-sourcing campaign to help fund it.  Information about her film, and how to support, can be found at http://kck.st/13tcFx8.

Hip-Hop – specifically the Rap art form of Hip-Hop – is usually preceded by its reputation of ”Gangsta life-style” lyrics riddled with curse words, bad grammar, and the infamous “N” word, stereotypically painting a post-apocalyptic portrait of poor African-American communities. It is widely promoted as an American subculture/multi-faceted art form rooted within the 1970’s poverty stricken South Bronx communities of New York City. For many, it may even be seen as the most abased form of artistic American culture to date. Despite its “hard” reputation, the once musical fad called Hip-Hop has reached every facet of the world from the Techno clubs of Japan to the war torn “ghettos” of the Gaza Strip. Within the Muslim community, it may be seen as something foreign since music itself is a controversial topic within the Muslim community.  The interesting fact about Hip-Hop is that its inception into American culture was actually pioneered by Muslims.

The precursors of Rap were a group of African-American and Latino poets from New York City called the “Last Poets”.  According to the website of Jalal Mansur Nuriddin, the group was formed on May 19, 1968 in Harlem, New York City out of a black writer’s workshop. The original line up of the Last Poets was Gylain Kain, Abiodun Oyewole, David Nelson, Felipe Luciano, Omar Bin Hassen, Jalal Nuriddin, and Suleiman El-Hadi. They were mostly a confederacy of poets separated by style of writing and internal conflicts. Despite this, they were united by the struggle for civil rights and the common outlook of their prospects as poor minorities within a racist and harsh American society. The Last Poets were undoubtedly a revolutionary group spewing revolutionary poetry, and their body of work could definitely be seen as extreme for the time. The Muslims of the group, Jalal Nuriddin and Suleiman El-Hadi, were known to give powerful messages of the harsh realities of being Black in America while fusing their understanding of the religion of Islam into their poetry. For these poets, their poetry was seen as a way to satirize the American society in which they found their community and religion opposed. The poetry also served as a powerful tool of da’wah. In “The Mean Machine”, one of the most famously known songs from the Last Poets, Jalal Nuriddin displays the influence of the hadith (tradition) of the Dajjal and the state of the world at the end of time in his poetry.

“… All products of The Mean Machine/The Devil was guised as a human being/ And he will even preach that God is dead/ And some of yall will believe what the devil had said/ And then he will act as the world’s police/ And the sun will rise up in the West and set down in the east/ And  when it came time for the end And when it came time for the end And when it came time for the end/ The men will look like the women And the women like the men/ And some will dance in a hypnotic trance like as if they had no care/ But these will be signs of the changing times that the end is drawing near/ For it was prophesized many centuries past/ that the end will come in a fiery holocaust  and only the righteous people will survive the blast/ And the Devil’s Machine will  bring out his own end/ and peace, love and joy will reign once again…/”

The Muslims of the Last Poets were not known to be, nor did they profess to be, scholars of Islam. It is clear, however, that their understanding of their religion influenced their body of work. One of the most famous albums of the duo of Jalal Nuriddin and Suleiman El-Hadi was called the Delights of the Garden. A poem in this album was divided into three songs called “be”, “yond” and “er” in which the poets give a fantasy-filled depiction of the end of the world. It involves two companies of men and jinn debating on how to deal with the last day, ending in a literal race against time and jinn as the party of men seek to surrender to the Will of God and no longer attempt escape from the inevitable.

Many of the other poems written by these poets and the larger group of Last Poets were mainly politically charged. Suleiman El Hadi was known for his poem called “Ho Chi Minh” in which he poetically tackles the events of the Vietnam War. This particular poem satirizes the American government’s foreign policy as the distastefully aggressive and vain “Uncle Sam” character who parades his might and technology over an old rice paddy farmer representing North Vietnam. As Uncle Sam sets to bully the old man, he is ambushed by booby traps, sending him in retreat for fear of his life. Another famous historical poem written and performed by Suleiman was the “Unholy Alliance”. This is a rap over twelve minutes long depicting over 400 years of western colonialism/imperialism. The purpose of this spoken-word poetry was to make the community aware of the times that they were living in as they saw it.

The content of the overall body of work of the Last Poets from their formation in 1968 until today is the basic structure and mission statement for what mainstream Hip-Hop is producing now. The poets would probably say that modern “rappers” have fallen below the standard that the Last Poets set within their poetry. Modern rappers may beg to differ. The outlying structure, as previously stated, is the same.  Rappers attest to make a larger audience aware of what is going on in their world as they see it. This has always been at the core of Hip-Hop. If, in fact, hip hop has remained true to its roots and purpose set by the Last Poets, then the art being produced depicts reality. While I make no assumptions that the majority of rappers intentionally produce indecent, misogynistic, and ignorant music to alert their audiences to those characteristics within society, does this music in fact depict a true account of the present? If the answer is yes, then whether intentional or not, the music gives the listener the opportunity to question the moral and civil injunctions set by the current society.  At the least, the intention of Last Poets, specifically Jalal Nuriddin and Suleiman El Hadi, was to send the message of Islam to their audience as well as wake them up to the realities of their time. One can only hope that rap and Hip-Hop as a whole returns back to its roots.

Author’s Biography:

Lavon Luther Brown attends St. John’s University where he is completing his Master’s Degree in Toxicology. Lavon also has a Bachelors of Science in Biology from St. John’s University.  He is a devoted husband and poet.

Staff Note: Documentaries are meant to be thought-provoking, and bring critical new information to the general populace. These documentaries were not chosen to espouse specific views; rather, they are included on this list in order to provoke reflection and discussion. The documentaries where chosen by the author and do not necessarily represent the views of virtualmosque.com.

I’ve gathered a list of some of the best documentaries I’ve seen. While these films may not have been made with a Muslim audience in mind, both student and Imam will appreciate the eye-opening details each film has to offer. As a community, I believe we need to be more informed of the history behind the realities and societal ills taking place before us.

Before you delve into these documentaries, there’s one more thing I should mention. Though I believe it’s important for us to be aware of our surroundings, and more so for the community’s leadership, we must never forget that the best source of guidance is the speech of Allah subhanahu wa ta`ala (exalted is He) – the Qur’an, the Sunnah of the Prophet Muhammad ﷺ (peace be upon him), and the knowledge of the scholars (may Allah preserve the ones alive and have mercy on the ones that have passed). Above all, we should turn to the Qur’an for enlightenment and guidance. A truly successful personality and truly successful society can only be built via the lessons and implementation of the concepts outlined in the Book of Allah. Without true internal direction from the heart, there can be no true external direction for society. And Allah knows best.

Note: Clicking on the title will open up its trailer or short preview. You can find many of these documentary films at your local video store. Others that are not copyrighted can be seen free at: www.topdocumentaryfilms.com

POLITICS AND HISTORY

1. “Why We Fight” (BBC, 2005)
2. “Fahrenheit 9/11” (Michael Moore, 2004)
3. “War on Democracy” (John Pilger, 2007)
4. “Hijacking Catastrophe” (Sut Jhally, 2004)
5. “Breaking the Silence” (John Pilger, 2003)
6. “Fog of War” (Robert McNamara, 2003)

HEALTH, FOOD, AND NATURE

1. “Food Inc.” (Robert Kenner, 2008)
2. “Super Size Me” (Morgan Spurlock, 2004)
3. “Planet Earth” (Discovery Channel, 2006)

MEDIA AND COMMUNICATIONS

1. “Reel Bad Arabs: How Hollywood Vilifies a People” (Jack Shaheen, 2006)
2. “Control Room” (Magnolia Pictures, 2004)
3. “Hearts and Minds” (Peter Davis, 1974)
4. “Manufacturing Consent: Noam Chomsky and the Media” (Herman, 1992)
5. “Weapons of Mass Deception” (Danny Schechter, 2004)
6. “The War You Don’t See” (John Pilger, 2010)

SOCIETY AND CULTURE

1. “The Century of the Self” (BBC, 2004)
2. “Shouting Fire: Stories from the Edge of Free Speech” (HBO, 2009)
3. “Debate: Political Islam – Is it a threat to the West?” (Doha Debates, 2009)
4. “Bowling for Columbine” (Michael Moore, 2002)
5. “Hamza Tzortzis: Liberalism & Islam” (LSESU, 2011)
6. “Jesus Camp” (A&E Indiefilms, 2006)
7. “A Time for Burning” (William C. Jersey, 1966)
8. “Malcolm X: Make it Plain” (AE, 1994)

PALESTINE

1. “Peace, Propaganda & the Promised Land” (Sut Jhally, 2004)
2. “The Israel Lobby” (Stephen Walt, John Mearsheimer)
3. “Defamation” (Norman Finkelstein, 2009)
4. “Palestine Is Still the Issue” (John Pilger, 2003)
5. “Occupation 101” (Abdallah Omeish, 2006)

HUMAN RIGHTS

1. “The Road to Guantanamo” (Michael Winterbottom, 2006)
2. “Taxi to the Dark Side” (Moazzam Begg, 2007)
3. “Fallujah, The Hidden Massacre” (Italy, 2005)
4. “Generation Kill” (Journeyman Pictures, 2004)
5. “The War Tapes” (Deborah Scranton, 2006)

ECONOMICS AND GLOBALIZATION

1. “Commanding Height: Battle for the World Economy” (PBS, 2002)
2. “The Corporation” (Noam Chomsky, 2003)
3. “Walmart: The High Cost of Low Prices” (Brave New Films, 2005)
4. “Money as Debt” (Paul Grignon, 2006)
5. “Darwin’s Nightmare” (Hubert Sauper, 2004)
6. “End of Suburbia” (Gregory Greene, 2004)
7. “Life + Debt” (Stephanie Black, 2001)
8. “Smartest Guys in the Room” (Alex Gibney, 2005)

MISCELLANEOUS

1. “Inside Islam: What a billion Muslim really think” (Dalia Mogahed, 2009)
2. “Islam: Empire of Faith” (PBS, 2000)
3. “Inside Mecca” (National Geographic, 2003)
4. “Jonestown: The Life and Death of Peoples Temple” (PBS, 2006)
5. “Death of the Freedom Fighter” (Al Jazeera, 2009)
6. “The Trouble With Atheism” (Dimitri Collingridge, 2006)
7. “Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed” (Premise, 2008)
8. “To Catch a Predator” (Dateline, NBC)
9. “An Islamic History of Europe” (Omaar Rageh, BBC)
10. “Free Fahad” (Siraj Wahaj, 2008)
11. “Entrapment or Foling Terror?” (Amy Goodman, 2010)

In the late 16th century a young boy collecting scraps of wreckage from the docks wondered if he’d ever leave Faversham in the borough of Kent, the hottest place in the entire United Kingdom. It was a marshy place of little importance to anyone but the brigand. Its docks were a haven for smugglers and pirates and other such unsavory folk. That boy was John Ward, whose dreams would one day come true, though perhaps not in the way he had wanted; he would become Jack Birdy, the most fearsome pirate in the world, and towards the end of his life, Yusuf Reis, penitent Muslim, wealthy beyond any man’s dreams, spending the remainder of his life in his Tunisian palace.

The legendary Captain Jack Birdy, once sung about by every balladeer in England, might have all but been forgotten, yet his memory remains as the spirit behind the fictional character Captain Jack Sparrow played by Johnny Depp in the “Pirates of the Caribbean” film franchise. Who was Johnny Ward, the child rummaging through the fishing docks of Faversham? Who was John Ward, the British Naval officer? Who was Captain John Ward, the privateer endorsed by the Crown of England? Who was Captain Jack Birdy, the privateer turned pirate betrayed by that same Crown? And finally, who was Yusuf Reis, formerly Captan Jack Birdy, formerly Captain John Ward, who would rescue thousands upon thousands of Spanish Jews and Muslims fleeing the Moriscos and Conversos expulsion of the 16th and 17th centuries?These were all one man. With so many characters wrapped in one, the stories of his adventures are exponentially more exciting than anything a Hollywood film could capture.

What follows is a historical dramatization of William Lithgow’s second visit to Tunis as a guest of Captain Jack Ward, five years before his death. Some of the dialogue is interpolated but strongly based on historical fact. Some of the dialogue is verbatim from historical account. Every detail has been painstakingly researched for an accurate portrayal. It is a dramatization, but a historically founded one, no less. Though this begins towards the end of Captain Jack’s life, it is hopefully the beginning of your interest in this legendary man, fictionalized in Hollywood, demonized in Christendom, largely forgotten in the Muslim world. This is but one of many stories about him calling out from history yearning to be told…

“You see, mate. I’ve grown fond of a tiny little birdy, savvy?”
“Oh dear me. What’s her name and should I warn her?”
“No, you dinghy rat! A wee little birdy.”
“Little birdy? Captain Jack, do you mean a SPARROW?”

The old man chuckled, not having heard himself addressed as Captain Jack in what seemed to be many a lifetime spent. For now, he was simply Yusuf Reis ((Pirates of Barbary, Corsairs, Conquests and Captivity in the Seventeenth-Century Mediterranean, Adrian Tinniswood, p 48)), a nobleman of Tunis wealthy beyond any Englishman’s dreams, and husband to Jessimina the Sicilian who was, like him, a renegade from Christendom. ((Ibid, pp. 51-52.))

“No…ummm…chicks.”
“Chicks?!”
“Yes. Chicks!”

The zany old man, once a great pirate and commander at seas ((Ibid, p. 52.))—albeit, no less the zany one back then —was now just a tired silhouette of what he once was. He seemed happy though, as he lavishly entertained his guest, none other than myself, William Lithgow son of James ((Born 1582, Lanark, South Lanarkshire, Scotland; Died 1645, Location disputed.)), not a pirate, nor a privateer, most definitely not a Turk ((“The vast majority of English men and women had no knowledge of Islam. There were no mosques in England. There was no English-language version of the Qur’an­—nor would there be until the 1649 publication of Alexander Ross’s poor English translation of a poor French translation from Arabic, The Alcoran of Mahomet. The word ‘Muslim’ was virtually unknown, English speakers preferring the generic ‘Turk’…To seventeenth-century England, every follower of Islam was a Turk, every Turk a follower of Islam. [Ibid, p. 50])), but a Scotsman and a vagabond yearning to sojourn an endless trajectory. I have rummaged my way, by land and sea, from Scotland to the Levant, and now to Africa. Here in Tunis I would enter yet another chapter into my soon legendary journal, The Totall Discourse of the Rare Adventures and Painefull Peregrinations of long Nineteene Years Travayles from Scotland. ((Frontispiece from William Lithgow, ‘The Totall Discourse of the Rare Adventures and Painefull Peregrinations of long Nineteene Years Travayles from Scotland’, London, 1632, National Library of Scotland.)) This chapter would be about the eccentric old man before me, once the most feared Barbary Corsair in the world, John Ward – also known as Captain Jack Birdy. ((7. Born 1553, Faversham, Kent; Died 1622, Tunis, Ottoman Empire.)) I had no idea what in Hades all this gobbledygook about “little birdies” was about, but I was eager to learn of his obsession with, for God’s sake of all things, chicks.

“Where are you leading me, Captain Jack? Am I following your drunken stupor?”
“Have you seen me sip gin or rum in the twice you’ve come? Since I traded captain’s hat for turban, I ne’er drank a drop ‘o bourbon.”
“Captain Jack is sober, and a poet no less. Has Christ returned?”

The old man smiled, and in an abstemious, yet telling, mockery of himself he coined something I shall merrily jot in my journal.

I drink water like an ass,
I am shoed like a horse,
I have a coat like a fool,
And a head like an owl! ((8. Barbary Pirate: The Life and Crimes of John Ward, p. 199))

Captain Jack was a notorious drunkard, cunning and cruel, and taken to tomfoolery. Yet now, water and unfermented nectar were all Captain Jack would drink. The faithful Turk drinks neither ale, nor porter, nor wine, nor ardent spirits of any kind. Yet, he did not need strong drink to be just as mad. “Shoed like a horse” was in reference to the Turk’s shoes which are studded with iron. It is a fearful sight, I must say, lest you find yourself under one. His coat, and Captain Jack always wore an Englishman’s coat, was now the coat of a Turk. This silly, opulent and vain coat made him appear to me a fool, but he seemed to revel and bemuse himself in my outrage. I will not shy from saying that his turbaned head did look like an owl’s.

We first received news of Captain Jack’s and Sir Francis Verney’s apostasies in 1610 when the Venetian Ambassador to England, Marcantonio Correr, wrote the following invective to the Doge and Senate on December 23:

“There is confirmation of the news that the pirate Ward and Sir Francis Verney, also an Englishman [but] of the noblest blood, have become Turks, to the great indignation of the whole nation.” ((9. Ibid. p. 175.))

Nevertheless, I always thought Captain Jack turned Turk to jeer King James I, who would not pardon him ((James I, A Proclomation against Pirats [sic], January 8, 1609.)) and to gain quarter with the King of Tunis, Uthman Dey. Yet, now I see a man adherent to these ways and finding comfort in them. He is refined and lazy in his old age and married to a noblewoman of Palermo to the shock of every sea dog who ever heard his name. Captain Jack married? The Kraken be tamed! Yet, it was true. Captain Jack was a Lord of Tunis living in a palace of the finest varieties of marble and alabaster, and no longer a scourge of the sea. He was what the most madcap of jesters could not concoct: a freebooter and a saint.

We entered a dank barn-like structure that was quite sweltering for this pleasant September day in the year 1615. Ten of Captain Jack’s servants rushed in to help us view what had to have been the most uncanny sight I ever witnessed.  Before us were nearly 500 eggs hatching before my eyes within dozens upon dozens of incubators crafted with the unhallowed science of the Turk. The heat from each oven was answerable to the natural warmness of the hen’s belly; upon which moderation, within twenty days they come to natural perfection. ((The Totall Discourse of the Rare Adventures and painefull Peregrinations of long Nineteene Years Travayles from Scotland, p. 359.)) Captain Jack, the greatest scoundrel to ever dominate the seas, was now raising chicks. For all the Turks’ barbarism, of which I have heard plenty, I have seen nothing in Barbary but mercantilism, incessant praying–it seems they never stop–and, quite frankly, ordinariness. The stories we hear in England of the Turks’ devilry and excesses are nowhere to be found and my eyes grow tired searching for them. I had hoped to write a tantalizing chapter or two about these provocative oddities but, alas, my inkwell is still full.

It is no mystery to me now why so many from Christendom found succor in the realm of the Turk. Captain Jack, his mate Sir Francis Verney, not to mention Captain Jack’s entire crew, the Dutchmen Meinart Dircxssen now Hasan Reis, and Jan Marinus of Sommelsdijk now known as Assam Reis, the Belgian Murad Flamenco of Antwerp ((Pirates of Barbary, Corsairs, Conquests and Captivity in the Seventeenth-Century Mediterranean,  Adrian Tinniswood, p. 59.)), as well as the scores of other Christians, all turned renegade from the faith and boasting the Kilij ((Kilij – Ottoman sword.)) of the Corsair and following the religion of Mahomet. The tumult we have seen between Catholic and Protestant, and the flipping between the two as our Kings and Queens pass, are things they will not miss. Though I esteem the Turk to be a marauder who will slay for pittance, they all clamor to pray in their domed Djemats, the courtyards of which, dare I say, are places wherein I could get lost in reflection. They molest neither Protestant nor Catholic here, and Tunis has, this year, become a haven for Conversos, Jews forced to become Catholic or leave Spain under pain of death. Whether it be tolerance or indifference, man is not branded by his God here. Tunis is a bizarre place, yet it is nothing I was told of by my countrymen and brethren in faith. Today, this has further been confirmed to me by the legendary Barbary Corsair who is my host, Captain Jack Birdy, also known as John Ward, privateer then pirate, now Christian turn’d Turk.

As we left that strange aviary and walked through the floral pathway with fountains and rivulets on either side, I looked in the distance and saw Captain Jack’s palace that would turn the Kings and Queens of Christendom green with envy. I had so much to ask Captain Jack, yet such little time it seemed. The sun was now setting. As we approached the grandiose Casbah, Captain Jack stepped off the path towards a fountain, slipped off his iron studded Turkish boots, and handed me his coat. The blasted thing was heavier than it looked.

“I beg your pardon, but we have to make a stop.”
“I follow your lead, Captain Jack.”
“I must pray.”

I marveled at what little was left of the great Captain Jack Birdy in this penitent man. He began washing himself in the way Turks do before prayer. As we entered the citadel Captain Jack looked up to its spiraling minarets and squinted.

“You know, Will. Five years ago to this day I became Muslim in this very citadel, in the Djemat El-Kabir you see over there.”
“That was your choice, Captain Jack, and I will not say it does not vex me. For Christ be the Savior of the world and I feel your heart knows this, as does every gentleman in his core.”
“Mate, the innards of a man are known only to God and the fish who eat them. What I have seen on the high seas, the wars between Pope and Crown, and how they could give each other quarter but could afford me no pardon. I want none from them.”

It is the greatest irony that Captain Jack was seen as the most notorious renegade and traitor of England, yet he believed himself grassed by his country. His scowl of disgust quickly turned to a devilish smirk.

“William, will you join me? Here is where all journeymen such as yourself and I find themselves peace.”
“Pray to Whom you pray, Captain Jack. I will pray to Whom I pray for your salvation.”
“And I for yours. Very well.”

I waited for Captain Jack as he repeatedly bowed and prostrated like a Turk. Looking around at the splendor of the Sultans I marveled at how they had not yet taken the world from end to end. The thought of supping with the nobles and elite of Tunis made me pang with hunger. They were to have yet another lavish party for me as they did thrice before. I could not tire from their scrumptious wheat middling, succulent roasts and glistening fruits, the likes of which I have never seen. As my mind immersed in a leg of lamb, Captain Jack emerged with a grin and a strange glow.

“Come, Will. Supper will be served shortly.”
“This isn’t going to be like the party Yusuf Dey had for Simon the Dancer last year is it?” ((Simon the Dancer, also known as Simon Danseker, was a companion of Captain Jack Birdy, and equally infamous. He would later turn on the Barbary Corsairs in favor of the royal families of Europe. His betrayal ended up in his doom at the hand of Uthman Dey’s son and heir, Yusuf Dey, who scolded him before a Janissary executed him. Pirates of Barbary, Corsairs, Conquests and Captivity in the Seventeenth-Century Mediterranean,  Adrian Tinniswood, pp.64-65.))
“That is not something to be a rib-ticklin’ about, mate. What happened to Simon Danseker is of no coziness to me or my men, but it was a debt paid. Simon would have had us all hangin’ from the yardarm and feedin’ the fish. He chose his way, savvy?”
“Aye, Captain. Pardon the jest.”

I had to quickly change the subject for it appeared that I had incensed the Captain. There was something about which I dearly wanted to hear: The little known and undocumented journeys of Captain Jack in the unchartered waters of the Western seas.

“Tell me of this proclamation for your capture that mentions ‘piratical activity in the West Indies.’ ((Bibliotheca nautica: Books, prints and manuscripts relating to naval battles and the science of naval warfare, shipbuilding and the art of navigation, pirates, buccaneers, and privateers, shipwrecks and disasters at sea, p. 54.)) I have a copy of it with me.”
“I have no need to see it. I lived it. The Caribbean. Knowing of Sir Francis Drake’s fortunes therewithal, the young scallywag that I was, I wanted to plunder those seas…and I did…quite well.”

As intriguing as this was, and as I was possibly the first person to get true details regarding his journeys in the Caribbean, for some reason I couldn’t get over his obsession with the little birds I had witnessed in the aviary only a few hours before.

“At least now I know why they call you ‘Birdy’.”
“William, do you know what they translate ‘Birdy’ to here? `Asfur. Some locals jokingly call me Jack `Asfur. Jack Sparrow. What an utterly stupid name. I guess that’s what I’ll be remembered as, eh?”
“I think not, Captain Jack. If they tell stories about you, they will most definitely not call you Captain Jack Sparrow.”

We approached the gate and as Captain Jack’s companions, all once Christian, all renegades turned Turk, drew the bridge for us to enter and greeted us with much merriment, the Captain turned to me with the smirk of that fiend whom I thought was all but forgotten.

“Shall I tell you about the Pirates of the Caribbean?”

We live in an iWorld. Surrounded by iPhones, iPads, MYspace, YOUtube, the focus is clear: Me, my, I. One need not look far to see this obsession with the self. In order to sell, advertisers must appeal to the ego. For example, many ads appeal to the part of us that loves power and being in charge. DirectTV tells you: “Don’t watch TV, direct TV!” Yogurtland says: “You rule! Welcome to the land of endless yogurt possibilities, where you rule the portions, the choices and the scene.”

But advertisers aren’t the only ones who appeal to our ego. There is a global phenomenon that provides a breeding ground and platform for that ego. And it’s called Facebook. Now, I’ll be the first to assert that Facebook can be a powerful tool for good. It is, like many other things, what you make of it. A knife can be used to cut food which feeds the hungry, or it can be used to kill someone. Facebook can be used for great good—after all it was Facebook that helped facilitate the toppling of a dictator. Facebook can be used as a powerful tool to organize, call, remind, and unite. Facebook can also be used to strengthen our connection to God and to each other… Or Facebook can be used to strengthen the hold of our nafs (lower self or ego).

The Facebook phenomenon is an interesting one. In each and every one of us is an ego. It is the part of ourselves that must be suppressed (if we are to avoid Anakin’s fate of turning to the dark side, that is). The danger of feeding the ego is that, as the ego is fed, it becomes strong. When it becomes strong, it begins to rule us. Soon we are no longer slaves to God; we become slaves to ourselves.

The ego is the part of us that loves power. It is the part that loves to be seen, recognized, praised, and adored. Facebook provides a powerful platform for this. It provides a platform by which every word, picture, or thought I have can be seen, praised, ‘liked’. As a result, I begin to seek this. But then it doesn’t just stay in the cyber world. I begin even to live my life with this visibility in mind. Suddenly, I live every experience, every photo, every thought, as if it’s being watched, because in the back of my mind I’m thinking, “I’ll put it on Facebook.” This creates a very interesting state of being, almost a constant sense that I am living my life on display. I become ever conscious of being watched, because everything can be put up on Facebook for others to see and comment on.

More importantly, it creates a false sense of self-importance, where every insignificant move I make is of international importance. Soon I become the focus, the one on display. The message is: I am so important. My life is so important. Every move I make is so important. The result becomes an even stronger me-focused world, where I am at the center.

As it turns out, this result is diametrically opposed to the Reality of existence. The goal of this life is to realize the Truth of God’s greatness and my own insignificance and need before Him. The goal is to take myself out of the center and put Him there instead. But Facebook perpetuates the illusion of the exact opposite. It strengthens my belief that because of my own importance, every inconsequential move or thought should be on display. Suddenly what I ate for breakfast or bought at the grocery store is news important enough to publish. When I put up a picture, I wait for compliments; I wait for acknowledgement and recognition. With the number of likes or comments, physical beauty becomes something that can now be quantified. When I put up a post, I wait for it to be ‘liked’. And I am ever conscience of—and even compete in—the number of “friends” I have. (Friends, here, is in quotation marks because no one knows 80% of their “friends” on Facebook.)

This preoccupation and rivalry to acquire more, is mentioned in the Quran. God says:

“The mutual rivalry for piling up (of worldly things) has preoccupied you.”(102:1)

Whether that rivalry is in piling up wealth, or friends and ‘likes’ on Facebook, the result is the same: We have become preoccupied by it.

Facebook also strengthens another dangerous focus: the focus on other people, what they’re doing, what they like. What they think of me. Facebook feeds the preoccupation with others’ assessment of me. Soon, I enter the orbit of the creation. Inside that orbit, my definitions, my pain, my happiness, my self-worth, my success and my failure is determined by the creation. When I live in that orbit, I rise and fall with the creation. When the people are happy with me, I’m up. When they’re not, I fall. Where I stand is defined by people. I’m like a prisoner because I have given up the keys to my happiness, sadness, fulfillment, and disappointment to the people to hold.

Once I enter and live in the orbit of the creation—rather than the orbit of God—I begin to use that currency. See, the currency of God’s orbit is: His pleasure or His displeasure, His reward or His punishment. But, the currency of the orbit of creation is: the praise and criticism of people. So, as I enter deeper and deeper into that orbit, I covet more and more of its currency, and I fear more and more of its loss. While I’m playing Monopoly, for example, I covet more and more of its currency. And it feels great to be ‘rich’ for a moment. But when the game is over, what can I buy in the Real world with Monopoly money?

The human currency of praise is Monopoly money. It feels great for a moment to collect, but when the game is over, it’s worthless. In the Reality of this life and the next, it’s worthless. And yet, I even covet this false currency in my worship. In this way, I fall victim to the hidden shirk: Riyaa (showing off in worship). Riyaa is a consequence of living in the orbit of the creation. The deeper and deeper I enter into that orbit, the more I become consumed with gaining human praise, approval and recognition. The more I enter that orbit, the more I fear loss—loss of face, loss of status, loss of praise, loss of approval.

But the more I fear the people, the more I become enslaved.  True freedom only comes when I let go of the fear of anything and anyone other than God.

In a profound hadith (Prophetic teaching), a man came to the Prophet ﷺ and said: “O Messenger of God, direct me to an act, which if I do, God will love me and people will love me.” He ﷺ said: “Detach yourself from the world, and God will love you. Detach yourself from what is with the people, and the people will love you.”  [Ibn Majah]

Ironically, the less we chase after the approval and love of the people, the more we gain it. The less needy we are of others, the more people are drawn to us and seek our company. This hadith teaches us a profound Truth. Only by breaking out of the orbit of the creation, can we succeed with both God and people.

So while Facebook is indeed a powerful tool, let it be a tool of your freedom—not a tool of your servitude to yourself and the assessment of others.