Dr Kaukab Siddique | Editor-in-Chief ---------------------------------------------------------
Safar 6, 1426/March 17, 2005 #22
Jamaat al-Muslimeen News [4 items]
P.O. Box 10881
Baltimore, MD 21234


On the anniversary of the murder of peace activist Rachel Corrie by Israelis driving a caterpillar bulldozer, her parents are filing suit both against the criminal entity known as Israel and Caterpillar company.


A committee to gain mass support for Ahmed 'Abdel Sattar is being set up. Ahmed is the U.S. citizen of Egyptian origin who has been convicted of talking on the telephone for several years to Egyptian dissidents who want to overthrow the tyranny of dictator Hosni Mubarak. Ahmed is facing LIFE IN PRISON for this "great crime" of talking to Islamic people who wanted the support of the blind Shaikh to fight Mubarak.

A direct link to Ahmed's attorney will be provided by the Committee.


Jamaat al-Muslimeen supports the rallies to be held in New York on the anniversary of the U.S. war on Iraq, March 19. Lynne Stewart will be a main speaker at the rallies. She is the self-sacrificing human rights attorney who fought for the rights of the blind Shaikh, Dr. Omar 'Abdel Rahman, spiritual guide of Gamaa' al-Islamiyya in Egypt.

The rallies, under the heading of "U.S TROOPS ... OUT NOW" will begin in New York's Marcus Garvey Park [124th street to 5th Ave] at 10 AM and proceed to Central Park's East Meadow [97th street & 5th Ave] by 12 Noon, where Ms. Stewart will speak.

Ms. Stewart has been convicted of helping the blind Shaikh. If she is sentenced, it will destroy the client-attorney privilege on which the U.S. legal system rests.

IN ATLANTA, join Jamaat al-Muslimeen.

The representative of the Jamaat is Sis. Khalidah Tunkara who is famous because she refused to take off her Hijab even under powerful police pressure.
WAR NEWS: [by our Media Monitor]


During Dr. Condoleeza Rice's visit, there have been a number of Taliban attacks. U.S. TV channels reported an attack on March 16 in which one U.S. soldier was killed and 3 wounded. In another attack, in Kandahar city, March 17, 5 people were reported killed.


The media are no longer reporting attacks on U.S. troops. However, information published by the Pentagon indicates that another 11 U.S. troops have been killed one week in mujahideen attacks. The wounded total of U.S. troops is now over 11,000.

One report which the media did put out was that 2 U.S. defense contractors were killed on the airport road outside Baghdad. This brought out the fact that till now the mujahideen have killed a total of 280 U.S. defense contractors, which is not added to the military losses.


Numerous reports of fighting in Kashmir have come in along with news of Indian atrocities against the helpless population.


[From our Economics observer]

Paul Wolfowitz, one of the main people behind the U.S. invasion of Iraq, is being removed by Bush and being moved into the World Bank. The Jew in charge of the World Bank, Wolfensen, is retiring. Between them, these Jewish wolves have torn humanity apart.

Wolfowitz's removal is a sign that the U.S. has lost the war in Iraq. Support for the Iraq war has dipped into the low 40%.

Amina A. Wadud's New Crusade: She Wants to Lead Prayers.
How Does Islam Bring About Change? A Look at Amina's Basic Misunderstanding of Islam.

by Kaukab Siddique

This article will look at the primary issues about Islam in America regardless of Dr.Amina Abdul Wadud's serious secondary blunders. Some people think she has already left the fold of Islam. Her statements and actions in a public meeting in Canada do support this view.
My hope is that she will realize her errors and repent. The three steps she took would put her outside Islam if she does not repent. [It is possible that she was going through a serious bout of doubt and depression when she carried out this drama.] These three were public statements and she has not claimed that she was misreported:
  1. She claimed that she can decide which texts of the Qur'an are acceptable within the realm of "civilization" and which are not. For instance, she finds that the cutting off of the hand of a thief is not acceptable for a civilized person like her. For a Muslim, there can only be acceptance of Allah's word. There can't be any rejection. The Qur'an is open to interpretation and the Prophet, pbuh, and his Companions (r.a.) implemented the Qur'an according to the needs of society. However, Dr. W. was not talking of interpretation but of acceptance and rejection.
  2. She claimed that "same sex" marriages are okay. However, in Islam there is absolutely no place for "same sex" marriages and homosexuality. We know that America is a free society and people here can indulge in all kinds of sexuality, from group sex to hard porn techniques, [polygamy alone being forbidden] without any serious problem. That does not mean that a follower of Islam should succumb to these pressures and start proving how "progressive" she is by turning HARAM into HALAL.
  3. There is no place for racism and nationalism in Islam, although Islam does not stop us from helping our own communities and nations. Dr. W. made a deliberate attempt to divide Arabs from Africans. She took out her hair, showed it to her audience and claimed that her Arab audience did not respect her because she is a "nigger" [her word]. This was a deliberate provocation which Bush and all the enemies of Islam would love. Some think that this tactic shows that Dr. W. might be working for the CIA and is helping the CIA to widen the rift between Arabs and Africans. I doubt it. Most probably she is under great mental pressure and wants her audiences to accept her as a leader, and when they didn't she carried out this drama.
Now Dr. W. has decided to carry her crusade even further. She's going to give the khutba and lead juma' prayers at a place in New York. Muslims are discussing whether this is an Islamically valid action or not. One Muslim woman, Sis. Bint Waleed has pointed out that Dr. W's "juma prayer" is being held under the patronage of an art gallery with a Hindu name. [Sundaram Tagore Gallery in New York]. Also, that almost ALL the founding members of her "event" are non-Muslims. [We have received the list of these names.]

For me, the underlying issues, behind Dr. W's attitudes, are much more important than her actions. She seems to have misunderstood Islam altogether. All of us should focus on these basic requirements so that Islam, as it develops in America, should be according to the Qur'an and the Sunnah and not an "American Islam" according to the wishes of George Bush and Paul Wolfowitz. Here are the essential considerations which Dr. W. has missed completely:
  1. Islam is ONE UMMAH. [The Qur'an 49:10]. The basic prayer recited in every unit of worship is: "...Show us the straight way." [1:6], not 'show me the straight way.' There is no individual way to salvation in this Path. We will stand alone only on the Day of Judgement but here, in this world, we have to be ONE UNIFIED BODY as the Hadith says it. Thus, individualism, resulting from ego worship and capitalistic socio-economic systems, is anathema to Islam.
  2. Prophet Muhammad's (pbuh) way is to organize a Jamaat or group dedicated to the Cause of Allah, to end oppression and slavery. The Hadith specifically teach that the "Hand of Allah" is in support of the Jamaat.
  3. The process of Islam is that of Shoora [mutual consultation leading to decisions based on consent].
  4. The way of Islam is a natural process of:
  5. Da'wa, the calling or invitation to Islam, creates the Jamaat.
  6. Muslims do not demand or call for their own leadership. "I want to lead" is not an Islamic attitude. An Islamic leader is the servant of the people, soft-spoken and not strident. Leadership emerges naturally from the Islamic struggle, just as the Caliphate of Abu Bakr (r.a.) emerged naturally. Owing to his role, his sacrifices and support for the Prophet, pbuh, the Muslims took Abu Bakr, r.a., as their natural leader after the Prophet, pbuh. He did not have to canvass votes for himself.
  7. A person who cooperates with the oppressive power structure, who supports or condones war against the Muslims, one who seeks recognition by the forces of wealth, exploitation and oppression cannot be called an Islamic leader or even a good Muslim. The Qur'an and Hadith are very clear on these teachings.
In the light of these principles, let us look at Dr. Amina Wadud's crusade. I have no grudge or problem with her. I am simply citing her as an example of what has gone wrong with Muslims in America.
  1. Dr. W. has not tried to join any Islamic organization opposed to the American power structure. Instead she has tried hard for acceptance by the people in power.
  2. She has not fulfilled her basic duty as a Muslim to oppose the American invasion of Afghanistan and then of Iraq. Many non-Muslims have done better than her. What Islamic credibility is left for her and others like her?
  3. Even when Muslim women took bold initiatives to stand against tyranny, oppression and the denial of women's rights, she did not come forward to help. Here are a few specific examples:
The TIMING of Dr. W.'s crusade is very important. We are living in war times, the second term of George Bush, an era of moral darkness and rampant Zionist-Imperialist aggression. It is a time when Muslims are engaged in Jihad in Kashmir, Chechnia, Afghanistan, and Iraq. Israel has torn Palestine apart. Serious Zionist attempts are underway to destroy Sudan, to undermine Nigeria, to legitimize Israel.

This is certainly not a time for making a break with TRADITION. The issue right now is not whether women can lead prayers. The issue is: How should Muslims in America respond to genocide. Lancet magazine says, the U.S. air force has killed 100,000 Muslims in Iraq. Earlier, more than a million Iraqis, many of them CHILDREN, died slow deaths owing to sanctions imposed by the USA/UN on Iraq. What should be the role of American Muslims in that context? That's the most important issue.

Even General Musharraf was shocked when the U.S. decided to BOMB AFGHANISTAN DURING RAMADAN. Then this past Ramadan, the U.S. destroyed FALLUJAH, house by house, mosque by mosque, sowing death and destruction during the nights of LAILATUL QADR.

In that context, Bush held "elections" in Iraq. Earlier, after killing thousands of civilians in Afghanistan, the U.S. claimed that it was "liberating Afghan women" as if women are not part of the families which our "heroic" air force wiped out.

It's time for UNITY, where the existing traditions must be upheld. Learn from the Muslims of Pakistan: When India invaded in 1965, Maulana Maudoodi urged Pakistanis to fight in Allah's name, regardless of the fact that Field Marshal Ayub Khan had imprisoned Maudoodi and his entire Shoora.

Learn from the Afghans: Regardless of how much money the U.S. is making available to Afghan mercenaries, Afghan women are proud of sending their children into the Jihad. They are not going to break tradition and remove their burqas while the UMMAH is under attack.

In conclusion, there CANNOT BE AN AMERICAN ISLAM. There is only ONE ISLAM, which was perfected and completed in the Qur'an and in the example of Muhammad (pbuh). Bush and his publicity machine are calling forth "moderate Muslims" to break Muslim unity.

There have been positive responses to Bush from some Iraqi-Americans who claim that the "elections" in Iraq were "great," [Qazwini has done his part], from opponents of Hadith who have made it their permanent occupation to denigrate and abuse the Hadith, from W.D. Muhammad who has come forth with an "American Islam" which sees the supporters of Israel as friends and Muhammad, pbuh, as NOT the last messenger. The icing on the cake is Dr. Amina A. Wadud who wants to gain rights for Muslim women by leading Juma' prayers, thus creating an ideological diversion, while ignoring the millions of women hurt by the enemies of Islam.

Inshallah, Islam in America will develop according to the model preserved in the Qur'an and the Hadith. Muslims in America are part of the Ummah and should have the humility to learn that we are a very small part of it. Makka, Madina, Al-Quds, Baghdad, Cairo, Kandahar, Khartoum, Kano, Lahore, Dhaka, Grozny, Jakarta, Samarkand .. are and should be much more important for Muslims than New York and Washington. Ego is an American problem because here it is enhanced by the racist attitudes of White supremacy ["I am number one"] which infect this entire country and people of non-White races too.

Our leaders are in prison. Imam Jamil al-Amin is in prison. Shaikh Omar 'Abdel Rahman is in prison, Siddique Abdullah Hasan is in prison, as are many activist Muslims who never dreamt of opposing the U.S., including Ahmed 'Abdel Sattar, Sami Al-Arian, Masaud Khan, Hammad ... Anyone who does not support them should not speak in the name of Islam.

I am tired of people claiming to be Muslim leaders, be it of prayers or groups, when they can't speak a word of truth about Muslims being held in the American gulag. kufr, tughyan and nifaq, fed by the U.S. power structure, are rampant.

Shia View: A Critique of New Trend's Study of Shia'ism

by Hasnain Naqvi

[New Trend's rebuttal of this view will be published in the next issue. We are publishing Naqvi's letter as is, without any editing. Hopefully one day Shia publications will do the same for New Trend.]

This is in reference to an article, written by Kaukab Siddique titled, "Mohurram 10, 1426: A non-sectarian look at Islamic History". I have read some articles written by Mr. Siddique in the past and I have a lot of respect for his knowledge & views, but I think that in this case, either his knowledge of the "Shia faith" lacks the in depth research or his source of knowledge is not correct, although he did not even mention one source.
Before I present my point of view I would like to mention that, I am not a scholar or any authority on religion, but I will try to correct his misconceptions & of other with similar views about the "Shia Faith" point by point, as much as I can.
First of all let may say that, I agree with Mr. Siddique, that the leadership of both Shias & Sunnis is to be blamed for misguiding Muslim Ummah, because of their ignorance & some times mixing religion with politics.
Mr. Siddique said that, "Hazrat Ali (Aalayis Saalam) was man of great piety & physical courage, was not comparable to the Prophet (Sullalaho Wa Aalahi Wassullam) or with Hazrat Abu Bakr (Razi Allahano) , Hazrat Umar (r.a.) and Hazrat Usman (r.a.). With him the Caliphate was re-located from Madinah to Kufa & underwent a steep decline", in short he was (Naozobillah) incapable.
This is the basic point and if I can some how the other remove this misconception, the later points will automatically become more simple and clear. Mr. Siddique statement is partially correct, Yes, Hazrat Ali (a.s.) can not be compared to the Prophet (swaw) Period. Nobody can be compared to the Prophet (swaw), and his personality is only second to Allah (Subhanao Taala). It is the later part of the statement that, I disagree with him.
In order to explain my point of view, I think it is important to mention how different muslim sects view the personality of the Prophet (swaw). The Shia school of thought & majority of the other sects, believe that the Prophet (swaw) is "Maasoom", whatever he said & did was because of Allah (ST) asked him to say or do & they were not his own words or actions. The layman definition of a 'Maasoom" is, "Maasoom can not and will not make any mistake or commit any sin". As I said before the majority of the Muslim Umah believes that the Prophet (swaw) was a "Maasoom", his words & actions were the actions of Allah (ST), but some do not, and these are the people who have the misconceptions mentioned in Mr. Siddique's statement and they some times even quote the Holy Quran to prove their point of view, (Surah 41:6), "Say (O Muhammad (swaw): I am only a human being like you, except that I receive revelations". But this only means that the Prophet (swaw) looks like us, he has two eyes, one nose etc. etc., he is a human being like us in appearance but later part of the verse changes the whole concept. How many of us receive the revelation? It is this, that makes the Prophet (swaw) different from us, that we can not even imagine becoming one. This argument is like, as if I could say to an animal that, "I am a living being like you, except that I have more brain than you". Can then, a frog or a fish say, that we both are same? I guess not. In order to prove their point of view that, the Prophet (swaw) was a human being like us, they also quote "Rewaiats" (stories), of which I will mention few with many regrets & Toba.
At one time a blind person was reciting the verses from the Holy Quran, the Prophet (swaw) said, "May Allah bless you, you reminded me a verse which I had forgotten" (Naozobillah). Bukhari Sareef Volume 3, Page 152.
One time the Prophet (swaw) went to sleep during his Naamaz (Naozobillah). Bukhari Sareef Volume 1, Page 37, 44 & 171.
That the Prophet (swaw) used to forget how many Rakaat he did in a Naamaz (Naozobillah). Saheeh Bukhari Volume 1, Page 123 & Volume 2, Page 65.
There are many more "Rewaiats", like the one I have mentioned here & some are so offensive that I can not even dare to put them in writing. The sad part is that they are not quoted by any Jew or a Hindu, but they are in books written by renowned muslim "scholars".
The logic behind this argument is that, if for a moment we accept that (Naozobillah) Prophet (swaw) was not a 'Masoon', that he could lie, make mistakes & commit sins, then we open up a Pandora box of questions such as, was he lying (toba) when he said, that he receives revelations? Did he lie (toba) when he told us that, he is the Prophet? Did he lie (toba), when he told us to pray five times or how to perform Hajj? Did he make a mistake (toba) at Hudaybiyyah and on & on. This is the reason that, majority of the muslims may disagree on other matters but they believe that the Prophet (swaw) was a 'Masoom' & that the Holy Quran was, is & will remain pure for ever.
Now, going back to point that, if we agree that, what ever the Prophet (swaw) said were words of Allah (ST), then the Hadith which is written in both Shia & Sunni books & I quote, "Aana Madina Tul Alimmo Wa Ali Un Babaha", (I am the city of knowledge and Ali is its main door), tells us that, it is Allah (ST) which is saying that, if some has to enter the city, 'The Prophet (swaw)', he/she has to go through the door 'Hazrat Ali (a.s)'. When the Prophet (swaw) was returning after performing his last Hajj in the year 10 Hijri, he stopped at a place called 'Gadirakum'. At this strategic point, the revelation descended upon the Prophet (swaw) & Hazrat Gabriel (a.s.) came to the Prophet (swaw) with this verse, "O' Apostle! Deliver what has been revealed to you from your Lord & if you do not then you have not delivered His message, and Allah will protect you from the people, surely Allah will not guide the unbelieving people". (5:67). At this time the Prophet (swaw) held the hand of Hazrat Ali (a.s.) & said in front of thousands of muslims, "Mun Kun Tho Mola Fahaza Ali Un Mola .", I will write the translation here, "who ever considers me as his Mola (savior), should also consider Ali as his Mola, where ever Ali is, Haq (Correct Path) is, Where ever Haq is, Ali is, where ever Ali will go, Haq will go". At this moment, upon the completion of his speech, Hazrat Gabriel (a.s.) again descended upon the Prophet (swaw) with the final revelation, "Today I have perfected your religion for you and completed my favor unto to you, and have chosen for you as religion al-Islam". (5:3). This is narrated by some of the most prominent Sunni scholars, like Ar-Razi, Suyuti, Tabari, Ahmad bin Hanbal & Bakhari. Now if that was Allah (ST) asking the Prophet (swaw) to say this then, is it not our duty to obey Him, does this not mean that, who ever comes against Ali will be on the wrong path?
Now, can any one quote a single Hadith that the Prophet (swaw) said, which is in both Sunni & Shia books, about any other muslim who ever it may be, his wife, his relative or any of his Sahabas, please let me know as I have not read a single one and it may be because of my lack of knowledge. Now, this does not change the "Ruthba" (Position) of the Sahabas, his relatives or any his wife, the contributions made by them in the name of Islam are many, and can not be ignored.
So, once we understand the true personality of Hazrat Ali (a.s), every thing else will become crystal clear. Issues like, condemning Muawiyya (son of Hinda, who chewed the liver of Hazrat Hamza (r.a.), to quench her thirst for the vengeance of her father & because of this, people use to call him, 'Son of the liver eater'), and re-locating the Caliphate from Madinah to Kufa, become very simple. When Ali was fighting the Kafirs, he was on the correct path and when the "Muslims" were fighting with Ali, he was on the correct path, remember what the Prophet (swaw) said, i.e. what Allah (ST) said, "Haq is where Ali is". Regarding re-location the Caliphate, one simple reason I can think of is that, Hazrat Ali (a.s) knew that, the future leaders of the Muslim Ummah will be power hungry, that they will even kill the grandson of the Prophet (swaw), just to become the Khalifa. He wanted to avoid the bloodshed in the Holy city of Madinah. He wanted the Holy city of Mecca & Madinah to be used for only worship and not for kingship. I will not try to go into the allegations, such as who took the garden of Fedak etc., as Mr. Siddique did not mention his source & moreover this is not a point of view of the majority of the Shias. As I said before & Mr. Siddique also mentioned, there are few people in both camps who are misguided.
One thing that he also mentioned with some reference is, "the systematic & ritualistic self-flagellation & taking out of processions about the martyrdom of Hazrat Hussain (a.s.). Mr. Siddique tries to make to two points here. First of all, according to him the Prophet (swaw) condemned such behavior & display of mourning as part of paganism. Secondly he says that, this ritual was started by the autocratic sultan, named Muiz-ud-Dawla in year 352 of the Hijra. Let me answer the second point first, Yes, the official ritual of this mourning was started during that year, but again the statement is half-correct. Let me explain this by giving an example. If after 9/11/01, the mayor of New York city decided that, the muslims can not pray in 'Jamaat' in any public place in New York city and then in the year 2015, a Muslim mayor gets elected, who lifts this ban. Can the statement made by some one in the year 2020 that, "the muslims of New York city started praying in 'Jamaat', in the year 2015, be correct? No, not at all, because people were praying in 'Jamat', in their homes since they were scared to do it in a public place. Mr. Siddique is forgetting that since the day Hazrat Hussain (a.s.) was martyred his family & his followers were taken prisoner & since then people who wanted to mourn his martyrdom had to do it in hiding, leave alone take out processions. Since, Muiz-ud-Dawla was the first person, who was also a part of the establishment he could do that openly with no fear of the establishment, pretty simple. Now, the first point, weather the Prophet (swaw) condemned mourning or not. Again, he did not mention his source. First of all, in the Holy Quran, 'Surah Yosuf' (12:84) it is written, "And he turned away from them and said: 'Alas, my grief for Yosuf'! And he lost his sight because of the sorrow'. What does this verse tells us, that Hazrat Yaqub (a.s.) mourned by crying & he mourned so much that he lost his eyesight. If mourning was forbidden in Islam, why would a Nabi cry for his son so much? As far as the Prophet (swaw), condemning the mourning & self-flagellation let me quote an incident which happened during the war of "Ohud". As we all know, that the Prophet (swaw) lost two teeth during this war. When one of his Sahaba (the only person who never met the Prophet (swaw), but was among his Sahabas), named Hazrat Owais-al-Qarni (r.a) heard this news, he first took out two of his teeth, but then he said "I don't know if they were the front teeth or the back, upper or the bottom", so he took all of his teeth out. When some "Muslims" told the Prophet (swaw), that your friend has done this and "is this not an act of a mad person", the Prophet (swaw) replied "If any body wants 'Junnat', he can go to Owais-al-Qarni's house, he will get it from there" (Mishkat-al-shaeef). Does this sound like condemning mourning & self-flagellation, not even close.
Mr. Siddique also mentioned in his article that, Hazrat Hassan (a.s.) accepted the rule of Muawiyya. No, he did not, it is like saying that when the Prophet (swaw) signed the treaty of "Hudaybiyyah", he (Naozobillah) accepted the rule of the Kafirs, he did not.
In his article Mr. Siddiques has written that, "In more recent days, the Shias have gone completely against the teachings of Imam Hussain (a.s.), because leaders like Sistani & Chalabi are cooperating with the American & participating in the elections, where as Imam Hussain (a.s.) would not even accept the tyranny of a muslim leader". First of all, Mr. Siddique contradicts his own statement by saying that, "Imam Hussain (a.s) would not even accept the tyranny of a muslim leader". Well he is absolutely right, that is why the Shias of Iraq wanted to remove Saddam in the first place, was he not a "muslim tyrant"? Also, it was not just the Shias, what about the Kurds, they are Sunnis, why did he not mention them, why mention Shias only. Now, I have just one question for Mr. Siddique, where was the whole muslim Ummah when Saddam systematically killed more than 500,000 Shias in Iraq, when he destroyed the 5000 year old civilization of the marsh Arabs in the southern Iraq by putting dykes in rivers, just because they happen to be Shias, when he fired more skud missiles on his own city of Najuf than he fired on Israel, when his army with tanks killed women & children inside the Roza of Imam Hussain (a.s). How come not a single country except Iran, said a single word & try to stop Saddam's brutal & heinous crimes. The way I look it is that, if there is a kid & his father beats him every day & there are chances that he will be killed, since he has already killed his younger brother, one day he will call some one for help from outside, even if it means that his father will end up in prison, this is called human instinct of survival.
The last misconception I want to clear is, about policies of Iran in that region. Again Mr. Siddique forgot what happened few years back, when in 1991 all the muslim countries, such as Jordan, Egypt, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Syria & many others became a part of the coalition just to please America, Iran was the only country which stayed neutral although it had the best chance to avenge the war thrust upon it by Saddam. Again if I have a neighbor who is constantly harassing me, has stolen my belongings, beaten my kids, has made attempts to destroy my house and one day police arrests him, do you think I will go & try to save him, No, it is not the human nature. Today, it is Iran which says anything when it comes to defending the muslim Ummah and it is that reason why it a target of America & Israel.
I hope this will clear some misconceptions of Mr. Siddique & people with similar views. May Allah bless them and guide them (Aameen).

click here to email a link to this article

2005-03-17 Thu 20:26ct