Sol Hofkins was the first reader to call, asking whether I would be writing to rebut Michael Skube’s indiscriminate attack on Islam (“Either you are a believer or an infidel,” Oct. 28). Next was Rubina Hossain, daughter of Murtaza Kakli, the president of the Muslim Community of Palm Beach County. I agree with her and the letter-writer to The Washington Post, where the article first appeared, that Mr. Skube attempted to paint Islam as a belligerent faith whose “very nature,” in his words, “seems to be one of intolerance.”
It’s personal for me, too, as a one who attends the same mosque. But as Ms. Hossain correctly notes, Mr. Skube “contradicts the very essence of the religion” in writing that Islam’s history “has shown more stock in retribution than mercy.” Given that the Prophet Mohammed lived in the light of history, Western scholars and folks of other faiths have acknowledged, and it can be researched using objective sources, that the essence of Islam for those who are sincere is enlightenment. Readers might not have grasped Mr. Skube’s ramblings on the Enlightenment, but they couldn’t miss his swipes at Islam. If they didn’t know better, they might take them as gospel. Like me, that’s the view most Americans grew up with. Mr. Skube postulated that, “The Islamic past has known no such intellectual transformation, and nothing suggests it will any time soon.” He didn’t seem to know, or at least he never mentioned, that Islam’s Golden Age, from the years 800 to 1600, was a direct contributor to the Enlightenment. Sharing his neo-Crusader view of history, even prominent ministers are casting one of the great monotheistic faiths as inherently evil.
Just as unfortunate is the blind eye to an indisputable transformation. Unbound by the cultural bugaboos of the proverbial “Muslim world,” American-born Muslims in particular have gone to the authentic sources of Islam – the book that Muslims call the Holy Quran and the prophet’s true traditions. The result: It’s here that Islamic thought is having its most progressive development. My favorite example:
Long before the new millennium arrived, Imam W. Deen Mohammed was defining what it means to be Muslim in the 21st century. The leader of the estimated 3 million-member American Muslim Society recently was characterized by The New York Times and on public television’s Tony Brown’s Journal as being among the most influential voices of Muslim America and as a leader capable of unifying moderate Muslims in the East and West. For more than 25 years, he has been articulating the compatibility between Islam and democracy.
Some of the misdefinition of Islam is deliberate or politically motivated, and some is due to misinformation. A recent letter-writer said his copy of the Quran mentions the word infidel hundreds of times. I have at least one copy of three different English translations, including a gift from Saudi Arabia to those of us who made the Hajj, or pilgrimage to the holy city Mecca, last year. None even mentions the word, which none of the Muslims I know uses. He needs a better translation for any objective insight. (Abdullah Yusuf Ali’s, a fairly good one, is readily available online.)
The New York Times’ Thomas L. Friedman (“To ease anger, give Muslims a voice,” Nov. 21) was constructive in observing that “For all the talk about Islam and Islamic rage, the real issue is: Islam in what context?” The Washington Post’s E.J. Dionne Jr. (“Finding the right answer to the wrong question,” Nov. 24) had it right: “It seems there are many people in the Muslim world, and in the Third World generally, who don’t hate us at all. Much, it turns out, hangs on the meaning of who ‘they’ is.” He recommended examining “where the United States has, indeed, failed as a global leader and neighbor.”
As sincere Americans of all stripes continue our introspection and reassessment of what could have been done better prior to the evil acts of Sept. 11, it might help to keep in mind that the Taliban are a product of politics, and American icon Muhammad Ali is a product of Islam.
