The central concept in Islam is the creed that there is no god but Allah and that Muhammad (may peace be upon him) is the Messenger of Allah.  In fulfilling this creed as a belief and practice, the central approach is one of “listening and obeying” Allah and those who Allah instructs us to listen to and obey.  The primary authority He instructs us to obey is the Prophet Muhammad (may peace be upon him).  He has revealed through the Prophet Muhammad two bodies of material: recited and non-recited.  The recited material, meaning scripture, is the Qur’an.  The non-recited material is the person of the Prophet Muhammad, may peace be upon him.  This non-recited material is the compilation of his reported sayings, actions, and events that he witnessed and seemed to approve (as compiled in the Hadith literature).

From here, the primary question is simple: how do we know what it is we are supposed to be believing and doing? The first answer to this question is that we listen to and obey the Prophet Muhammad (may peace be upon him).  Further, in what matters do we “obey” the Prophet and in what matters do with “follow” the Prophet, may peace be upon him?  Further, what about those of us who are living long after he (may peace be upon him) has left the earth?  This is one of the central functions of Fiqh.

Literally, it follows that “Fiqh” means “understanding.” And, specifically, we find in the Qur’an in the Surah 9, Ayah 122 (roughly, “chapter” 9 and “verse” 122), we find Allah instructing us that some of the members of the community must go out on various expeditions, but some members must stay back in order to develop “understanding” of the religion.  This group of people developing this understanding is the scholars.  They effectively become the inheritors of the Prophet (may peace be upon him) because they are taking on the responsibility of understanding the religion.  Just as the Prophet (may peace be upon him) himself is a mercy to all of the worlds, the community of scholars – by taking up this responsibility to receive, understand, transmit, and explain the religion to us – become a mercy to us.

Without the continuous train or chain of scholars transmitting and explaining to us the way to understand, believe, and practice our tradition, we would be left with the huge responsibility of trying to understand our tradition on our own.  Beyond the simple problem of time, we have one serious concern that is often overlooked: everyone has a worldview.  Everyone views the world in a particular way that might be different from the way others view the world.  Most of us do not realize what is our world view.  Some people are skeptical in the way they view things, while others are very hopeful.  Some people are rather passionate, while others are dispassionate.  Some tend to look at things more literally, while others tend to look at things more symbolically or metaphorically.  So, when we are looking at our tradition, one of the challenges is to look at it appropriately.  Often, we do not realize that we are being excessively skeptical or excessively simplistic.  The term here is “Aqeedah.”  Generally, our Aqeedah informs us of the essentials we are supposed to believe.

When we look at the first generation of Muslims – the Companions of the Prophet, may Allah be pleased with them and may peace be upon him – with the wrong worldview, then we might make some great errors in understanding and appreciating them. If, for example, we study their history from the perspective of “peace,” then it might seem as though they were sometimes peaceful.  If we study them from the perspective of “technological advancement,” then it might seem as though they did not advance technologically as quickly as later generations of Muslims did.  But, the appropriate Aqeedah, is to study them from the perspective that they are not only completely loyal to the Prophet Muhammad, may peace be upon him, and his message, but that they were loyal to each other in matters of Aqeedah.  They definitely had disagreements on worldly matters, but they were unified in matters of Aqeedah.  They had consensus in matters of Aqeedah.

So, now we see we have three concerns in approaching the tradition.  One concern is in having the appropriate lens, or worldview, or filter, or Aqeedah.  Then, as we establish the appropriate Aqeedah in approaching our tradition, then we engage in the process of understanding, or Fiqh.  Third, the source for developing this Aqeedah and Fiqh is Allah, who gave us the personal example and teachings of the Prophet Muhammad (may peace be upon him) along with the scripture, the Qur’an.  And, by extension, we have the legacy of scholars who receive, preserve, transmit, and explain what is that Allah gave us through the Prophet Muhammad (may peace be upon him).  Thus, we rely upon the scholars to inform us on the appropriate Aqeedah and Fiqh.

Now, we mentioned before that one of the challenges of understanding the tradition without the help of scholars is the concern over an appropriate Aqeedah.  Another concern is over the appropriate methodologies to interpret the material.  Living a way of life is an act of interpretation.  Living a tradition is especially an act of interpretation.  How do we maintain consistency in interpretation?  We have appetites of various sorts that influence how we behave.  Even if we establish an appropriate Aqeedah, these appetites likewise will influence how we interpret our source material.  Thus, we might make arbitrary choices in religious practice.  Or, we might make choices based upon fulfillment of these appetites.  The risk then, is that we might engage in practices that are unhealthy, or even destructive.  The greater risk, however, is that we contradict what Allah is instructing us to fulfill.  We find this problem very frequently in our environment, where many of us often make arbitrary choices in our beliefs without much serious consideration.  Or, because we are sometimes dealing with large populations of believers and non-believers, we might have political motivations that affect our choices.  Thus, the scholars have established methodologies for interpreting text.  The goal is to establish consistency in interpretation, over arbitrariness and over our appetites’ yearnings and over political motivations.

The different schools of methodologies for deriving understanding are called “Madhahib.” (Singular: Madhhab).  In these methodologies, we are not only interpreting our source material – the Qur’an and Hadith – but we are also, through this process, establishing priorities.  The common – and frequently mistaken – methodology in our American society toward finding answers in tradition is the thesis/supporting citation approach.  Many of us have been trained in secular and so-called “Islamic Full-Time” Middle School, High School, College (and beyond) that the method to find an answer is to establish a thesis, and then scour the texts to find support for our thesis.  The problem here is that this method is not a method for deriving any sort of holistic understanding so much as it is a technique for presenting very limited arguments.

Notice that there are multiple methodologies, there are multiple Madhahib.  Each Madhhab is very unique from the next one in its methodologies.  Nevertheless, we can understand that it is certainly possible to have different interpretations on many matters.  We call this difference of interpretations and opinions “Ikhtilaf.”  This Ikhtilaf is not so much a detriment, as much as it is a benefit to the believers, by providing flexibility and diversity in opinions.

Having said this, we must understand that there are those matters that are considered to be beyond interpretation.  Meaning, we follow them as they are.  These matters, that are handed down to us with little or no room for interpretation are called “Tawqifi” matters.  Most of these Tawqifi matters are related to the essentials of the acts of worship.  We avoid making any changes to the essentials of our acts of worship.  So, for example, why do we fast in Ramadan? Because that practice was handed down to us to be practiced as such.  We do not move the month of fasting to a different month.

Beyond the Tawqifi matters, we have a whole range matters that are up for interpretation, debate and further consideration.  This process of deliberation over these matters is called “Ijtihad.”  One of the first results of this deliberation was the view that believers need to establish some basics in Aqeedah.  We do not quite find this discussion of Aqeedah among the companions of the Prophet, may Allah be pleased with them and may peace be upon him.  It is a later conclusion, based on the narrations transmitted, that they were united in Aqeedah implicitly.  Essentially, Ijtihad is the process of applying the methodologies of a particular Madhhab, seeking to find a consistent answer to our contemporary issue.  So, in seeking answers to our questions, the scholars engage in Ijtihad.

Now, what about we lay people who are not scholars?  If we had the time and will, we could get training in scholarship to find our own answers.  Unfortunately, even though that route might be an ideal for many of us, we have various other obligations to ourselves, our families, and our society that prevent this possibility.  Further, if we So, without training in these methodologies, how do we derive understanding of our tradition.  Rather, how do we know how to fulfill what it is that we are supposed to fulfill for Allah?  Here, we embody a culture of trust.  Just as we approach physicians to give us answers for our questions of health and illness, we trust the scholars for answers in understanding our tradition.  The term here is “Taqleed.”

Now, despite its long and logical history of support in our tradition, this term seems to be a bitter pill in our era of seemingly independent thinking.  We must understand that ours is a living tradition, an oral tradition.  Ours is a tradition of embodiment of knowledge.  Thus, it is a person-to-person tradition.  The whole foundation of the tradition is trust, and Taqleed is an organic result of this tradition.  Taqleed removes from the believer the obligation to find evidences on every single issue.  Practically speaking, everyone engages in Taqleed whether or not he or she realizes it.  Everyone trusts certain sources, sometimes consciously, and sometimes arbitrarily.  Taqleed does not, however, free the believer from using his or her own intellect.  Effectively, we are saying that within the first few centuries, the norm in the Muslim community was that the believers followed specific Madhahib and conducted their religious practices within their specific Madhahib.  So, the scholar engages in Ijtihad, and the lay believer engages in Taqleed.

Considering that our goal is to be consistent in our practices, Taqleed provides us with a method to fulfill this drive for consistency through the acceptance of a particular Madhhab.  From there, however, because we are seeking consistency, it does not follow that we would jump between Madhahib.  We run into the same concern mentioned above about arbitrariness, caprice, and political influence on our choices.  Rather, each Madhhab stands on its own, with methodologies to answer just about all our possible questions of practice.  If we were to jump from Madhhab to Madhhab, we would essentially be jumping from methodology to methodology, which is called “Talfeeq.”  In the process, we lose consistency.  By extension, we lose a central benefit of our Islamic practice:  stability and cohesion.

And Allah knows best.

Another area where I think too many Muslims make too many mistakes.

As the story goes, the Muslim masses are supposedly “conservative,” and those who are “liberal” tend to identify themselves as “liberal,” implying that they are different than the Muslim masses. In some cases, we use this latter term to mean “intellectually enlightened” and in other cases, we use this term to mean “loose with certain rules of social conduct.”

And, commonly we use such terms — either term, “liberal” or “conservative” — as attacks against each other.

So, what is our reality, and what should our ideal be?  The ideal is that we are moderates in just about all aspects.  So, in this piece, I am speaking more about the side we err on.

First, we must distinguish between the basic facets of life where we apply these terms: thinking, conduct, and politics.

Now, let us correct some misconceptions. The common, stereotypical Muslim immigrant, whom we commonly stereotype as “conservative” is commonly, stereotypically conservative in thinking. But, this same person is not consistently conservative in social conduct. The same person who commonly, stereotypically exercises gender segregation in the mosque and dinner parties and attempts to dictate the marriage choices of his/her children commonly watches hours upon hours upon hours of Bollywood or Egyptian movies. Those films are somehow considered acceptable.  More often than not, they common stereotypical Muslim immigrant tends to be far more loose (in terms of social conduct) than we might imagine.  What is the point of consistency? We mistakenly consider Muslim immigrants to be socially conservative, when the reality is that many Muslim immigrants tend to be loyal to their home cultures.  In that way, they are no different than many indigenous Muslims who are just as loyal to their home cultures.

Politically, however, it is a different type of inconsistency, but the spectrum of liberal/moderate/conservative does not apply. Rather, the politics of such a person are best labelled as “reactionary.”  It used to be that indigenous, African American Muslims tended to be more Democrat (technically “Politically Liberal”), while immigrant Muslims tended to be more Republican (technically “Politically Conservative”).  Some of these preferences related to legacies that are beyond the scope of discussion here.  But, some of these preferences related to the domestic policy of Democrats and the foreign policy of Republicans.  It is partially fair to say that both parties are very much at the service of lobbyists (mostly corporate), but that is the nature of our democracy.

On the flip side, we must definitely understand that the stereotypical “liberal” Muslim, who may be known for liberal social conduct tends to be no less intellectually closed-minded than the stereotypical “conservative” person mentioned above. The content of the closed-mindedness may differ, but such persons are usually no less closed-minded than anyone else.  More often, we also tend to find that the self-proclaimed “Liberal Muslims” are quick to judge others as “Conservative” and then are just as quick to just these alleged “Conservative Muslims” as judging them.  I’m saying that it is commonly a mistake to assume that “Liberal” means “Free Thinking” because it often (maybe more often) means “I believe everyone is judging me.”

So, what is our Muslim ideal in America in this time in place:

Intellectually: we should be intellectually liberal. Meaning, we should be willing to entertain and consider almost (almost) any idea, any possibility. There should be no shame in matters of learning, especially learning religion.  That is not to say that we should be quick to spreading ideas that people are not equipped to hear.  This is often the mistake of the learned classes of Muslims:  often they push ideas that are either irrelevant for the rest or might be confusing for the rest or might even be detrimental for the rest of us.  We are often better off exploring the more practical ideas than the abstract ideas.  But, as a default principle, we should be constantly expanding our horizons of knowledge.

Socially: we should be conservative. We should be conservative in our conduct. The focus here is on modesty, privacy, humility, and manners.  Again, do not confuse “Socially Conservative” with “Politically Conservative.” The political agendas of the Political Conservatives and the Political Liberals often mask themselves in language that fools us into thinking of issues of social relations as political issues.  The reality is that the Political Conservatives and Liberals have one target — power — and will mask things in whatever way they want.  Likewise, when the Political Right attempts to present itself as the Christian party, that point is laughable considering the very un-Christian morality of the overwhelming majority of its candidates, and the agnosticism of some of those pundits who push the supposedly Christian agenda.  We have the same problem in Muslim-majority democracies, where “Islam” is nothing more than a slogan to get votes, funds, and power.

Politically: we should be moderates.  This does not mean that we do not individually join parties.  Power politics necessitates alliances, ultimately with parties.  That is all well and good, until you represent yourself as Muslim.  Meaning, I tend to be politically conservative, which means I believe in individual social responsibility (starting with myself) and limited, tightly restricted government.  Unfortunately, the Republican Party today is too often a conglomeration of so many anti-Muslim bigots all the way from the top to bottom of its hierarchy.  Anti-Muslim bigotry is not only tolerated, but repeatedly enforced and spread.  My point is that I cannot justify any sort of serious participation with the Political Right any time soon.  More importantly, it is my personal preference to be on the Political Right.

In being political moderates the point is simple: we identify our issues and then see the candidate that seems to cater most to those issues.  I am not here prescribing what our Islamic issues are.  Again, I tend to be Politically Conservative, even though at this moment in time the overwhelming majority of Muslims support the Democratic candidates.  So, I am saying that we should organize ourselves more to get the parties to approach us, rather than the opposite.  This is a long process.

Now, in between our liberal intellect and our social conservative-ness sits one organ: the tongue. Which way should it go? The rules that govern the tongue are the rules of manners. Further, the manners implemented upon the tongue should vary according to the recipients. Some recipients need to hear liberal thinking, while others need to hear conservative social conduct.  Meaning, while maintaining full loyalty to the truth, you speak to people according to what they are capable of understanding and what they are willing to hear.  Again, some need to hear liberal thinking, while others need to hear conservative social conduct.

That is my opinion. And, the emphasis here is on us judging ourselves. A person who outwardly appears to be contradicting any of the above onlyappears to be contradicting any of the above, and should be given his/her due: 70 excuses to justify his/her conduct.

We should also be clear in understanding that there are limits to each of the above outlooks.  As mentioned, there is a limit to liberal thinking.  At the intellectual level, it would be silly to explore being an Atheist Muslim.  But, because there are self-proclaimed Atheist Muslims, we do engage with them in some capacity.  At the level of social relations, there are definitely limits to social conservatism.   We err toward social conservatism, but we must understand that we are neither too strict nor too loose.  Each excess has its problems, as well as its blowback. A community that is too loose with its social relations tends to be so watered down that “Islam” is essentially nothing more than an identity.  A community that is too strict with its social relations also creates very unhealthy atmospheres for those involved.

So, in a nutshell we should:

1- Intellectually keep expanding our horizons.
2- Socially err on the side of conservatism.
3- Politically get the politicians to serve us on our terms.

And God knows best.

In recent years, I learned that I have to be vigilant about my friends because my friends affect me tremendously (and I likewise affect them). But, I realize now that back then I only thought about how much bad company can affect you, and how much bad company can hurt you.  This year, however, I really benefited extensively from good company and saw its affect on me.  Rather, this year I realized gratitude for the good company I’ve been getting blessed with.  I hope that I gave them positive influence also.

9 – I am sick of hearing about 9/11.

This point is not quite a lesson, but a visceral experience.  I am sick of being made to stand in the shadows or to be held to account because of 9/11 because I’m Muslim.  I’m sick of the victim mentality we find in our society (whether or not related to 9/11) among (a) Muslim Americans, (b) Christian Americans, (c) Americans in general.  But, the lesson here is that people quickly jump on the bandwagon of victimhood any chance they get.

8 – Sometimes in life, you don’t get closure. Rather, you must make peace with it. And move on.

Sometimes in life you need that moment that somehow gives you permission to move on.  Sometimes you need a letter, or an apology, or a confession.  And, if you don’t get it, stop waiting. Make peace with the situation.  Make peace with its place in your heart an in your consciousness and move on.  There are parts of me that still ask the air to ask certain people, “Why?” but I know I won’t get answers.  Maybe some feel the same way about my choices.

7 – When you listen to teachers, your transformation takes place at 100x the speed it does when you do not have a teacher or when you do not listen to your teachers.

I’ve seen it in myself when I do and don’t listen to my teachers. I’ve seen it in my students.  I’ve seen it in my students who listen and those who don’t listen.  And, I’ve seen the lack of transformation among those students who break off from teachers. And, I’ve seen the lack of transformation among students who use their teachers as trophies, but do not listen.  Most commonly, however, I’ve seen the lack of transformation among those who stubbornly or defensively or (mostly likely) naively insist on their independent thinking separate from teachers, not realizing that the best teachers accelerate and enhance independent thinking.

6 – Some people are pathetic.

Not much to say about this point. Sometimes we have to accept that some people will not be happy with you and will seize the moment to attack you, even if they have to lie about it.  What can we say about such people, except that they are pathetic.

5 – Love generates love.

It’s that simple: love generates love. Love begets love.  Sad that it took me 40 years to learn it.

4 – When you seize control of yourself and let go of controlling life, life does get much better.

Rather than trying to focus on the ominous mysteries of the future, or rather than trying to figure out God’s plan for me.  I found it much more useful to seize control of my thinking, to focus on my heart and on myself, and let the chips fall where they may.  And, life has been significantly better for it.  My goodness, so much better.

3 – A central concern of our era is the corrosion of character and the loss of manners.

We Muslims should invest less of ourselves trying to get accepted by mainstream America with our pleasantries and claims of victimhood.  We should shift the bulk of those particular efforts toward the difficult process of strengthening our character, backbone, and refined manners.  From there, we have to seriously, consistently push the agenda of character in our society.  At this point, it is not only our survival that matters, but the rapid collapse of general American society.

2 – Sometimes God gives ease after difficulty by making you stronger & sometimes by changing your views.

This is one of the most profound lessons I’ve learned this year.  We are promised ease after difficulty, and according to some commentaries, we are promised two eases for each difficulty.  I naturally assumed that those eases would come by way of difficulties – the thorns in my side – getting removed.  Sometimes that happens.  Or, sometimes, something better would be given that would help me forget the thorn.  Rather, what happens sometimes is that the difficulty makes us much, much stronger.  Then, the difficulty no longer seems like a difficulty.  Sometimes the difficulty seems like ease itself.  Or, in some cases, our views on our selves, life, the world, and God change, resulting in us forgetting about the difficulty.

1 – The people of our society are wounded and scared.

This point is the biggest lesson I learned in the past year.  We all know that some people are wounded.  Now, I assume that most or all people are wounded.  Our challenge is to go through the labyrinth of possibilities and find healing for each and every person.  Including some of the people above that I spoke about with displeasure.

What adds to the wounds is that ours is a hostile, hostile climate.  It is hostile to our minds and hearts.  There is so much visceral fear in our society that people are seriously losing their rationality.  The result is even more wounds.

But, sometimes as parents we impose our insecurities upon our children. Out of fear that they feel insecure, we sometimes overcompensate by crossing boundaries. Thus, we will commonly try to make Christmas more Christmas-like for our kids (in some cases even getting Christmas trees). In other cases, we try to make Eid more Christmas-like. In either case, the problem is the same: we are afraid our children will feel embarrassed for being different. The real problem, however, is that we underestimate our children’s strength of character. Usually, it is not the child that feels insecure, but the parent. If the child feels insecure, it is likely that he or she is inheriting those feelings from the parent. That is the deeper problem of many of today’s parents: we are too often afraid of our children. If you have strong backbone, then (Insha Allah) your child will inherit it. If you are afraid because you see yourself as a tiny, powerless minority that seeks acceptance, then your child will inherit that.

Consider it: if you feel insecure about your child’s Christmas-time insecurities, do you feel the same a few weeks earlier, at Hanukkah? Probably not. Likewise, do you feel the same about Kwanza, or even Diwali? Probably not. This feeling of insecurity comes from being a minority population, especially when placed against a majority. But, our children will be as insecure as we make them. Teach your child that God will take care of him/her. Teach your child that the best of all humans was Muhammad –p. But, first you must believe it.

Of course, there are those of us who take the other extreme, and make Eid and such events as thoroughly boring and unhappy as is humanly imaginable. I can’t help such people. That stoicism is not our tradition either.

On the other hand, this is not an excuse to demean anyone else’s holiday. Christians celebrate Christmas. It is not the time to speak of the pagan origins or the capitalist status of today’s Christmas. Rather, treat it with respect because your peers, colleagues, and friends treat it with respect. Further, if you do not yet have non-Muslims in your family, it is a matter of time before you inevitably well. Most likely, you will have non-Muslims in your extended family within 10 years; inevitably, you will within 20 years. So, as a head start for those relationships, either we treat Christmas with respect, or we treat it with silence. But, some of us already have non-Muslims in our immediate family, and it becomes normal to celebrate Christmas. That is a different issue with its own dynamics.

But, when someone is wishing you “Merry Christmas,” regard it as a gesture of goodwill, and accept it with at least a “Thank you.”

Again, the overall concern for yourself is to have confidence in your own belief, and then Insha Allah, your children will inherit your confidence.

And God knows best.

On the one hand, Muslims fast for two days in commemoration of that famous event in the Prophet Moses’-p- life: the day He saved Moses-p- and his followers from the Pharaoh. This is the day that the sea was split into two mountains of water, and Moses -p- led his people to the other side, just before the sea came crashing down on the Pharaoh and his forces. In observance of that event and our strongest connection to the Prophet Moses -p, our Prophet Muhammad -p- advised us to fast for two days (in a voluntary fast).

On the other hand, Muslims mourn that famous event in Imam Husayn’s life, when he was abandoned and murdered. Some Muslims called upon him to lead an uprising against tyranny, and Imam Husayn, may God be pleased with him, finally agreed. But, when the leader’s forces came, those Muslims abandoned Imam Husayn. The forces subsequently slaughtered almost everyone at the camp. What makes the event even more shocking is that Imam Husayn is the beloved grandson of the Prophet Muhammad -p. Husayn’s sister – Zaynab – was somewhat spared, and soon faced the leader.

Now, anyone who has strong feelings about either of the above will feel that I am not properly addressing the issue at hand. The feelings about this day are so passionate, that I decided to wait until the 11th of Muharram to post this note.

But, the issue at hand that I am addressing is neither the proper history, nor commemoration nor sectarian issues involving the 10th of Muharram. Indeed, on that day, generally it is Sunnis that fast and Shias that mourn, generally. And, for purposes of fair disclosure, I have to mention (if it is not obvious) that I am a Sunni.

Rather, I am speaking about God’s marvelous wisdom. Somehow, a day can take on symbolic meaning, so that it is both celebrated and mourned. More than that, many of those who celebrate this day also choose to criticize those who mourn it, while many of those who mourn this day also choose to criticize those who celebrate it. The point here is that if I celebrate this day yet I also use it to attack Shias, then my loyalty is not to the Prophet Muhammad’s recommendations for us, peace be upon him, but to my team. And, the point here is that if I mourn this day yet I also use it to attack Sunnis, then my loyalty is not to Imam Husayn, may God be pleased with him, but (again) to my team. We all know that we should indeed love the Prophet Muhammad -p- and his family.

So, what is one of God’s wisdoms here, on the 10th of Muharram? It is that when we are trying to fulfill religious behavior, it is so easy to fall into irreligious behavior. And, it is so easy for God to use one simple day in the calendar to expose that contradiction in us.

We should celebrate that God created a bridge for us to connect to the Prophet Moses -p. The Hajj connects us with the Prophet Abraham -p, and the 10th of Muharram connects us with the Prophet Moses -p. We should be sad that even when God gives us a bridge, whether it is through a sea or over a sea, we often instead choose to drown. But, the doorway to turn back to God, via “tawba” is constantly open.

Then, perhaps, in this life, as we work to improve ourselves and society, we can fulfill the dignified models of the Prophets -p- in this life, and hopefully meet them in the next life, along with their grandchildren.

And, God knows best.

Regardless of how much someone may try to coerce your heart, the most that anyone can do is to coerce your body and your emotions. But, your heart is beyond the reach of anyone but you and your Owner. You can reveal the contents of your heart, or hide them, but the secrets of your heart are yours. Outsiders, however, will seek to seize them and replace them.

In our culture, however, we find four insidious methods for coercing the heart. Rather, these methods seek to reach as close to the heart as any outsider can. The first method involves atrophying the heart itself. The second method involves inhibiting any growth. The third method involves clouding it. The fourth method involves splitting the heart. But, any of these methods only work against us if we allow them to work against us.

We know that the mind-heart-body trichotomy in Islam differs from the contemporary imperial models. In our paradigm, the mind is the rational intellect, the heart is the intuitive intellect, the body is the sensory intellect. The rational, the intuitive, the sensory are each intellects. Contrast this reality with the contemporary imperial model, in which the mind is the rational, while the heart is the emotional, and the body is the reactive sensory. The difference does not end here. In the Islamic paradigm, the animals, plants, and earth also have consciousness, spirituality, and, by extension, precious value. In the imperial model, the plants, animals, and earth are available for our devouring consumption. Effectively, an animal is no different than a pebble, when obstructing our imperial ambitions, often a human is no different than a pebble either.

The key point here, is that in the contemporary imperial model, the heart is not an intellect, but a place of emotion and passion. Further, the emotions themselves are frowned upon as weakness. In the contemporary imperial model, the heart is the source of naive weakness, while in the Islamic model, the heart is the source of your strength. It is your truest intellect. It is your backbone, your courage. It is in the heart that we find your ilah. But, when we embrace this contemporary imperial model, what have we done? We have atrophied the heart. In removing the strength from the heart, we abandon the most important organ of our consciousness. Test yourself. Try to sit still for a minute, not thinking of any words. Then, try to sit still for a minute not thinking. Try to sit still without thinking, while breathing normally. Can you do it?

Our society is thus hyper-rational, in that we have been conditioned to over “think” everything. As we know, even though we are hyper-rational, our rationality is thoroughly crippled by a largely useless educational system at all levels, teaching our future generations knowledge that is irrelevant for their personal and professional lives.

This problematic educational system recalls the second insidious methods for capturing and coercing the heart. Another central concept in our Islamic tradition is the concept of movement. The terminology across our sciences are so frequently terms of movement: Shari’ah, Tariqah, Madhhab, Sirah all speak of paths. Repeatedly, the Qur’an calls on the believers to explore. Reflect on the world. Travel across the world. Look out into space. What is this call, but a call to yearn and feed your yearning. In contemporary language, this call is a call to curiosity. Not only does our contemporary educational system tend to shut down this curiosity, but most systems of religious education obliterate any sense of spiritual curiosity by stamping it down with dogmatic instruction. What is dogma? Dogma is a knowledge of tradition that bears minimal practical value, and is hostile to imagination. If in the first method, we shut down our hearts by convincing ourselves that our hearts are empty vessels of weakness, then in this second method we shut down our hearts by using religion and education to shut down a most central tool of the heart: yearning. Try it. Try to identify your most deep yearning. You know when you are approaching it if you feel vulnerable and tender. How long does it take for you to reach that point? Meaning, how much have you censored yourself from it?

The third method for coercing the heart might be the most obvious: pollution. Ours is an era of multiple types of pollution, and most often, we focus on material corruption. Even then, because our overall outlook reduces plants, animals, and the earth to subjects of our disposal, that conversation is largely muted, looking at our treatment of the earth as something different than sheer abuse. But, two of the central tools for reaching the heart are the eyes and ears. And, two of the most insidious forms of defilement are noise and visual pollution. Consider how much your eyes and ears are bombarded. With the development of personal media devices, your eyes and ears are even more cluttered than perhaps at any time in human history. Because our newly developing systems of communication seem to necessitate that even a young child carries a personal media device, this audio-visual bombardment begins at an early age. So now, not only is the child reared with a sense that the heart is irrelevant and obstructive, not only is the child’s sense of wonder getting stamped out, but the heart is getting buried within a heap of nonsense. Try it. Shut off all electrical devices (including your lights) and try to enjoy the silence. As you develop a taste for silence, you will long for it.

The fourth method is a method that seems to get increasingly refined: alienation. Consider how alienated we have become from others. In the industrialized era, giving rise to the middle class, our material goals have pulled us away from each other: we seek houses on larger and larger plots of land. The result is distance from our neighbors who, in previous generations, were intimately involved in our lives and livelihoods. Now, with those same personal media devices and new methods of social networking we are replacing human interaction with digital messaging. The end result is that our hearts are getting separated from each other, replacing these human connections with artificial conversations. On the positive side, we are connected to so many more people, but on the negative side, our substantial relationships are shrinking at the same rate. The heart needs nourishment by way of interaction with good company. Now, instead, we are fed the equivalent of junk food for the soul. Try it: interact with intimacy with people. Speak about something more substantive than pleasantries and projects. Do you know how, anymore?

Thus, this is the era we live in. We live in an era of a heart that is increasingly atrophied, crushed, cluttered, and split. But, we are not lost. The challenge is to reclaim that heart that is within you and nurture it back to growth, and then, if God wills, you will no longer be the numb zombie that you did not realize you are. You will be a human.

And God knows best.

Now, there are appropriate times for Fear and Grief. The Fear instinct is physiological, and might tie into survival. It is not wrong to fear something that can hurt you. If you are going to have fear, it is better to fear the source of all things that can hurt you: God. So, redirect your fear from something that cannot hurt you, like thunder, to something that can hurt you, like lightning. From there, redirect your fear from that material thing that can hurt you, the lightning, to the Master of that thing, God. From there, redirect that fear from the might or wrath of God, to fear of disconnect from God.

Further, fear needs hope. Fear, by definition, includes hope. The ideal fear in most cases is one that is equally balanced with hope. Lightning is something dangerous, yet is a source for vital gases. If you must choose between fear of God and hope of God, then choose the latter, or at least have a balance of fear and hope.

Likewise, there are appropriate times for grieve. In our mythically independent era, we take leave of our emotional needs, believing our emotional needs hinder us. Rather, our emotional needs, when fulfilled, often nurture us. Thus, in our mythically independent era, we are a society of emotionally empty robots, not knowing how to emote. The end result is that we exhibit only three: laughter (not happiness), sadness, and anger. Anger, itself is not quite an emotion, but that is a discussion for another time. The end result of our mythically independent era is a sense of emotional numbness, emphasizing functionality over beauty, accomplishment over love.

In the case of loss, there are times when a process of grief is necessary. For example, if one of your loved ones — say your father or mother or spouse or sibling or child — dies, you need to exhibit a process of grief. You need to emote. If not, then the pain from the rupture will remain within you and will manifest in other forms. You might try to compensate for the pain — not realizing that you are doing so — by immersing yourself in your professional work. You might try to compensate for the pain — not realizing that you are doing so — by disconnecting personal relationships. If you do not go through a conscious process of grief, rather, mourning, then you will suffer for it unnecessarily.

But, there is the unhealthy, destructive, choking aspect of most fear and grief. Grief is a form of wallowing over events of the past. Fear is a wallowing over the future. Imagine the person who is drowning in a pool of quicksand. Rather than try to escape, he shuts his eyes, pretending that he is inside a cozy, warm blanket. Such is the nature of much fear and grief: these are sentiments of murk that we dwell in, giving us the illusion of accomplishment. They accomplish nothing, do not nurture us, and instead shackle us.

But, the problem of Fear and Grief is even deeper. Fear itself is so irrational that it behaves like lightning in our consciousness. The fear of thunder is not the fear of thunder, but the nonsensical consequence of a fear of death. Thunder cannot hurt you any more than a dog’s bark can hurt you, yet we commonly fear both thunder and barking. Deeper than a fear of death, we often fear the proverbial unknown. When we fear something specific, the consequence in our consciousness is that the fear manifests in all types of bizarre ways. Consistently, fear inhibits us, in some cases, to the point of psychological paralysis. If we fear death, then we shall fear life. If we fear the unknown, then we will not see the known, for we shall see the unknown in everything. The challenge, then, is to trust. Thus, better than fear of God is to hope in God, which relates to trust in God. That trust in God will open the door for us to trust ourselves. Then, can you live in the world that you live in, and not the destructive world of the destructive element of your imagination. Then, can you live in the moment.

Grief takes the paralyzing reflex of fear further. Fear tends to focus on the future, while grief tends to focus on the past. Yet, the consequences of grief find their way to impact our future also. On the one hand, we might grieve over loss, in an unending grief. We might think to ourselves one of the most unhealthy of thoughts, being that thought that begins with, “If only I did this, then that would not happen.” We are mourning something that did not happen. When stuck in an unhappy situation, we simultaneously mourn the present as a consequence of past events, grieving over future events that — according to our imagination — cannot happen. Again, we are mourning something that did not happen. The challenge, then is to make peace with yourself, your choices, your experiences, your condition. Then, can you live in the world, looking at what needs to be done, rather than what cannot ever be done. Then, again, can you live in the moment.

The central goal, then, is to live in the moment in front of you. Look at the situation of the moment and work accordingly. Then, you can use your imagination to look at the expected results of your choices, and then try to make better and better choices. So, we fear and trust. So, we mourn when necessary, but not when not necessary. And, then you can see the beauty that stands within you and in front of you.

And, God knows best.

By the end of the first ten days of fasting you are deflating the balloon down to its natural shape; you will have a glimpse into your true personality. You are deflating the fluff out of your personality, and revealing the true face hidden behind the mask. Maybe you are angry. Maybe you are exhausted. Maybe you are easily irritated. Maybe you find yourself being suspicious of people. Maybe you are really sensitive. You will find Muslims getting into all kinds of very nasty fights in this period, not realizing what is happening in their personalities; their personalities are getting exposed. When you reach the end of that first ten days, introspect deeply to see how you feel and how you feel about things. Look at how you look at your near ones (family and friends). Look at how you look at yourself. Look at how you look at your relationship with God. Look at the mirror, for this special period is a mercy that you do not often get in your year.

By the end of the second ten days of fasting, you will have a sense of control over certain aspects of your personality, where you will have a strength that you did not have 3 weeks prior. Now, look at those issues you faced at the end of the first ten days, and figure out how to purify them out of your system or at least control them. That is, of course, if you have been honest with yourself. If you are being honest with yourself, you are witnessing a transformation within yourself. The first thing you seek in this period is the basic foundation of your relationship with God: you turn to Him. Tawba. Wash away the darkness in your previous choices; start by seeking His forgiveness.

By the end of the third nine or ten days, you will have a great sense of control, and perhaps even a sense of exhilaration. You have developed a shield around your Iman. That shield is what we call Taqwa. The gates of paradise are open to you, and you should seek of its treasures. Aim high. You can obtain a palace of 70,000 rooms, with each room containing 70,000 doors to 70,000 additional rooms. But, why satisfy yourself with even 70,000 of those palaces when you can have wings? Why satisfy yourself with wings when you can be in His company and in the company of those with Him. Aim high. Seek all of these things, not just from the Hereafter, but also from the Here and Now.

Thus, in this month, seek the company of the best of your friends and family, for that company will help strengthen you. Do not be disrespectful to the spiritual leeches in your environment, being those people who seem to suck away any consciousness of God within you as they play in this temporary world. Keep those people at a distance, and instead occupy yourself with the best of people. You know who the leeches are and you know who the gems are. If there are no Muslims around you, then make company from the best of your friends, and make company with the books and stories of the best of past generations.

In this month, seek the company of the best of words: the Qur’an. Look to the Qur’an to see what Allah is saying to you, by way of what He said to those before you, may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon them.And, then as soon as Ramadan ends you will get thrown to the barking dogs. The world will return to its normal cycle, and most of the world around you is little more than the bark of a dog. Your instinct will be to respond in the ways you responded before. But, you now know you can control those “flaws,” though many people may forget and may return exactly to what they were before, as though Ramadan is a sort of break. But, you know you can control those “flaws,” so control them.Your target then, for the next 11 months after Ramadan is to dig to the next layer within you, because those flaws you observed within you are hiding deeper flaws, that may get exposed in the following Ramadan. And, the deeper we get within that delicate cave that is our heart, we see two things. The light within seems to continue, but we also discover traits we never realized we had. And it can be scary because today you may discover anger, but next year, you may discover hatred, and the year after that you may discover envy, and the year after that, you may discover deep, deep fear. And, you face those newly exposed traits (and more) in the next Ramadans.The more preparation you do in between Ramadans, the better your next Ramadan will be. “Preparation” here is action, as opposed to emotionally motivating yourself, for action is like building a house with bricks while emotional motivation is a flame that something that fizzles and fades.

And Allah knows best.

Ideology, in its simplest form, prescribes relationships.  For example, Ideology seeks to inform us how should we perceive our world and our place in it, how should we grant authority, how should we structure institutions. Some ideologies, though only a few, also address forgotten central questions: how should we transform ourselves and our society so as to approach that Utopia.  Rather, most ideologies speak of a by-hook-or-by-crook approach to reaching Utopia. Even fewer ideologies address the question of transformation when the ideology fails; meaning very few ideologies prescribe steps to follow for when the utopia ends.

We find parallels in Business, with one distinct difference.  While Business deals with concrete expressions involving product and transactions, Ideology resides in the world of imagination.  If Business works from the ground-up, Ideology often starts from the metaphorical sky and tries to reach the metaphorical ground.

At the same time, when Ideology and/or Business face competition, they face the same basic choices in competition: compete and thus transform, or face defeat (in the form of irrelevance).

When there is no competition for Ideology and/or Business, the beneficiary is power, often the government. When there is competition, however, then the masses benefit.  Benefit comes not only from the market of choice (along masses to choose), but also from improving choices (through innovation).  Meaning, competition compels increasingly refined and relevant ideologies, as well as higher quality business practices and products.

The point thus far is that from one perspective, Ideology wrestles against Business for control.  On the other hand, in the push-pull between the power brokers and the masses, the key is competition.

In their search for victory, Ideology and Business also overlap each other.  Ideology often has a business theory.  Business often begets an ideology.  For example, consider the cases of Capitalism and Socialism.

When we speak of Capitalism, we must be clear what we speak about. Capitalism is not an ideology.  Rather, Capitalism is mere business. In Business, when we speak of Capitalism or not, a natural goal is deregulation and free markets.  In Ideology, however, when we speak of Capitalism, we speak of the elevation of the Individual by way of material power.

Socialism, however, is an ideology.  In its aspirations, it responds to social inequity and inequality.  While ideological Capitalism celebrates the victor, ideological Socialism identifies a victim and sympathizes. The business systems that Socialism then promotes within the Business arena are, at one level, regulation, at another level welfare, and at a Utopian level, an environment without competition.

Again, the goal of Business itself is also an environment without competition: monopoly.

The difference here is that Ideology often works by imposition.  Ideology necessarily imposes itself.  Business can succeed without imposing itself (by finding a need and transforming itself to fulfill that need), but often does impose itself (by artificially creating a need and then fulfilling that artificially created need), for that is a consequence of competition.  This difference might seem semantic, but it is significant, that Ideology necessarily imposes itself, but Business does not have to.

Here, we face the problem and solution of Religion. The mistake that so many religionists make is that they seek to embrace one or the other through such approaches as Protestant Capitalism, Political Islamism, or Jewish Zionism.  The result is that each body must embrace ideas and practices that contradict their respective Traditions.  The deepest problem of reducing Religion to Ideology is that it removes its transformative aspects, and places focus on simplistic pseudo-solutions to complex phenomena.  When Religion is squeezed into Ideology, it is sleek but incomplete.

Now, Religion itself has a tendency to permeate all aspects of life.  And, it is through this aspect of religion that we find its solution.  When Religion is used for social control, it is at least as destructive as any (wholly) man-made endeavor.  When Religion, is reduced to an Ideology, it is often little more than a team-sport, seeking victory.  But, when Religion is made to permeate the character and conduct of the believer, seeking spiritual perfection, then the result is not only beauty, but also a Business that is guided by ethical standards, and an Ideology that is guided by character, and in both cases, Ideology or Business driven toward Service.  Rather, it may even absorb Ideology and erase it, while cleaning Business.

The key then is to permeate the individual with Religion.  And, what is that permeation: simply, the function of Religion is not only to develop an ethos of service, but to give the believer a backbone.

And, Allah knows best.

I would use my name on everything I would write, but would never advertise my work, not even on facebook (where only my friends would see), except to send short emails to maybe 10-20 close friends. I would write an essay and leave it up to the world to decide what to do with it, if anything.  I rarely ever even advertise my classes. I would use some simple (perhaps foolish) logic that if the class is of benefit, people will find it.  Simply, I’ve been trying to keep my work clearly as service to the Divine, consciously avoiding entering the realm of the self serving charlatans.  There are some religious figures who are revered in the community, who I know personally and regard as charlatans.  I don’t want to be one of them.  I don’t want to be a hero that people revere, shutting off their own minds and hearts.  I want to nurture people and engage with them.

There have been benefits to this approach. I’ve accidentally connected to some amazing teachers, as well as some amazing students.  And, I enjoy being insignificant, anonymous.  But, I also enjoy being what-you-see-is-what-you-get.  I’ve never been comfortable in a spot light, except when I was allowed to be myself (or asserted myself as myself). I don’t expect that to change.

But, a month ago a few people very close to me have been pushing me to become more public, because they felt it would help the work if I “made a name for myself.” Not to promote me, but to help the *issues* that I focus on.  One person has already started researching Image Consultants.  I’ve been struggling with this because of the charlatanry mentioned above, as well as the simple fact that I feel that most of what I say and write is just simple common sense.  Seriously.  Simple. Common. Sense.  I have to emphasize this point because I’ve read a modicum of the great works of history and found many of those works to be astonishingly profound and brilliant.

Further, I often found an appeal in such stories as that of the poets whose works were unknown in their lifetimes, but those works were often accidentally discovered in heaps of trash or in piles of discarded writings.  But, those romantic notions may have been excuses to remain anonymous, or they may have been excuses to *not* write (out of laziness), or they may have been closet hopes for some sort of fame after all.

And, right down to today, I’d been really wrestling with the issue.

Then, today, I received my answer.

My friend was approached by an organization that provides food for undernourished children. Some 1/30 American children get food *only* from school meals. He donated $1500. He was seriously thinking of keeping his donation anonymous, but then agreed to let his donation be known. Based on that news, someone else was inspired to donate $1500.  Based on *that* news, someone else donated a few thousand more, bringing the total to some $8000.  And, the organization wants to have an event celebrating the donations, and again he was hesitant to participate.  But, he decided to do so, with the hope that he will inspire others to give.

And frankly, that is the advice that I would have given him: I know you are not doing this for yourself, but to inspire others to do it, so do it.

And, that’s the point. The best of charities is the one done where the left hand doesn’t know what the right hand is giving.  But, there is tremendous benefit in advertising your giving *specifically* with the hope that it will provide benefit (often by inspiring others).

And, as I type this note, I hope that there will be another benefit: people will engage with my ideas, and I will learn from them.  I don’t know that any of my essays would ever have the impact of my friend’s providing meals for hungry children. But, they still might be of help in some ethereal capacity.

But, still, I leave it up to the Divine to elevate or debase me.

The funniest part of all this is that, essentially I’m just wrestling over whether or not I should, after writing an essay, tweet about it.  And, that’s pretty silly, I suppose.