The Mission Group of Peace for All

What is the ELCA’s Social Statement on Peace

2007-12-24T16:23:00.000-08:00

Within the past decade, the global community of nations has entered a new era in international relations। We have witnessed the end of 50 years of Cold War between the United States and the Soviet Union, along with their respective allies, and the resulting dramatic reduction of the threat of global war. At the same time, the 1990s has seen a surge in regional and local armed conflict and ethnic rivalry. New opportunities and challenges raise fresh questions about our nation’s role in promoting global peace and justice.

Lutherans in the United States have a longstanding interest in and concern for peace among the nations। Lutheran church bodies have spoken officially on war and peace since at least 1922. Such statements express a range of theological perspectives and ethical emphases, in part conditioned by the historical circumstances surrounding each statement. Yet, there are common themes, including the recognition that "peacemaking" is a Christian responsibility, and that peace is linked with other issues including economic development, human rights and international institutions.

The Evangelical Lutheran Church in America inherited the concern for peace expressed in social statements of its predecessor bodies। In 1991, the Division for Church in Society appointed a Task Force to assist staff in the preparation of a social statement on international peace. The Task Force of fifteen included pastors, theologians, a biblical scholar, specialists in international relations, a four star general recently retired from the U.S. Army, peace advocates and others who provided a wide range of background and perspectives. This group published a study, Peace: God’s Gift. Our Task, in the Fall of 1993 and a first draft of the social statement in the spring of 1994. Both documents called for and received responses from individuals, congregations and other groups of the church. In the Fall of 1994, a series of hearings were held across the country to gain additional feedback in order to help shape the final proposal to be brought to the Churchwide Assembly in 1995. For Peace in God’s World was presented to voting members of the Assembly, and after discussion and amendment, was adopted by a vote of 803-30.

The central message of the statement is contained in the opening paragraph: "We of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America share with the Church of Jesus Christ in all times and places the calling to be peacemakers।" And then, "That calling is to proclaim the Gospel of God’s final peace and to work for earthly peace." The statement begins theologically, with the God of peace, and continues by affirming that the church is a community for peace. It explains a Lutheran understanding of the role of citizens and governments, including questions about the legitimacy of the use of military force. The study presents a multidimensional array of tasks for keeping, making and building international peace today. It concludes with a series of implementing resolutions.

Leaders of the study need to be familiar with the purposes of the statement। As an ELCA social statement, For Peace in God’s World is intended to offer theological and ethical perspectives to equip the ELCA and its members to fulfill their calling to serve God in the world. It is intended to guide staff, pastors, teachers and other lay persons in their response to issues of war and conflict among the nations and to the challenges of peacemaking.

The concern of this statement is our calling to be peacemakers in the international arena. Although, its focus is not the equally challenging tasks of peacemaking in our families or local communities, this guide offers opportunity for participants to connect the issues of global peace to personal and community concerns. You may want to consult the ELCA Church Council’s "Message on Community Violence," listed in the Resources section at the back of this guide. Note also that the statement is not a comprehensive Bible study on peace. Biblical references, however, are included in the statement, and the session plans do offer some opportunity for biblical reflection. Several excellent Bible studies on peace are listed in the Resources section.

2007-10-18T13:34:00.000-07:00

Religion in a Secular Society: What Place or Role can Religion Have?
By Austin क्लीन

If secularism opposes the public support of religion or the presence of ecclesiastical authorities simultaneously exercising public authority, what role is left for religion in a secular society? Is religion doomed to a slow decline and attrition? Is it relegated to a web of quaint but unimportant cultural traditions? Such are the fears of opponents to secularism and secularization who argue that religion is too important to be eliminated in such a manner and blame atheists for their woes.
A word of caution is important here when it comes to terminology. One frequently hears or reads about secularists seeking the restriction of religion to "private" life and getting it out of "public" life — a position which gives people the impression that secularists don't want anyone ever talking about religion in public again. Although some secularists may harbor such feelings, this interpretation relies upon the fact that the public/private distinction has more than one meaning.
For secularists, they do not mean it in the same sense that a person's financial situation should remain private rather that becoming public knowledge. Instead, they are using "public" in the sense of "maintained for or used by the people or community." Thus, the desire to have religion removed from "public life" involves removing it not from public view but from public (read: government) support. The desire for religion to be made private involves not keeping it secret but keeping it a personal, voluntary endeavor.
We can see, then, that there is nothing about the process of secularization or a philosophy of secularism which requires the demise of religion. Secularists themselves are quite divided in their evaluations of religion and what role they think religion should have in society. Many are adamant in their belief that religion does more harm than good and they do hope that it will eventually disappear. Many others, however, are happy for it to retain a role in the social and moral lives of believers. Some secularists even support religious charities in their social efforts for the relief of poverty and suffering.
If religion withers in a secular society — and such a fate is entirely possible — the blame cannot be laid directly at the feet of secularism and secularization. They can only be held accountable for creating the conditions for the actual cause: people's disinterest in religion. In a non-secular society, people have little chance to ignore or get away from religion. Everywhere they go, either ecclesiastical authorities have some power over them or the principles of some particular religion are used as a basis to control their lives.
In a secular society, however, escape from domination by religion and religious leaders is possible. No one is beholden to any religious organization or religious values unless they specifically choose to be. If enough people choose not to be associated with religion, then religious organizations will decline due to decreases in income and membership.
Religious leaders are surely justified in lamenting such a possibility, but by opposing secularism and secularization, they make two errors. First, they place responsibility for such a predicament in the wrong place. Instead of attacking secularism for allowing people the chance to ignore religion, they should instead take a closer look at why they might be worth ignoring.
Second, any attempt to attack secularism essentially admits that they are unable to maintain people's interest and support on a purely individual, private, and voluntary basis. This may indeed be true, but it is a devastating thing to acknowledge — yet religious leaders who attack secularism don't seem to understand what it means. For some reason, they fail to realize that publicly supported and/or enforced religion is ultimately worthless. If they really believe that that is the only way that religion can survive, then they admit that religion itself is worthless — and that validates the secularist position that religion simply isn't necessary for the public good.

A brief biography of grand Ayatollah Rohani

2007-07-10T13:40:00.000-07:00

His birth
The great Ayatollah Seyed Mohammad sadegh Rohani, a man from the family of guardians of the religion and feghh (Islamic jurisprudence) a religions authority, an anti despite and indefatigable warrior in the way of God, was born in Moharam 1345 after Hejra (a.h), coinciding with 1305 Hejri shamsi (h.s) (solar year) and 1926 A.D. in holy city of Qom.
His family was of Imam Hussein (a) extraction, with a great background of knowledge and virtues.
His parents
His father, ayatollah Haj Mirza Mohammad Rohani, one of the luminaries of Qom seminaries, was born in 1307 A.H in Qom.
He traveled to Najaf under the auspices of ayatollah seyed Abolhasan Esfahani and Mirza Naeeni. For a while, he was a student of the deceased ayatollah Haji Hussein Tabatabaei qomi. Then he came back to Qom. Through his continuous attempts, the great ayatollah Sheikh Abdolkarim Haeri traveled to Qom and started to teach seminary science. He was one of the Ayatollah Haeri's special and best students.
After his father death, used to answer people's religious questions and solve their living problems in "Aqa mosque", Qom to mention some of his great measures, one can recall his cooperation with Ayatollah Kashani in the issue of nationalizing Iran's oil industry, fighting Reza shah in the issue of removing the Hijab and religion from the country, making attempts to invite ayatollah Haeri to Qom paving the way for his teaching, and cooperating in the process of establishing Qom seminary.
The religious authority, Ayatollah Sadegh Rohani, passed away in Sha'ban, 18, 1381(A.H) due to a long-lasting disease. When the news of his death circulated around the city of Qom, city bazaar, offices and religious schools were adjourned in respect.
All religious authorities, luminaries, teachers and students of the seminaries took part in his funeral while traders, craftsmen and offices raised black flags as an emblem of mourning and attended mourning sessions. After the funeral prayer, his body was buried in Bala sar mosque, Qom.
His mother was also one of descendants of Imam Hussein (a). She was daughter of ayatollah Haji Seyed Ahmad Tabatabaei qomi, who used to hold congregation prayer in the courtyard of Hazrat Masuma's holy shrine.
His education
Ayatollah Rohani learned the basic lessons of Arabic literature in Qom. Then, in his adolescence he traveled to Najaf to learn from great ayatollah, accompanied by his older brother. Because of his incredible aptitude and intelligence, he learned "Sath" (seminary lesson based on the reading of the text) in a short period.
Through being examined and advised by Ayatollah Khoei, he turned to learning "Methodology" and Kharej (seminary lecture not based on reading textbooks). An adolescent's being accepted to learn "Methodology" and "Kharej" was totally confusing and incredible for the older students of Najaf seminary.
Ayatollah zadeh Milani quotes: "Ayatollah Khoei told my father, I have the honor to teach in a seminary in which an adolescent is learning "Makaseb" (earning and professions) beside his older brother and other more experienced schoolmates. Rather, he can understand and analyze the lesson better than the rest of students.
Those familiar with Islamic science know that the valuable book of "Earning and professions" – one of Sheikh Ansari's greatest works is being taught in seminaries and only intelligence and talent students can completely comprehend and analyze the subject of that book.
His teacher
Due to his staidness and desire to learn, ayatollah Rohani used to attend the greatest religious authorities classes. Some of them are:
1- Great Ayatollah Haji Sheikh Kazem Shirazi (1290-1367)
2- Great ayatollah Haji Sheikh Mohammad Hussein Esfahani, also known as Company (1361- )
3- Great ayatollah Haji Sheikh Mohammad ali Kazemeini
4- Great Ayatollah Haji Seyed Abdolhasan Esfahani (1284-1365)
5- Great Ayatollah Haji Sheikh Mohmmad reza Al-e-yasin
6- Great Ayatollah Haji Seyed Abolghasem Khoei (1317-1413)
7- Great Ayatollah Haji Seyed Mohammad Hussein Tabatabaei Boroujerdi (1292-1380)
He learned many valuable things from his famous teacher and has always been thankful to them. However, the role ayatollah khoei played in treating Ayatollah Rohani was really appreciable. As he acknowledges, a great share of his knowledge is due to 15-year attendance in public and private classes of Ayatollah Khoei among the rest of great Ayatollahs. There was consensus among almost all of scholars of that time that Ayatollah Khoei was an incomplete jurisconsult who was expert in seminary sciences such as feghh (jurisprudence), methodology, kalam (speculative theology), interpretation, rejal (biography and criticism of traditional) and philosophy. His published works verifies this claim.
Ayatollah Khoei used to scout around for intelligent students and to play greater role in training them.
When attended Najaf seminary in his adolescence, Ayatollah Rohani was a young student with an unbelievable comprehension power and intelligence. He should learn complicated lessons of feghh write down the notes and make a fair copy of them at home, discuss the lesson with his friend, and pre-study for the next day lesson. This huge bulk of task, especially in lack of learning and living facilities, took 16 hour of his day. Moreover, he should do his personal affairs such as earning his living while tolerating the economic pressures. Being a young man he suffered from a harassing economic situation. Sometimes he had to borrow things and money from the neighboring traders who know him. Contentment was the most significant secret of his success in learning Islamic sciences.
Ayatollah Rohani's teaching
He started teaching different Islamic sciences in his adolescence.
He began to teach in the courtyard of Imam Ali's holy shrine.
It impressed everyone that a young man can assert seminary lesson.
Attending Ayatollah Khoei's classes for a short period, he was able to assert "Feghh and methodology" lessons for those interested in seminary sciences. It wasn't long before he was just like a shining sun in the sky of Najaf. For the same reason, Ayatollah Khoei's relationship with him was growing more and more. Although Ayatollah Khoei used to not let anyone raise question while he was teaching and wanted them to asked their question at the end of the lesson, he repeatedly asked the young Rohani to raise question whenever he deems proper. This indicates Ayatollah Rohani's merits.
The class relationship between the teacher and the student was in such a way that Ayatollah Khoei discussed the teaching matters with Ayatollah Rohani several times. Great Ayatollah Khoei praised the 15-year-old Rohani's great knowledge, comprehension power and briskness in learning (the full text of Ayatollah Khoei's manuscript can be found in this web site, which is also published in biography books in Arabic and Farsi). Verified by the great Ayatollah and religious authorities, Ayatollah Rohani reached the stage of "religious authority" being only 14 years old.
He came back to Qom in the late 1329(H.S) and started teaching Kharej (seminary lectures not based on reading text book) in the courtyard of "Hazrat Masuma's" holy shrine in early 1330(H.S).
Now, it is half of the century that he is teaching Islamic sciences and most of his students are among famous teachers and seminary pundit. Some other of his are supposed to reach the stage of religious authority.
Ayatollah Rohani is used to speaking eloquently while teaching. He avoids engaging in useless matters in his teaching. His lessons include ideas of outstanding Islamic pundits attached with his own discussions on acceptance or rejection of their beliefs. He fights stiffness, one-sidedness, excessive precaution, and blind imitation because he believes that illogical imitation and prejudice on Islamic pundits' beliefs while fighting any news idea will enfeeble the scientific power of the seminaries. He therefore, respecting all Islamic pundits' beliefs, analyses their beliefs as a critic.
Ayatollah Rohani's teaching is filled with new ideas and beliefs, innovations, and keen-sightedness. Nevertheless, he never ignores the decree of god for the sake of "public interest" or "new ideas".
His work
Ayatollah Rohani has always tried to distribute the Islamic and Al-al-bait (the Prophet Mohammad's family (a)) culture in his entire life. He has either taught and trained many other knowledgeable sages or has written some valuable books on Islamic sciences.
As soon as he attend Qom Islamic seminary, started writing "Shia feghh encyclopedia" besides teaching "Kharej". The mentioned encyclopedia is verified and endorsed by the greatest religious authorities and seminary teachers.
One of his most valuable works is the book "Feghh-al-sadegh" great Ayatollah Boroujerdi regard this book as a valid source and quoted many parts of it in his teaching, great Ayatollah Khoei also, wrote in a letter that "I delivered the book "Feghh-al-sadegh" to Ayatollah Kashef-al-ghata and told him, look! What a precious service I have done to Islam by bringing such a researchers and scientists up.
The dean of "Al-Zahra" (Al-Zahra university), Egypt, which is the greatest scientific center of sonnies, praises the book Feghh-al-sadegh in a letter, too. This book is one of the expressive, valid and important sources of Feghh and methodology in Shia community. Of many adequate reasons for Ayatollah Rohani's religious authority; one is writing the comprehensive book "Feghh-al-sadegh".
Some of his valuable works includes:
1- "Feghh-al-sadegh": full encyclopedia of Shia feghh (in Arabic)
This comprehensive source has been published in 40 volumes annexed by a full list of sources and bibliography.
About two hundred years ago, the valuable book "Jawaher-al-kalam". Ayatollah Rohani wrote this book in his youth. Sunni purdites also verified this book. "Feghh-al-sadegh" is being taught in the department of Islamic studies in famous western universities and is regarded as a valid source.
2- "Zobdat-al-usul" (Methodology, in Arabic) in 6 volumes asserts a full review of methodology in rational discussion format.
3- "Menhaj-al-foghaha" (the way of the jurisprudence, in Arabic). In 6 volumes is a description of Sheikh Ansari's "Makaseb"(Earnings and professions) in an innovative way.
4- "Al-masael-al-mostahdetha" (the recent question, in Arabic): include answering today's new problem with respect to the holy Quran traditions, and feghh.
5- An explanation of the book "Menhaj-al-salehin" (the way of the righteous) in 2 volumes (in Arabic)
6- An explanation of the book "Urvat-al-wosgha" (the strongest handle) in 2 volumes (in Arabic)
7- An explanation of the book "Wasilat-ul-nejat" (means of salvation, in Arabic)
8- A treatise of the book "Uncertain clothing" (in Arabic)
9- A treatise of the book "Principle of no harming" (in Arabic)
10- "Determinism and freewill" (in Arabic translated into Persian)
11- A treatise on (in Arabic)
12-"Scared rites of hajj" (in Arabic)
13- "Masael-al-montakhaba" (the selected question, in Arabic)
14- A treatise on "Principle of collecting knowledge" (in Arabic)
15- Al Ejtehad-wa-al Taghlid" (religious authority and imitation) (in Arabic)
16-"Qawaed-al-thalatha" (the three principles) (in Arabic)
17-"Al-leqa-Al-khas" (the special meeting, in Arabic)
18- Tozih-al-masael" (the Islamic epistle, in Arabic)
19-A research on "Determinism and freewill" (in Farsi)
20-"The government system in Islam" (in Farsi, Turkish, and Urdu)
21-"Sacred rites of hajj" (in Farsi)
22- "A selection of Islamic ordinances" (in Farsi)
23-"Religious consolation of the judicial power and the law institute of international lawyers" (in Farsi)
24-Islamic ordinance of today's problem (in Farsi)
25-"The ordinances" in question and answer format: in 2 volumes (in Farsi)
26- "One thousand question and answers" in 6 volumes: 1000 questions and answers each (in Arabic)
His religious authority
Returning from Najaf and starting to teach Qom seminary, Ayatollah Rohani began to write the book "feghh-al-sadegh" after the death of great Ayatollah Boroujerdi, seminary pundits suggested that Ayatollah Rohani publish his epistle. According to Iranians national library records, his first epistle was published in 1340(H.S).
Great Ayatollah Seyed Sadegh Rohani was the first religious authority in the whole family of Rohanis whose followers are scattered in all over the Muslim world.

Visit of Ayatollah AbdolHamid Masoumi Tehrani with the Grand Ayatollah Rohaani

2007-06-13T16:52:00.001-07:00

Visit of Ayatollah AbdolHamid Masoumi Tehrani with the Grand Ayatollah Makaarem Shirazi

2007-06-13T16:21:00.000-07:00

humanity

2007-04-09T15:22:00.000-07:00

As such responsibilities convert to carelessness and indifference, there will emerge egoism, egotism, superiority seeking, totalitarinism, repression and tyranny, aggressions, and the like.

Lets look at 'the' ourselves, our sorroundings, at far distances; Lets see how progress in science and industry has taken spacial distances away, turning the world into a small hamlet. But, our hearts diverge more and more the day after day. Love, friendship, succouring and humanity, in one word, disappears gradually and loses its nature even in the books. Lets look, understand and feel well.

We breathe in an atmosphere infetched with pessimism, distrust, cruelty and heedlessness which have made our spirits poisoned as well as causing us to be some moving dead bodies devoid of any feeling and apathy.

Lets look at 'the' ourselves, our surroundings; Think about ourselves, our environment, justifications, philosophy-weavings and suspicions.

Lets renounce despaire and decide to move.

Each of us, of any age or idia wherever lives, try to be "human"; "A Real Human", before becoming a learned man, scholar, inventor, trader, worker, employee or a politician.

Christianity went through it, why not Islam?

2007-02-06T15:28:00.000-08:00

Secular rule will help Islam with its reform

By Shahram Akbarzadeh

What is happening with reformation in Islam? Christianity went through it, why not Islam? Why not separate church and state and render unto Caesar what is Caesar's? The reality is that Muslims living in Western liberal democracies are already doing just that.

The daily experience of Muslims is marked by an acknowledgement of the distinction between public and private. Australian Muslims are more than happy to comply with the secular rules of this great land because these are the best guarantee for religious freedom. Secular rule is the most effective bulwark against religious intolerance and exclusive claims to ultimate truth.

It may be ironic that Muslims can be more true to their faith in Australia than in a good number of Muslim societies.

Countries that claim to implement sharia law, for instance, are among the most serious offenders of human rights against their Muslim citizens. Afghanistan under the Taliban was the most horrendous case.

The value of secular rule is appreciated by Muslims. They live by it - but do not articulate it. And that is the problem. Australian Muslims have not had the leadership to translate the implicit reformation that is under way into clear formulation. The substance is there but not the form. This is a pervasive issue that affects all Muslims in liberal democracies.

The Australian case, however, may be more acute as voices of reformation can already be heard in Europe and North America. Muslim intellectuals there have challenged old taboos and argued for some fundamental rethinking of Islam on religious tolerance and gender rights, trying to catch up with the daily reality of Muslim lives.

It is not surprising that the Islamic leadership and Muslim thinkers in Australia, apart from a handful of lone voices, are reluctant to meet this challenge. It is not easy to question established traditions. Inertia is a serious problem. The official leadership, most notably Sheikh Taj al-Din al-Hilali, have in fact worked against innovation.

But all is not lost. Innovation can emerge from the rank and file. There is no reserved place for clergy in Islam. Any Muslim believer can interpret and re-interpret the intended meaning of the sacred text. This is a liberating feature. Through the centuries, however, the autonomy of the individual believer has been usurped by a class of the learned ulema and political rulers who exercised control over the ulema.

The ulema ruled that the gates of ijtihad (re-interpretation) were shut. In other words, the Koran was not deemed open to continuing interpretation. Instead, they favoured following tradition and religious interpretation that was established by their predecessors.

Islam was thus co-opted by the state to serve the interests of the rulers. There has been little chance of breaking with tradition as vested interests thwarted innovation.

But migration has offered a much-needed circuit breaker. Migration to Australia has broken the link between religious belief and political culture. Individual freedoms and liberties that govern Australia offer the best opportunity to revive Islam's culture of innovation and intellectual inquiry. Secular rule serves to open the gates of ijtihad.

New generations of Muslims in Australia are comfortable with their faith and civic responsibilities. They are at the forefront of Islamic reformation. They are not afraid of their heritage, religious or secular. They have the responsibility to articulate their experience as good citizens and true believers.This is not at easy task. Innovation is never easy. They have to tackle two very different audiences.

On the one hand, they work within their own communities to spread the message of rethinking and re-interpretation, which are bound to be met with the forces of inertia and suspicions of the traditionalists.

On the other hand, they have to convince the broader Australian community that reformation is not a matter of expediency, but reviving an essential doctrine in Islam. If Islam is to remain relevant to Australia today, it cannot pass up this opportunity.

Islamic reformation may not be the most talked about issue among Australian Muslims, but they live it. The challenge is to turn action into words.

Shahram Akbarzadeh is director of Centre for Muslim Minorities and Islam Policy Studies, School of Political and Social Inquiry, Monash University.

Why Islamic Law should be opposed?

2007-02-01T13:44:00.000-08:00

One good thing about hearing our opponents - paying attention to their oppositions and criticisms - is that we may find some of our weaknesses and even a correct way to improve them.
What you are going to read is one these articles! ... the title is: "Why Islamic Law should be opposed?" ... So, let's read it, and see what it actually says. See if there is something to learn in it.

===============================

Why Islamic Law should be opposed?
By Azam Kamguian

Islamic Sharia law should be opposed by everyone who believes in universal human rights, women's civil rights and individual freedom, freedom of expression, freedom of religion and belief and freedom from religion. Islamic law developed in the first few centuries of Islam and incorporated Middle Eastern pre - Islamic misogynist and tribal customs and traditions. Shari'a developed not only from the Koran and the Sunna but also through juristic reasoning and interpretation and hence different sects. We may ask how a law whose elements were first laid down over a 1000 years ago can be relevant in the 21^st century. The Sharia only reflects the social and economic conditions of the time of Abbasid and has grown out of touch with all the human's social, economic, cultural and moral developments. The principles of the Sharia are inimical to human's moral progress and civilised values.

Islam is an all-encompassing religion that controls and has opinion on everything from the dowry to the periods of women, from the amputation of limbs of thief to the stoning of adulterers, from food to the creation of the World. No detail of daily life escapes its attention. It interferes in anything and everything. The Islamic law tries to legalise for every single aspect of an individual's life, the individual is not at liberty to think or decide for himself, he has but to accept Allah's ruling as interpreted infallibly by the doctors of law.

Islamic law forcefully opposes free thought, freedom of expression and freedom of action. Accusations of impurity, of apostasy is waiting to silence any voice of dissent. Suppression and injustice shapes the lives of all free minded people above all atheists, who are deprive of all freedom. One is borne Muslim, and one is forced to stay Muslim to the end of their life. Islamic law denies the rights of women and non- - Muslim religious minorities. Non -believers are shown no tolerance: death or conversion. Jews and Christians are treated as second - class citizens.

In countries which have proclaimed an Islamic state, such as Iran, the Sudan, Pakistan, some states in Northern Nigeria, and Afghanistan under the Taliban, we can already see the pernicious effects of the Sharia: the stoning to death of women exercising their right to personal freedom; random accusations of blasphemy - carrying a mandatory death penalty - being used to settle personal grudges, public hangings for apostasy, real or alleged, and many other cruelties.

A fundamental aspect of Islam is that the will of god should be followed. Thus it is god and not the people that decide how things are to be. In an open and free society, people lay the boundaries of powers of organs of state, that is, the people dictate the powers that state is to have over them and the people through their elected organs and representatives decide the laws. The situation is quite different under Islamic states or where Islamic law acts as an important part of the legal system. Examples are Saudi Arabia where the Koran has been declared to be the constitution and no laws contrary to it can be passed. Other examples are Iran, the Sudan, Afghanistan under the Taliban, and many other Middle Eastern countries where Islamic law has a considerable influence on the legal system. This is clearly not acceptable and is denying the people the right to determine the governance of their countries.

The Sharia & Human Rights

Human rights and the Sharia are definitely and irremediably irreconcilable and antagonistic. Oppression, massacres, intimidation, lack of freedom, ferocious censorship are the undeniable facts of all countries designated Islamic. Human rights are desirable to ensure a certain standard of living for people across the globe. It is often alleged that Human rights constitutes a means of enforcing western ideals on others who might not believe in them. It is not acceptable to let governments and authorities away with many of the abuses by using cultural relativism as an excuse. We cannot let cultural relativism becomes the last refuge of repression. To accept religion as a justification for human rights abuses is to discriminate against the abused and to send the message that they are un-deserving of human rights protection.

Perhaps the most unsavoury aspect of Islamic law from human rights perspective is the punishments doled out. Islamic law regulates individual morality, being opposed with sexual morality. From flogging to stoning to death of individuals. Sexuality and sexual behaviour is a realm that Islam has strict rule on. Adultery is strictly forbidden and harshly punished. The punishment is execution, death by stoning or flogging. Homosexuality is also forbidden and punishable by Islamic law. To add to the inhumane nature of executions, in majority of countries under Islamic states, these executions are carried out in front of crowds of people.

The Sharia & Women's Rights

In the Koran and according to the Sharia, women are considered inferior to men, and they have less rights and responsibilities. As regards testimony in the court of law and inheritance, a woman is counted as half a man, equally in regard to marriage and divorce, her position is less advantageous that that of the man, her husband has the legal, moral and religious duty to beat her. She does not have the right to choose her husband, her clothing, her place of residence, and to travel. A very young legal age of marriage ranging from 9 in Iran to 13, 15 and 17 (in Tunisia) is also another aspect of Sharia. This is according to the way Muhammad the prophet of Islam married Aisha a 9 - year old girl when he was 43. The four orthodox law schools plus shi'i mainly differed on points important to women. In all schools marriage is a contract according to which husband should perform sexually and provide materially for the wife. The wife must have sex whenever husband wishes. A man can easily divorce a woman by pronouncing it three times. Polygamy up to four wives was permitted, in shi'i sect, temporary marriage is allowed where man can have access to unlimited number of women. The practice is known as Mot'a or Sigheh. According to Islamic law men were permitted concubines and female slaves. Islamic law and the Koran permit men to beat their wives if they disobey.

Another discriminatory rule is that in many Muslim inhabited countries a woman is not allowed to marry a non-Muslim whereas men are allowed to marry non-Muslims. With the object of protecting morality and preventing sexual anarchy women are expected to cover their whole bodies bar their faces and their hands up to their wrists. Islamic law is totally against dress freedom. This is obviously a huge infringement on the personal development of women, not allowing them to develop sexually and as people. It is inhumane to imprison women behind veils when it is men, who according to Islam and Islamic law cannot be trusted to control themselves.
Once again, in order to protect morality it is dictated that women cannot be in contact with men to whom they are not related without the presence of some male relative. The segregation of sexes in this way makes it very difficult for women to leave their houses and participate in society in any way at all. Islamic law in this way completely prevents women from taking part in society and keeps them locked up, isolated and unable to reach their potential. Women deserve to be treated as human beings and for this reason alone Islamic rule and Islamic law which are completely misogynist must be opposed.

The Sharia & Discrimination against non- Muslims

In addition to the imposition of Islamic morality on non-Muslims, Sharia law dictates that there should not be equality between Muslims and non-Muslims. Under strict Sharia law only Muslims can be full citizens of a Muslim state. Many of Islamic states shamelessly discriminate against non-Muslims. In Saudi Arabia and in Kuwait being Muslim is a precondition of naturalisation. A person who believes in a scriptural religion, such as Christianity or Judaism will have limited rights in an Islamic state; they cannot participate in public life or hold positions of authority over Muslims. Anyone else is deemed to be an unbeliever and is not permitted to reside permanently in an Islamic state. In addition, the Koran only recognises People of the Book as religious communities. Others are pagans. Pagans must be eliminated.

In many Islamic states, non-Muslims men are not allowed to marry Muslim women and in criminal prosecutions non-Muslims are given harsher punishments than Muslims. Crimes against Muslims are often punished more severely than crimes against others. In many countries the testimony of a non-Muslim in court s not equal to that of a Muslim.

Freedom of religion does not just mean freedom to hold a faith but also the freedom to change one's religion or belief. Apostasy is when a Muslim advocates the rejection of Islamic beliefs or announces his own rejection of Islam by word or by act. That is when a Muslim abandons his or her faith. Apostates face the most ferocious violence, often are punished to death. This discrimination is clearly contrary to freedom of belief and religion and the principle that religion should be a private affair of individual. The use of any and especially such violent coercion in matters of faith is completely unacceptable.

Believing in religion should be voluntary and as a private matter, otherwise people who practice a religion are not doing so of their own convictions but rather because of the sanctions that will be imposed on them if they don't. When the law gets involved, religion is no longer between the individual and what or whom they believe, as it should be.

The Sharia & Freedom of Expression

Under the Sharia and where Islam oppresses, writers, thinkers, philosophers, activists, artists are all deprived of their freedom of expression. Islamic regimes are notorious for suppressing freedom of expression. Often, as the government aligns itself so closely with Islam any critics of the government are accused and charged with vague charges of heresy and insulting Islam. Under Islamic law people are deprived of drinking, playing music, reading literature on philosophy, sexuality, and arts.

For the human rights abuses sanctioned by, the discrimination institutionalised in, the autonomy deprived by, the lifestyle choices deprived by and the human dignity eroded by Islamic Law, this barbaric inhumane law should be opposed.

In the west, even in countries which have a sizeable Muslim minority, any idea that the Sharia could have any sway should be strongly opposed since it conflicts with many basic human values, such as equality before the law, that punishments should be commensurate with the crime, and that law must be based on the will of the people.

Islamophobia & Racism

The problem for us in the west is how to oppose these violations of human rights without being accused of neo-colonialism and racism, and of failing to respect different cultures. There is a key - point here, that human rights are vested in the individual, not the group. As soon as rights are accorded to any group rather than to individuals it creates the possibility for conflict that only between the group and those outside it, but between the group and its own members. Any group, which denies the right of its members to leave, is in contravention of one of the most fundamental principles of human rights. It is clearly one of the reasons for the growth of Islam over the past century that becoming a Muslim is a one way street. Whether by birth or conversion (historically likely to have been a forced conversion and an imposed phenomenon) once you are a Muslim the only way out - under the Sharia - is death.

Apologists for Islam often claim that this sort of argument is based on a mis-understanding of Islam, the religion of peace. Apologists will quote this sura rather than that to prove their point. But like the Christian Bible, of course, the Koran has arguments to support every possible point of view. The only answer to this is to show by actual examples the reality of what is happening in countries that have fallen under the sway of the Sharia. It is also frequently claimed that critics of Islam are guilty of a) racism, and b) Islamophobia. Since we are discussing religion and not race, the first argument fails. Certainly in the west there is a high degree of correlation between race and religion. The Muslims in Britain, for example, tend to be of Middle Eastern origin. Nevertheless, it is perfectly feasible to love the believer but hate the belief. Human beings are worthy of respect but not all beliefs must be respected. Attempts to make Islamophobia a crime are thinly disguised attempt to equate anti-Islamic arguments with racism. It is essential to distinguish criticism of Islam both from fear of Islam and from fear, hatred or contempt for Muslims. But often, moral criticism of Islamic practices or criticising the Islamic religion is dismissed as Islamophobic.

When Islam really does promote violence by advocating jihad to achieve world domination, when it really does say that men should beat women and that the testimony of a woman in court is worth half that of a man and that followers of Islam should not befriend Jews or Christians, then why not having fear to it? Why not criticising it?

The world is a battleground of social movements and ideas. It took people in the west over 400 years of often-bloody struggle to gain the right to criticise Christianity. Even now, that right is still not fully recognised. In Britain, for example, there is still a law against blasphemy, and many Islamic clerics have argued that it should be extended to cover Islam as well. It should be scrapped. But once we are prevented from expressing our point of view in the market place of ideas: then we are on the slippery slope back to the dark ages.

Of all the existing ideologies and religions, Islam remains the greatest danger for humanity, as it has not been caged by progressive forces and because of the terrorising power of political Islam and the close ties of states and the establishment Islam.

We must recognise that our society is far larger, diverse and complex than the small primitive tribal society in Arabia, 1400 years ago, from which Islam emerged. It is time to abandon the idea that anyone in the region should live under Sharia. More than ever before, people need a secular state that respects freedom from and of religion, and human rights founded on the principle that power belongs to the people. This means rejecting the claims by orthodox Islamic scholars that, in an Islamic state, sovereignty belongs to the representative of Allah or Islamic justice. It is crucial to oppose the Islamic Sharia law and to subordinate Islam to secularism and secular states.

Adapted from a speech given by Azam Kamguian at a discussion panel & debate on 10 October 2002, organised by University Philosophical Society of Trinity College, Dublin - Ireland -- MiddleEastWomen.Org

Political Islam & the Secularist Liberationist Women's Movement in Iran

I am going to talk about political Islam and women's struggle for secularism and freedom in Iran. Contrary to the dominant and distorted image that portrays Iranian women as defining their rights within the framework of Islamic law and trying to reconcile women's rights with Islam, I talk about the secularist liberationist women's movement in Iran.

The last 24 years have been some of the darkest in women's lives in Iran. The Islamic regime which was the first established government of political Islam brought nothing but repression, death, torture, lack of rights and dark reaction. For 24 years Islamic laws have been and still are in full force against women in Iran. Women were amongst the very first targets attacked by the Islamic Republic. With Khomeini's pronouncements on the veil, immense outbursts of anger expressed by women on the streets on the International Women's Day in 1979. This anger was not simply because of their rejection of the veil. They saw in the attempts to impose the veil a much greater implied threat. They felt that this was just the beginning of a whole series of measures, which would lead to the seclusion of women from social and economic activity. Political Islam which first came to power in Iran is a major force that has imposed serious setbacks on women's lives in the region, in the recent decades. Political Islam is a political movement that came to the fore against the secular and progressive movements for liberation and egalitarianism and against women's rights and freedom in the region. In the 1970s, the political Islamic movement grew stronger and became more widespread. Political Islam is nothing but the enforcement of brutal laws and traditions, and killing, beheading, and genocide of people. In Iran, the Sudan, Pakistan and Afghanistan, Islamic regimes proceeded to transform the countries, and particularly women's homes into prison houses, where the confinement of women, their exclusion from many fields of work and education and their brutal treatment became the law of the land. In addition, the misogynist rhetoric they have let loose in the social sphere implicitly sanctions male violence towards women.

As women were the first victims of political Islam, they also became the pioneer force fighting against political Islam in Iran. In fact, the post - revolutionary period in Iran has seen an extra ordinary gender- awareness amongst Iranian women. During the last twenty - four years women's resistance against Islamic laws has been a daily fact of life. Tens of thousands of women have offended the rules and have been attacked by Islamic moral squads with fists and kicks, knives, cutters and throwing acid on their faces yearly. The penalty for breaking the rules of segregation and Hijab has been insult, cash fines, expulsion, and deprivation from education, arrest, imprisonment, beating and flogging. 80 percent of women resisted against these rules have been young women who were born after the coming to power of the Islamic Republic. No day has gone without resistance and hope during the last two decades.

Women in Iran have succeeded in pushing back the offensive of the Islamic regime inch by inch, re - appropriating spheres of public life that were lost immediately after the revolution. Their success in forcing the government to remove, at least on paper, the ban on certain fields of higher education is a case in point. Women have succeeded in placing their plight at the center of politics in Iran and as a major issue of conflict in political discourse and ideological mobilization. In the streets of Iran's major cities, growing clashes between the morality police and bystanders over the arrest of violators of the Islamic dress code demonstrate that women's resistance, together with the overall political and economic crisis of the Islamic regime have caused a disenchantment of ordinary Iranians with the Islamists who continue their policy of purifying the female soul and body from secular ideas and practices. In recent years many courageous women have either publicly thrown their veils away or burnt them in street demonstrations. Women and the politics of gender continue to be the Achilles' heel of the Islamic Republic.

During the post revolutionary period, women have struggled to open spaces and make opportunities in education and employment. They have campaigned against Islamic child abuse and have organized association for the defense of children's rights. They are actively involved in semi - legal and clandestine political struggle. Culturally, they resist and campaign against Islamic and traditional images of women dictated and portrayed by the Islamic cultural authorities in films, theatres, newspapers and magazines. Despite strict Islamic moral code and preserving taboos, more than ever before pre - marital sexual relationship is common and taboos have been broken. All of these make the women's movement a strong political reality at the center of Iran's political scene.

Here, I would like to talk about the so - called Islamic Feminism or Muslim feminists. This is a tendency, which tries to improve women's situation by reforming some of Islamic principles and Koranic verses. They mildly criticize some aspects of Islamic Republic's policies and some of its leaders. They are the political allies of the so-called reformist faction of the Islamic government of Iran whose agenda for shaping a tolerable Islamic regime has been badly defeated in the most recent years. This trend is not of any importance inside Iran, but again it has got publicity due to the efforts of Western governments and also western mainstream media that try to portray a distorted image of women's demands in Iran and reduce them to those of Islamic feminist's expectations. They promote and even try to impose a moderate Islamic government on Iranian people, which suits their interests in Iran and in the region.

But, the fact is that Iranian society has changed dramatically and deeply since 1979. The movement for secularism and atheism, for modern ideas and culture, for individual freedom, for women's liberation and civil liberties has been widespread and deep. Disgust for religion and the backward ruling culture is immense. Women and the youth are the champions of this battle; a battle that threatens the basic pillars of the Islamic system. The most hopeful signs and the most remarkable stimulus for change continue to come directly from Iranian women both in Iran and in exile. In Iran, women presented the first and the most effective challenge to the Islamic regime by courageously questioning the right of Islamic authority to define the conditions of their lives. Any change in Iran will not only affect the lives of people living in Iran, but will have a significant impact on the region and worldwide. Secularism is not only realizable, but also, after the experiences of Iran, Afghanistan, the Sudan and Algeria, is an urgent and pressing need and demand of the people of the region.

The answer to the question of Middle Eastern and Iranian women's liberation is secularism and the establishment of egalitarian political systems in Iran and in the region. Secularism has been and continues to be a pre-requisite for women's liberation. Our objectives must be:
The complete separation of religion from the state.

The elimination of all religious and religiously inspired notions from laws.

Religion to be declared the private affair of individuals.

The removal of any reference to a person's religion in laws, on identity cards and in official papers.

A ban on ascribing any religion to people, whether individually or collectively, in official documents and the media.

The elimination of religion from education.

A ban on teaching religious subjects and dogma or to the religious interpretation of subjects in schools.

And I should also like to add that we are not far from those days when women will be throwing away or burning the imposed veils, celebrating the overthrowing of the Islamic Republic of Iran and the beginning of a new era of secularism and an egalitarian society in Iran.

This was Adapted from the speech given by Azam Kamguian at the International Humanist & Ethical Union's International Women's Conference "Empowering Women" on 15 November 2003, in London - U.K. - MiddleEastWomen.Org

Women Insulted by Hugo Chavez's embraceof Iranian president Ahmadinejad:
Published on World War 4 Report - http://ww4report.com

Feminist dissent from Chavez embrace of Ahmadinejad
By WW4 Report
09/22/2006

From our correspondent Jennifer Fasulo:

Chavez's Shameful Embrace of Iranian President Ahmadinejad: Show Solidarity with the Women and People of Iran, not their Oppressors!

Hugo Chavez, one of the key important figures in the left populist movements spreading throughout Latin America, has publicly lauded and embraced Iranian president Ahmadinejad. (See "Two anti-US nations heap praise upon each other," AP [1], Sept. 17) It is moments like this, when feminists and any activists who care about women's liberation, are reminded of just how little women's lives matter in the world of patriarchal nationalist politics.

One expects Chavez to condemn all US war-mongering and threats against Iran. We can applaud as he uses the public stage to denounce Bush as a criminal who is out to dominate and destroy the world. But there is no excuse for declaring solidarity with a misogynist theocrat like Ahmadinejad. By embracing Ahmadinejad, Chavez is adding steam to the growing and dangerous alliance between left-wing and right-wing anti-imperialism. In this equation, the only thing that matters is one's opposition to US imperialism. Women's rights, worker's rights, student's rights-- the things that are supposed to matter to socialists and progressives-- be damned.

Apparently, Chavez, appears not to have noticed that the Iranian government has created one of the most brutal and misogynist regimes in modern history - turning Iran into a country where gender apartheid and sexist hatred of women has been enshrined in law, where women are still TODAY stoned to death for the "crime" of adultery, buried up to their necks and pelted in the face and head with stones until they die, where women have no right to divorce or child custody, are legally forced to veil under threat of physical beating or imprisonment, can't travel without the permission of a husband or father, where their testimony in a court of law is considered half that of a man, and where political dissent of any kind, for women and men, is punishable by imprisonment, often torture and death. This is the government that Chavez compares to his own as a "heroic nation," one which he deems, "revolutionary."

Chavez's lack of concern for women's rights under Islamic governments is reflective of the male left generally. The issue is not on the radar screen. If an ethnic or racial group were treated the way women in Iran or Afghanistan have been treated for the last 30 years, it would be widely and routinely denounced. But if its happening to women, its dismissed or excused as an issue of "culture." This insidious use of the word "culture" implies that women are brutally subjected not through force and violence, but because they or their "culture" wants it that way, and therefore it's okay and nothing to get upset about. This argument, aside from insulting the human spirit, which never passively accepts subjugation, is also profoundly ignorant of the actual conditions and historical facts in Iran. Any cursory investigation of Iranian society will show that the Iranian people are a people in utter revolt against their despotic rulers, with women leading the way.

For 27 years women have resisted and defied the Islamic regime's persecution of them, often at great risk to their lives. Along with an inspiring women's movement, there are strong, secular workers and student movements, all of them opposing not only the Islamic regime, but also the US threats of military attacks and sanctions on Iran.

How can Chavez, who considers himself a socialist and a defender of the downtrodden, align himself with the leader of such a reactionary regime, rather than the inspiring socialist and feminist movements which are fighting against it? It is a terrible political choice that he need not make. Chavez can and should renounce his solidarity with Ahmadinejad and place it with the people of Iran where it belongs. He should be standing, not by the side of the executioner, but by the side of the unjustly accused and condemned, like 17-year-old Nazanine Fatehi who awaits execution for the crime of defending herself and her niece from a gang of rapists. Or Kobra Rahmanpour who also awaits execution and writes in a public letter, "I have suffered enough - Please help me! I don't want to die. But right now I am more like a lifeless body who has forgot happiness and laughter in the scare from the execution rope - My only hope lies in people and my fellow humans." (see the International Committee Against Executions [2]) How must Kobra, and Nazanine feel to see Chavez throw his arms around their excecutioner?

Chavez's stance needs to be condemned by all progressive forces within the international community. One group that has already issued such a condemnation is the Worker Communist Party of Iran (WPI [3]). In a statement issued on September 14, they write, "We see the attempts by right-wing pro-America forces to overthrow Chavez and we value every bit of positive reform by the Chavez government in the interest of deprived and hungry people, but defending the murderous and terrorist leaders of the Islamic Republic, rolling out the carpet for them under the guise of anti-imperialism is nothing but throwing dust in the eyes of the people and covering up the brutal reality of the Islamic regime."

The WPI goes on to challenge the very notion that the Islamic Republic is an anti-imperialist force. "We must make it clear to Chavez and Castro that the Islamic current, without the support of the US government and western powers, could not have come to power - and without their help could not have stayed in power."

In these bleak times, many on the left see Chavez as the great hope for the world and are loathe to call into question his commitment to revolutionary politics. Chavez does deserve credit for the things he's done to improve the lives of poor people and curb the abuses of capitalism in Venezuela. Many feminists have also praised his economic initiatives for women and willingness to recognize the contribution of women's unpaid labor in the home. Recently, he passed a historic bill which would compensate women for their unpaid housework, something that socialist feminists have been fighting for decades. Yet these facts must also be balanced by other disquieting aspects of Chavez's politics. He has frequently been criticized for his authoritarian leadership, including by the Venezuelan women who are pushing him to make good on his promises.

In a manner disturbingly close to Bush and Ahmadinejad, he likes to claim that he has "god on his side." After the recall election in which Chavez triumphed over efforts by the opposition to unseat him, he declared, "God has spoken." And while some feminists have praised him as a champion of women's rights, others have pointed to his strong anti-abortion stance, which included an attempt to create an anti-abortion amendment to the Venezuelan constitution.
Even the issue of paying women for housework is not clear cut. There has long been a debate within feminist circles as to whether this will have a liberating effect (raising women out of poverty) or whether it will further institutionalize women in the role of domestic servitude. All of these issues deserve to be reconsidered in light of Chavez~Rs alliance with an anti-feminist fundamentalist like Ahmadinejad.

We have to ask ourselves, what hope does Chavez represent, especially for women, if he's willing to align himself with a government that treats women like sub-humans? What hope do we have if we can't distinguish between revolutionary movements and the forces which seek to destroy them?

Precisely because things are so bleak right now and the forces of reaction and religious bigotry are on the rise around the world, we must not tolerate leftist alliances that seek to legitimize them. We must not allow the undermining of the women's liberation movement in Iran that is tirelessly fighting to save women's lives and break the chains of their legal imprisonment, nor the progressive revolutionary movements that are charting a third course between US domination and right-wing opposition to it. These are the movements that represent the true hope for the ideals of justice, equality and human liberation. Now, more than ever, we must stand up and defend them.

Source: ww4report.com/2525

Calling People for truths...

2007-01-31T16:00:00.000-08:00

In the name of God, the Compassionate the Merciful

say : O followers of the Book ! come to an equitable proposition between us and you that we shall not serve any but Allah and "that" we shall not associate aught with Him, and "that" some of us shall not take olhers for lords besides Allah; but if they turn back, Then say : Bear witness that we are Muslims. (Koran. 3-64)

God expediently sends prophets on mission to make humankind understand three points.

First, to help them recognize the world creator as well as remind them the sole, Matchless one who created entity through His Knowledge, authority and power. They also were to remove from the people any sort of doubt, any from of dualism and sacrilege stirring them toward "the Sole One worship".

Second, to make people aware of the Day of Reckoning; That any kind of deeds shall be made up in its own way and recorded, even if its a bit until every body is called for the divine judgement "The Resurrection Day & corporal awakeness".

Third, to encourage people in doing good deeds, observing philanthropism and fraternity, Keeping peace and social security, on one hand, and making them beware of hostility, rights trampling and injustice, aggression and dishonored acts and killing and looting, on the other hand.

Considering the messengers' history and temporal-locate situations in which they are delegated__especially that of the Ololazm* ones__disregarding the pre-induced opinions, it'll be seen whenever the three aforesaid tenets fall into oblivion, God sends His messenger to help them__those who have forgotten their Creator, who have considered real or legal objects and individuals as , who have determined an inter-medium, who are far away from final consequences of their deeds, who have forgotten the Day of Judgement, or, think of it as an old myth and something for-fetched, and finally helping those who are along way far from humanity, benevolence and good behaviour and lable their nasty acts with rightousness__come to Sense, inviting them to worship "the only One", reminding them the Last Hour, restoring humanity through expression of divine laws and sowing the seeds of salvation, equanimity and the two world security among people.

The mission of Abraham, Noah, Saleh, Hood, Lout, Jonah, Moses, Jesus, Mohammad and the other prophest (peace be upon them) has been based on the Three mentioned axes.

They were neither touting__advertising their goods-nor were they in persuit of popularity, power, monopoly or wealth; They were but divine messengers and those who were specifying laws and limits and, gerenally, expressing the principles for people in diverse forms and languages; The targets were not just then people, but later descendants in all eras.

But for another time, some forgetfuls, materialists and totalitarianists trampling over the divine laws, as the time passes, and considering pure instructions of prophets as barriers, interpret them willfully, deviating (misleading) people from the three tenets through manipulating divine laws, mandates and spreading cheatful superstitions and finally turn the faith of spritual development, equanimity and liberality into shackes of absolutism and exploitation and using it as a tool to fool gullible mankind; They, thereby, make people engaged in petty activities,bloodshed, tribalism, grouping, false fightings, vain discussions, absurd thoughts and sciences, futile loves and feuds, ineffective cries and prays, fancy foes and unreasoned laughs so that it results in waging a universal war.

Nations renounce the three princioles while proceeding toward out-dated tales, old wreckages and spoiled bones. cleared off the books and appeared in form of "words and polytheism" in society; in form of classes, sects and tribes. Each of the existing sects and schools as__reformists, religious ones, Zionists, on one side, and shiite, sunnite sub-factions, on the other side,__considered itself as the right, true religion while thinking of others as false, polytheist ones; Each pieced its specific strings of stories together, presented its miracle, wrote its book, issued its mandate versified its epics about prodigies, set up its innovations and attributed it, directly or indirectly, to God in order to prove its reality & rightousness people were 'torn' into pieces each of which an oily bite, soft and digestible to the Pharaohs and Nimruds; Those who were not namely "Pharaoh and Nimrud", but of the same customs and habits.

And Now, we live in similar age when momotheism has been replaced by different forms of polytheism and profanity; These two 'tendencies' have penetrated so deeply into our bodies and spirits that, like prophets' contemporary factions, bearing no doubt, we think of them as real salvation and monotheism. We are not a ware of our deeds' consequenses and consider the Last Day among childlike tales, Fraternity & friendship, honesty and sincerity, trusteeship and respect to others, benevolence and philanthropsism, tender and cooperation, peace and intimacy, self-sacrifice and self-denial, sympathising with fellow kind and helping him, humbleness and generousity have lost color within diverse communities being replaced by hostility, lying, treachery and aggression, hypocricy and roguery, formalism and disrespect, malevolence and crime, fighting, looting and bloodshed, insolence and unmanliness, repression and exploitation. Nowadays, we are more badly in shortage of pure divine knowledgesthan ever.

Lets, thus, set aside all that woeds, superstitions, innovations, futile discussions, baseless disagreements, groopings and factionisms and harp at the divine string paying attention to Moses'Ten Instructions, listening to the Jesus'enlivening admonitions, Mohammad's eternal Koran and, infact harping at Abraham's Honest faith.

Lets, praise no 'god' but the only creator of the world; Not to ask for but His assistance and not to put a medium in between.

Lets dedicate ourselves to Him and obey His instructions.

Lets, think of our ultimate acts and be sure that even the tiniest ones are recorded, verified and affect our lives in both worlds.

Lets, abstain from nasty deeds and put humanity clothes on.

God sent His last messenger 1400 and more years ago and not any other one follows him. Then, we should instigate an uprisal through praying to God for help, away from false imaginations and sect's impurities, seeking salvation and saving our societies.

Abdolhamid Masoumi Tehrani

*.Prophets (5 ones): Noah, Abraham, Moses, Christ and Mohammad.

There is No Suppression of Religion or Faith in a Secular Society

2007-01-29T11:01:00.000-08:00

Religion in a Secular Society: What Place or Role can Religion Have?

By Austin Cline

A word of caution is important here when it comes to terminology. One frequently hears or reads about secularists seeking the restriction of religion to "private" life and getting it out of "public" life — a position which gives people the impression that secularists don't want anyone ever talking about religion in public again. Although some secularists may harbor such feelings, this interpretation relies upon the fact that the public/private distinction has more than one meaning.

For secularists, they do not mean it in the same sense that a person's financial situation should remain private rather that becoming public knowledge. Instead, they are using "public" in the sense of "maintained for or used by the people or community." Thus, the desire to have religion removed from "public life" involves removing it not from public view but from public (read: government) support. The desire for religion to be made private involves not keeping it secret but keeping it a personal, voluntary endeavor.

We can see, then, that there is nothing about the process of secularization or a philosophy of secularism which requires the demise of religion. Secularists themselves are quite divided in their evaluations of religion and what role they think religion should have in society. Many are adamant in their belief that religion does more harm than good and they do hope that it will eventually disappear. Many others, however, are happy for it to retain a role in the social and moral lives of believers. Some secularists even support religious charities in their social efforts for the relief of poverty and suffering.

If religion withers in a secular society — and such a fate is entirely possible — the blame cannot be laid directly at the feet of secularism and secularization. They can only be held accountable for creating the conditions for the actual cause: people's disinterest in religion. In a non-secular society, people have little chance to ignore or get away from religion. Everywhere they go, either ecclesiastical authorities have some power over them or the principles of some particular religion are used as a basis to control their lives.

In a secular society, however, escape from domination by religion and religious leaders is possible. No one is beholden to any religious organization or religious values unless they specifically choose to be. If enough people choose not to be associated with religion, then religious organizations will decline due to decreases in income and membership.

Religious leaders are surely justified in lamenting such a possibility, but by opposing secularism and secularization, they make two errors. First, they place responsibility for such a predicament in the wrong place. Instead of attacking secularism for allowing people the chance to ignore religion, they should instead take a closer look at why they might be worth ignoring.

Second, any attempt to attack secularism essentially admits that they are unable to maintain people's interest and support on a purely individual, private, and voluntary basis. This may indeed be true, but it is a devastating thing to acknowledge — yet religious leaders who attack secularism don't seem to understand what it means. For some reason, they fail to realize that publicly supported and/or enforced religion is ultimately worthless. If they really believe that that is the only way that religion can survive, then they admit that religion itself is worthless — and that validates the secularist position that religion simply isn't necessary for the public good.

A gift from the nation of Iran to the nation and the government of the United States of America

2006-11-18T13:41:00.000-08:00

In the name of God

By God’s grace, the calligraphic and illuminated transcript of the holy Book of Psalms of David was delivered to the U.S. embassy in Ankara, by The Mission Group of Peace for All, as a gift from all Iranians who fight for freedom, to the nation and the government of the United States of America.

This precious artistic and spiritual work is written in Hebrew and Farsi languages. Ayatollah AbdolHamid Masoumi Tehrani has done the calligraphy of this work, and Prof. Mehdi Bahman has done the illumination of its pages.

This precious book is a gift from the nation of Iran to the nation and the government of the United States of America and bears the message that Iranians desire friendship and mutual respect with all other countries, especially the United States of America.

Through this precious artistic gift, we also endeavored to demonstrate that not every comment and statement, declared by the current government of Iran, being about political, International, social, religious or nuclear issues, is, and has been, the opinion and viewpoint of our nation.

The massage we have is that Iranian people appreciate the personal, social, and religious freedom; they desire for a free and peaceful society for both themselves and the people of other nations.

Iranians are people who have a historical association and friendship with the Jewish nation, and have never desired and planned for destruction and annihilation of Israel.

The majority of our people dislike the terrorists and their organizations, and has no association with any of them.

The Mission Group of Peace for All delivered this symbolic gift to the U.S. embassy in Ankara, so that, after its transportation to America, it could be brought in the public view as a massage of friendship, respect and peace, from the nation of Iran to the nation and the government of the United States of America.

This precious transcript of the holy Book of Psalms of David is the first book of the Bible that has ever been handwritten in calligraphy by an Iranian Muslim clergy, and illuminated and decorated with gold by an Iranian artist.

The size of this book is 25 × 35, and its total number of pages is 570. The amount of gold used in this book is 5000 sheets of 24-carat gold.

Tehran – Iran
The Mission Group of Peace for All

Protesters march against Sharia law in Canada

2006-10-17T06:19:00.000-07:00

What you are going to read is actually what happened in Ontario, Canada, last year! It's not just a fiction, something that is just made up by enemies of Islam. What you are going to read, is a real and serious story. I think this story shows that how a reformation in the Islamic world and among Muslims (if it is possible) is a vital necessity.

This is an undeniable and unfortunate fact that today Islam, much more than any other religion in the world, is considered to be an affront to the human rights. Isn't it Muslim scholar's duty to at least try to show that Islam is not what it actually looks like today? If not, then whose duty is it?!

Please read this true story, and judge for yourself.

=============================
Protesters march against Sharia law in Canada

Fri. Sep. 9 2005

CTV.ca News Staff

More than 300 demonstrators converged in front of the Ontario legislature Thursday in a protest against the allowance of Islamic Sharia law in the province.

"Shame! Shame!" chanted members of the crowd, angry at the prospect of Ontario becoming the first Western jurisdiction to allow the use of Sharia law to settle family disputes.

Ontario Premier Dalton McGuinty said his Liberal government will decide "shortly" on whether to permit Islamic law to be used in the province's family arbitration cases. He has insisted that the rights of women will not be compromised if Shariah tribunals get the go-ahead to settle marital disputes for Muslims in the province. "Whatever we do, it will be in keeping with the values of Canadians and Ontarians," he told reporters Wednesday.

But critics consider the religious rules an affront to human rights. "What Mr. McGuinty is doing is simply flirting with political Islam," said Homa Arjomand, co-ordinator of the International Campaign Against Shariah Court on Thursday.

"And that dangerous game is putting the lives and safety of women and children in danger. Shame." Billed as a global campaign against Sharia law, demonstrations took place in 11 cities across Canada and Europe -- including one in London, England in front of the Canadian High Commission.

"The leader of Ontario's government -- shame on you!" said Mahmoud Ahmadi, spokesperson for the Federation of Iranian Refugees. "Shame on you!" Not everyone at the Toronto protest, however, was against the inclusion of Sharia into the province's legal fabric.

Wahida Valiante said if Jews, Catholics and others can practice faith-based arbitration to settle family disputes, so should Muslims. "You are creating two classes of citizens: one who have certain rights and other who don't have certain rights." Christians and Jews have been able to use faith-based arbitration to settle family disputes since 1991.

Imam Mubin Shaik in Toronto runs the Majid El-Noor Arbitration Centre -- Canada's only Sharia law arbitration centre. He contends Shariah is in line with Canadian law. "I subscribe to Islam. I've taken Islam as my way of life," said the Imam. "It doesn't mean it goes hand in hand with oppression with women."

The McGuinty government, meanwhile, is still reviewing a report submitted nine months ago by former provincial Attorney-General Marion Boyd. Boyd recommends that Muslims in Ontario should have the same rights as other religious groups.

If Ontario rejects Sharia, Boyd warns, then it faces the spectre of ending all religious arbitration.
Boyd claims there is no evidence women were being discriminated against in faith-based arbitration and recommends that Ontario's existing arbitration system be strengthened. "The recommendations that I've made put a lot of safeguards in place," Boyd told CTV. "I think they have to have the political courage to recognize they're not going to satisfy everybody."

However the prospect of Sharia-based tribunals in Ontario has raised alarm bells among women's groups across Canada and Europe, as well as human-rights activists and dissidents from Islamic states such as Iran. They argue that Sharia, even limited to family arbitration, would create a precedent for religious fundamentalists working to suppress women's rights. They say it could discriminate against Muslim women who might be pressured into it against their will.

"They are helping the Islamic groups to legalize violence against women," campaigner Shiva Mahbobi told CTV. "It's racism to put people in different categories and define their rights based on where they come from."

"Under Sharia law if a woman has a relationship outside marriage she can be stoned to death and girls as young as nine can be made to marry," Mahbobi added. "I am asking the government to give a choice to these women."

New Democrat MPP Peter Kormos accused the McGuinty government of burying its head in the sand. "It's regrettable that the government has simply failed to act in the matter and failed to address concerns that are raised," he told The Globe and Mail.

Even McGuinty's opponent, Progressive Conservative Leader John Tory, acknowledged the government is grappling with a difficult issue, one that is "hugely emotional" for both sides, Boyd's report said.

Source

The letter to ...

2006-08-14T04:30:00.000-07:00

Dear U.S.A. Ambassador to Turkey,

The carrier of this letter, Mr. .................., has carried a transcript of the book of Psalms of David, so that he could offer this precious book to his Excellency, as a symbol of friendship between the two nations, Iranians and Americans, and a proof of pacifism and respect for all Nations and religions, and as a gift from the great nation of Iran.

The calligraphy of this precious book is done by Prof. AbdolHamid Masoumi Tehrani, and its inlay is done by Prof. Mehdi Bahman. This excellent work, which is written in both Farsi and Hebrew, is totally 570 pages that are all adorned with gold. The amount of Gold used in this book is 5000 sheets of 24-carat gold. This book, in the statement that a copy of it is attached, has been presented as a gift to families, relatives, and friends of all victims of terrorist attacks, specially the victims of September 11 tragedy.

Unfortunately, since the issuance of that statement, the current government of Iran and some clergies of Quom has been attacking this book; and in different ways, they have tried to destroy it. It has been a while that they have also threatened the calligraphist of this book with death, and requested the annihilation of this book. (a copy of the statement, that has been issued as response to the threatening, is also attached.)

Protecting and preserving this book, Mission Group of Peace for All has gone through lots of difficulties, until now, that we have just been able to transfer it to out of the country, so that the carrier of this letter can deliver it to you.

This precious book, which is a Persian artistic work, and brings the massage of pacifism, respect for other religions, and disagreement with the current adventurous regime of Iran, is presented as a gift, from all Iranians who fight for freedom, to the nation of America and all other nations of the world.

This gift is only from the nation of Iran and all Iranians who fight for freedom, and has no relationship, what so ever, with the current regime of Iran.

Therefore, we request that you accept this gift from the nation of Iran, and then transfer it to the American Library of Congress or wherever you think it is appropriate.

Please consider the fact that there may by Islamic hardliners and Iranian intelligence agents in Turkey who, if the existence of this book is made known to them, will threaten the safety of this book and its carrier. Therefore, we request to provide, if possible, the accommodations of the safety of this artistic work and its carrier.

We sincerely appreciate your cooperation.

Central Office
The Mission Group of Peace for All

Behind the Veil

2006-03-11T20:14:00.000-08:00

Each one of us has bits and pieces of his life’s memories, the dreams of early childhood, all the character-shaping factors. Yes, I remember every moment; I almost remember the moment I was born. This moment is stuck in my memory since my mother told me all about it. It was a Wednesday in 1971. I was the first-born baby girl to my parents. I was the first joy, the first baby crying at our home.

I am the eldest of four sisters. Our financial status was average like that of any ordinary family. I studied in public schools. My father did his best to provide for our needs. His dream was to give us a good education, especially me. We were all girls, so my dad wished to have a son. He spared no effort to let us have a good share of education and provide us with all our needs. As far as religion is concerned, we were raised with moral values and religious commitment.

My father is a true Muslim. Having been raised in the countryside, my father was keen to maintain all religious rituals and traditions. As for my mom, she was less conservative than my dad. She prayed every now and then. I remember that she always had many arguments with Dad concerning that. He wanted both of them to be a good example for us to follow in all religious matters. I remember that my dad used to get up early for the dawn prayer at a mosque in the vicinity. Sometimes I would wake up to the voice of the ‘azzan’ (call to prayer). I was amazed by my father’s persistence to pray the five obligatory prayers on time at the mosque. Nothing prevented him from doing that, not the cold of winter, the heat of summer, not even during his sickness.

I asked him once, “Why don’t you pray at home in the cold weather?” He replied that the more he would go out to the mosque in such bad weather, the more God would reward him with great compensation. My dad was really faithful to Islam, a conservative, which he still is.

When I was seven years old, my dad encouraged me to fast the whole month of Ramadan (Ramadan is one of the Islamic calendar months that all Muslim are obliged to fast). And then he told me one of the Hadiths (Prophet’s tradition), “Teach them till the age of seven, and beat them till the age of ten.”

I used to feel hungry during the long day of fasting, especially at that age, but I was faithful and patient till the end of the day. I managed to fast the whole month. My dad was very happy and announced the news to all our family members. He was very proud of my religious commitment.

I was very happy knowing that God would reward me according to His promise. But my great joy was to achieve this difficult task. Till the age of twelve I did not pray regularly, and Dad always argued with us about this matter. Discipline in both study and prayer were the most important topics that pushed us into many arguments and tongue-lashings in all our life at home.

Dad had a way to punish us that I strongly rejected. If one of us didn’t pray for any other reason than the legal reasons, he would refuse to eat with us at the same table according to the Prophet’s tradition. I wondered how could the Prophet teach principles likely to cause family dissentions. What kind of a commitment was Dad expecting to come out of such a punishment?

We grew up with the idea that Christians were infidels and polytheists, not worthy of our friendship or companionship. There was one exception to that rule. One of my dad’s friends was a Christian named Fawzy. Dad had known him since his childhood, and they had a close relationship. When he, his wife and their son used to come to visit us in our joyful occasions and feasts, I was always amazed as, after they left, my dad would say: “Oh, Fawzy, it’s a big waste for you to be a Christian. I wish you were a Muslim!”

When I was thirteen, I joined the prep school. On the first day of school all students usually run and fight to get the best seats in class. A girl called Marcella sat beside me. Her name was not familiar to my ears. It was a very new adventure for me. I had to deal with that infidel Christian who sat with me at the same desk for the whole year. Soon I got to know her more and I found myself being fascinated by her. I still remember the innocent beaming of her face. Until now I still remember her tenderness as if it were yesterday, and not many years ago.

I remember she asked me once what kind of sandwiches I had for lunch. I told her that I had a Roman cheese sandwich. Marcella said she had a ham sandwich and suggested we swap sandwiches. I was upset by her suggestion and said to her, “Muslims do not eat pork, it is forbidden in Islam.” So she asked me why. I told her God was protecting us from this meat that was not good for our health. She looked at me, her eyes wandering and resorted to silence. I wondered, if my answer was true and logical why did eating pork not affect all these Christians year by year? I found no answer and I didn’t bother myself searching for one; soon I forgot the whole thing.

The first year of school passed, and our simple and lovely friendship grew. The following year at school, one day Marcella was looking for something in her bag.

This was the last straw I was clutching at and now I had lost all sources of support for continuing my walk in Christianity. So I felt as if God wanted me to forsake that religion, may be because I was unable to continue that battle. Although I enjoyed from the bottom of my heart and the depths of my soul every word of the Bible and did my best to keep saying the Lord’s Prayer diligently, nothing was genuinely changed in my character. I was still full of hatred and envy towards Christians. I could not forgive anybody. I could not even say “Good morning” to my mother. I used to get out of my house with traces of anger, hatred and hostility painted on my face. I deliberately used to show anger toward my parents and brothers that they might know that they were infidels and that I hated them for that reason. I was so filled with the spirit of rebellion and hostility that I even doubted the authenticity of what I read in the Bible.

All those factors came together with the losing of the papers; it was a merciless attack to hinder the work of God in my life, an attempt to break my determination and my increasing love of the Bible. Once again, I broke into tears, blaming God for all that was taking place around me. I began to wonder if it was only God’s doing that whenever I took a step towards Him things would go wrong. “Why, Lord, do all these things happen to me? Why me? What did I do to deserve all that? If you are punishing me for something wrong I did to Christians, please forgive me now as I repent before you. Please have mercy upon me based on your death on the cross for me, or else your cross is nothing but what we used to think of it. Who are you that you would allow such a person like me to approach you? What can I do to please you? My life has become so miserable. If it continues like that, death will be easier for me than to continue to live as I am. Please God take my soul. If you don’t have mercy on me, I will commit suicide. It will be no more harm to go to hell for that for if you don’t bestow your mercy upon me, I will go to hell anyway.”

I wept so much. I was wallowing in pain and agony. I stood up, with my tears running on my face like rivers. My mother saw me and patted my shoulders, and she cried with me. She asked me what was wrong with me. I told her, “Just leave me alone. I do not want to speak with anybody. I have once talked to you and you accused me of insanity. May God forgive you.” I went quickly to my room and took a shower to cleanse my body from all the uncleanness of Christian thoughts I also needed to wash myself from all I had done.

I kept on thinking , contemplating whether God would forgive me for all that I said regarding His Prophet Mohammad and His Holy Qur’an. I felt as if somebody was speaking to me saying, “You did not attack anybody or speak any kind of falsehood. All the conclusions that you reached was not of your manufacturing; they were self-evident.” I stood up, spread, my prayer carpet, and I repeated the two Islamic Testimonies in order to go back to Islam. I tried to pray but unsuccessfully. I could not utter a word from the Qur’an. I could not bow down either. So, I placed my head between my palms for a while. Then I went away saying just few words, “Oh Lord, if you are not angry with me, nothing will do me any harm. If you are punishing me now for some transgression I did, I ask you to forgive me and alleviate my punishment . If you are standing against my guidance, that is foreign to your nature. Oh Lord, I have no more power to deal with my situation. If you will not reveal yourself to me, I will go astray. I love you Lord. I did what I was ordered to do. I did what all the others could not, just to please you, as I thought. When you revealed to me your light and called me, I did not delay. How long will you leave me groping in pitch darkness? All that is taking place in my life is a test of love you have prepared for me to lead me to your side. You are the Good Shepherd. Please give me more of your love and guidance to bring me more towards meeting you.”

My father used to push us to pray consistently, so I decided to commit myself to pray. I realized that discussion and thinking were useless, so I decided to keep the five daily prayers as a duty in order to avoid my father’s curses. I felt coerced. In my first prostration I asked God to help me finish the last prostration and get over with such a chore. I was not thinking of God, and my prayer did not bring any change in my character. My attitude towards Christians was still hostile, a result of the way we were brought up. Marcella was the only Christian exposure I had. I even avoided passing by the church near our home.

At home, things remained the same for a couple of years or so. Clashes and disputes went from bad to worse between my parents until they did what was likely to change the course of their lives. It was ‘the least recommended of the legitimate’ as they said -- to get separated.

I started to get a new role in my family. I was 16 when, in place of my dad, I had the responsibility as head of the family, caring for my four sisters. I had to focus on three things, namely to get high grades at school, to be a good mother to my sisters and to assume my father’s responsibilities.

I did not allow myself to think of anything else. I finished my preparatory school with high grades. My old dream was to pursue my university education but, for financial reasons and in order for me to be able to care for my family, my father did not allow me to go to high school.. I started to feel that everything was against me. That feeling was one of rejection and rebellion. But there was no way out of this bad situation. Each year brought more grief, sorrow, and brokenness. I had nowhere to go!

This time I took refuge in God. After all, I had no other choice but to seek God.. I was so weak, so honest and in a dire need of Him. I committed myself to pray and fast, and to follow all the Islamic ordinances. I started to wear the veil. After I finished each prayer, I used to call upon God and talk to Him a lot, but I felt that my prayers and supplications would hit the ceiling and come back to me with neither an answer nor help or even a hope.

I always felt that God was far away from me, “as far as the East from the West”. After I finished my education, I stayed more than two years at home. I was bored to death of such a routine life, so I started to look for job. It came to my knowledge that a law office had a vacancy for a secretary.

The owner of this law office was a Christian. I was certain that my father would refuse such an idea, but I had to tell him. He categorically refused. When I persisted, finally my dad agreed. Working at a business owned by a Christian, my curiosity for the Christian religion started to arise.

I started with a question to my boss about a picture of the Virgin Mary on the wall behind him: “From where did they get it? Why did they say that Jesus was God while he was born of an ordinary woman, even if his birth was miraculous?” I hardly finished my question, when his anger flared and he said to me in a firm way, “Here there are no questions about religion. It is enough what is going on in the country nowadays.” He meant the awful terrorist attacks that happened in 1991.

So the fear of that lawyer and his ignorance of his religion forbade him from getting involved in any discussion about religion. Ignorance and fear are more than enough to hide the most awesome beauty. So I decided to learn more about Christianity, this time from some Christian books in the library of our office. I started to read about the crucifixion, trinity, and the Son of God and His love. I was fascinated by the great love story that appeared clearly with the cross and salvation. I found it to be logical to the mind and satisfactory to the soul. I had an apprehension about getting involved in such readings, so I stopped reading. I asked the help of an Islamic theologian in order to answer all my questions and to help me stop my attraction to Christ.

I went to the sheik of the mosque near my home and told him about my little satisfaction and my great fear. He gave me the instant solution to the disease of searching for knowledge and gave me a recipe that comprised three steps I had to follow strictly:

Fist step: to stop reading about this religion and leave my work,
Second step: to repent, pray and fast three days; and
Third step: to keep on reading the Holy Qur’an everyday.

In fact, I did what the sheik requested except for one item, which was to leave my work. I was afraid that my dad would not allow me to work again. I began to discover something that increased my doubts and worries. When I started reading the Holy Qur’an regularly, I found no healing of my disease. A woman, according to the Qur’an, lacks the insight and the religious commitment, so the inheritance of a man is twice that of a woman!!

Before court, the witness of two women is equal to that of one man (considering that women are less intelligent). So not one of us women could be a doctor, researcher, judge, philosopher, or even a wise person!!!
The majority of people condemned in hell will be women!! Moreover, lots of them will serve as hell’s firewood. Just imagine--we women were created just to please men and eventually we will end up being the firewood of hell or nymphs of Jannah (beautiful women to please men in heaven.)

A woman in Islam should not leave her house except for one of three reasons: to move to her husband’s house, to perform the Hajj, or to be buried. I was tired of all the Qur’anic verses that talked about fights in Islam and the seas of blood that were still being shed in the name of religion. Try to imagine that after twenty-one years of strongly believing in something, it turns up to be false. It was the most difficult time I have ever had. How can someone who used to take refuge in God, all of a sudden live without a refuge and without a god?

After a month of sleepless nights, of weeping and crying, and of waiting upon the true God to descend from heaven to earth to answer me, I got tired of thinking. I then went back to read the Qur’an, which left me more bewildered and confused. So, I decided to read the Holy Bible that I may find the truth.

But people said that the original version of the Holy Bible did not exist any more. What could I do? I had no choice but to read this corrupted version of the Bible that I may find the truth between the lines. So I started to read the Holy Bible and I discovered Jesus, the name that I had heard about long ago, and the name I had been attracted to. I saw how he healed the sick, freed the captives, forgave the adulterous woman, loved and blessed his enemies. For the first time in my life I discovered what I had never experienced--the fatherhood heart or the motherhood care--because my parents were separated long ago and I was the eldest daughter.

And now I feel that Jesus is my father and mother. I have felt Him hugging me, holding me in His arms like a baby. He took away all my heavy loads that burdened my back. For the first time in my life, I felt that I am a real woman – a real person, really beloved; not a commodity to please men, but created after the image of God. I cried like someone who had been rescued from hell or death. On that day I said to Jesus, “Jesus, you are my God and my Savior. You are my father and my mother; you are everything to me in life.”

From that time on, I turned over a new leaf, full of events, miracles, and persecution, but we will talk about that later.

Yours,
Leila

Introduction

2006-03-03T14:44:00.000-08:00

As the prodigal son went back to his father after a time of being lost, going astray, and wandering aimlessly, Ishmael today goes back to the bosom of his father Abraham, even to the bosom of Christ who exists before father Abraham. He exists before the foundation of the world.

Ishmael goes back to the One who came from heaven and was incarnated for him. Yes, my God and my Savior, you came to preach the Good News to the poor, to bind up the brokenhearted, to proclaim freedom for the captives and release from darkness the prisoners, to bestow on them a crown of beauty instead of ashes, the oil of gladness instead of mourning, and a garment of praise instead of a spirit of despair.

You came to rebuild the ancient ruins and restore the places long devastated; we will renew the ruined cities that have been devastated for generations, and proclaim freedom, peace, healing, and love. Oh, my God and Savior, you came to save all nations.

We, the children of Ishmael, have lived so many years unaware of you, knowing nothing about you, and many times we not only denied you but also were hostile to you and fought against you . But your love that is beyond all minds, all imagination, and beyond all enmity found us, guided us, had mercy upon us, and purified us.

Your love, my Savior, brought us back to you as the prodigal to the bosom of his father, as a foundling returns to his mother’s bosom, as a drowning person brought back to the ship of rescue.

My God and my Savior, here we are; we sought You and You found us; we asked You and You answered us; we prayed to You and You have heard our prayers. You have loved us first.

Now we have become sons, not slaves; free, not captives. We became righteous instead of being wicked; we became like you in loving the whole nations.

We are the Children of Ishmael, the son of our father Abraham, who was called ‘the friend of God’. We decided on the coming few pages to proclaim to all nations our love, admiration and submission and loyalty to You. We are the branches and You are the vine; we are the bride and You are the groom; we are your city and You are our God, Savior and King.

Yours,
The Children of Ishmael

Temporary Marriage of Enjoyment

2006-03-03T14:33:00.000-08:00

Marriage of enjoyment (or pleasure) differs from the conventional marriage in that its aim is not having a regular marital life and begetting children, but to enjoy sexual relations in a "legal" way. The man who practices such a marriage is often someone who spends a long time abroad for any reason, and thus marries a woman temporarily. The period of marriage is limited to the time when the husband leaves the country, and then the marriage is automatically dissolved.
The traditions relating to marriage of enjoyment indicate that Muhammad warranted such practice for his friends especially during the raids (maghazi). Yet, `Umar Ibn al-Khattab strongly opposed it, as he said, "The Messenger of God permitted mut`a [marriage of enjoyment] three times, and after that he forbade it. By God, if I find that anyone practices mut`a, while being married, I will stone him with rocks, unless he brings me four witnesses that the Messenger of God permitted it after he had forbidden it." A tradition in Bukhari claims that he prohibited it. Still, it is a bone of contention between many jurists. It is narrated that `Imran said, "We practiced the tamattu` [marriage of enjoyment] in the life-time of the Messenger of God, and then the Qur´an was revealed [regarding tamattu`] and somebody said what he wished [regarding the same] according to his own opinion."
Regardless of the disputes on the details of mut`a in the Sunni schools of thought, one can say that it is equal to fornication, yet the Shiites turned it into some sort of legal marriage. The Sunni jurisprudence, however, allows mut`a, even if it doesn't call it by name. For example, a man may agree to marry a woman in addition to his marriage contract, and bind themselves to divorce as soon as the term they fixed is finished.
Since the Sunni schools of thought all agreed that mut`a was cancelled and prohibited on the basis of traditions narrated about Muhammad, we would like to treat the subject within the Shiite jurisprudence. According to the Shiites, the legality of mut`a is established in both the Qur´an and the Hadith, and in the traditions about their infallible Imams. Their Qur´anic proof is: "and wedded women, save what your right hands own. So God prescribes for you. Lawful for you, beyond all that, is that you may seek, using your wealth, in wedlock and not in license. Such wives as you enjoy thereby, give them their wages apportionate; it is no fault in you in your agreeing together, after the due apportionate. God is All-knowing, All-wise. Any one of you who has not the affluence to be able to marry believing freewomen in wedlock, let him take believing handmaids that your right hands own; God knows very well your faith; the one of you is as the other. So marry them, with their people's leave, and give them their wages honorably as women in wedlock, not as in license or taking lovers. But when they are in wedlock, if they commit indecency, they shall be liable to half the chastisement of freewomen. That provision is for those of you who fear fornication; yet it is better for you to be patient. God is All-forgiving All-compassionate" (Sura al-Nisa´ 4:24,25).
Abu `Abdullah from Ja`far al-Sadiq (the sixth Imam of Twelver Shiism) narrated the following about nikah of enjoyment: "God had made it lawful in His Book, and by the mouth of His Prophet, so it is lawful till the day of Resurrection." One day Abu Hanifa said, "O Abu Ja`far, such as you say that, even though `Umar prohibited and forbade it?" He replied, "Even if he did so." He said, "I adjure you by God not to make lawful that which `Umar has declared prohibited." He answered, "You follow the saying of your friend [`Umar], but I follow the saying of the Messenger of God. What your friend said is untrue." Then, `Abdullah Ibn `Umar came forward and said, "Does it go well with you if your wives, daughters, sisters, and cousins do this?" But Abu Ja`far avoided him when he mentioned his wives, daughters, and cousins.
`Abdurrahman narrated: I heard Abu Hanifa asking Abu `Abdullah concerning mut`a, for which he answered, "Which of the two mut`as are you asking about?" He replied, "I have already asked you concerning the mut`a of Pilgrimage, now tell about the mut`a of women in general; is it legitimate?" He answered, "Praise be God! Have you not read the Book of God Most High? It says, 'Since you have thereby sought enjoyment with them, give them their marriage portion as is stipulated.' " Abu Hanifa said, "By God! It is as though I have never read this verse before."
In a tradition ultimately related by `Ali, Abu Hanifa said to Ja`far Ibn al-Nu`man, "O Abu Ja`far, what do you say concerning mut`a; is it lawful?" He replied, "Yes." He asked again, "Then what keeps you from commanding your women to practise it and earn money for you?" Abu Ja`far answered, "Not all professions are desirable, even if they were lawful. Certain folk have certain lots in life and certain social status. But what do you say, Abu Hanifa, concerning [new sweet wine]; don't you claim that it is lawful?" He answered, "Yes." Abu Ja`far asked, "What keeps you then from letting your women stay at taverns selling wine and earning money for you?" Abu Hanifa said, "Tit for tat; and your arrow penetrates even more." The Abu Ja`far said to him, "The verse in Sura al-Ma`arij [70] speaks of prohibiting mut`a, and the tradition of the Prophet also cancelled it." Abu Ja`far replied, "Abu Hanifa, Sura al-Ma`arij is a Meccan Sura, and the verse pertaining to mut`a is Medinan, and your tradition is anyway doubtful and bad." Abu Hanifa said to him, "The verse pertaining to inheritance, as well, speaks of canceling mut`a." Abu Ja`far answered, "Wedlock has been already established without inheritance." Abu Hanifa asked, "Where do you deduce that from?" Abu Ja`far answered, "If a Muslim man marries a woman of the people of the Book, and then dies, what do you say about her?" He answered, "She does not inherit from him." He said, "See, wedlock is established without inheritance," and they departed.
The Suni schools of thought consider mut`a as abolished on the grounds of Sura al-Mu´minun 23:5, which says, "Believers will succeed! ...who guard their private parts except with their spouses and whomever their right hands may control, since then they are free from blame." Nevertheless, the Shiites claim that this verse is Meccan and that it has been revealed before mut`a was allowed. It seems that the Shiite interpretation is more in harmony with historical reality, since in many credible traditions (that the Sunnis hold as genuine) we have indication of the fact that Muhammad not only allowed marriage of enjoyment, but commanded his friends to practice, as well. Jabir Ibn `Abdillah narrated that "mut`a will remain forever." Ahmad Ibn Hanbal said in Musnad, "God has given permission for the practice of mut`a, and the Messenger of God made it a law." It is evident from the stories related about Muhammad's friends that they had a hard time trying to understand this permission and adapt it to the morals prevailing at that time. Such a fact is vouched for by the above-mentioned statement of `Umar.
We gather from the Shiite traditions that those who seek the "enjoyment of women" are bound by no numerical limitation. Abu `Ubaid narrated that: He mentioned for him the mut`a [and asked] whether it was one of the four [women]. He answered, "Marry a thousand of them; they are hired." The justification that the Shiites give for the marriage of enjoyment is strange. They say that it was warranted for the single man so that he could keep himself restrained (chaste). Abu al-Fath Ibn Yazid narrated: I once asked Abu al-Hasan concerning mut`a, and he answered, "It is lawfully and absolutely warranted for those who are married, as to those who are not, they should keep themselves restrained by mut`a, but if the latter do get married, they are not in need of it, yet it is still warranted for them if they are away [from home]." The reference here is made to the phrase "keep themselves restrained" occurring in Sura al-Nisa´ 4:6, which is utterly irrelevant to the issue of mut`a even according to the best known and oldest Shiite interpretations. It is strange also to know that not all women are fit for mut`a! There are conditions and a description that women have to meet in order to be suitable. The first of these conditions is that the woman has to be a chaste believer. Abu Ja`far was once asked concerning mut`a, and he answered, "mut`a today is not the same as it was before; they were believers then, but today they are not, so ask them." Abu Sara narrated: I asked Abu `Abdillah about it [meaning mut`a], and he said to me, "It is lawful; so only marry a chaste woman, for God Most High said, '...who guard their private parts' (Sura al-Mu´minun 23:5). So do not place your private part where you do not trust your dirham! Whoever wants to marry a woman according to the marriage of enjoyment has to molest her. If she responds with wantonness, then she is not chaste." Muhammad Ibn Abi al-Fudhail narrated: "I asked Abu al-Hasan concerning the wanton beautiful woman; whether it is permissible for a man to enjoy her for a day or more." He said, "If she was known as a prostitute, then she should not be enjoyed or married."
As regards the stipulations for mut`a marriage, they are summed up as follows: Fixed time and fixed hire. Aban Ibn Taghlib narrated: I said to Abu `Abdillah, "What should I say to the woman when I am left alone with her?" He replied, "You should say, 'I marry you for enjoyment according to the Book of God and the tradition of his Prophet, knowing that you inherit nothing and no one inherits from you, for such and such days. And if you like, for such and such years, for such and such dirhams.' You should fix the price that you agree upon, whether little or much. If she says yes, then she accepts; she is your woman and you are worthy of her." I said, "I am ashamed to mention the condition pertaining to the days." He replied, "It is more damaging for you [if you don't do so]." I asked, "How is that?" He answered, "Unless you stipulate [the days], your marriage would be binding, and you will have to pay her alimony during the days of `idda [40 days after divorce], and she would inherit from you, and you would not be able to divorce her except according to the divorce of the Sunna [or tradition]."
The jurists say that it is unlawful to enjoy a Jewish or a Christian woman. Al-Hasan al-Taflis said, "I asked al-Ridha, 'Can a Jewish or a Christian woman be married for enjoyment?' He answered, 'Enjoying a free believing woman is more favorable to me, and she is more irreproachable than they are.' "

War & Peace

2006-01-31T16:15:00.000-08:00

by Melvin Rhodes, Senior writer
Terrorism is the scourge of the modern age. More than 30 years ago, living just outside of London, I remember being inconvenienced on more than one occasion by the IRA terror campaign on the British mainland. Later in the same decade my wife and I lived through a terrorist war in Africa, in which we lost a number of personal friends and acquaintances.
Today it's Islamic terrorism that is affecting our way of life. It didn't start on Sept. 11, 2001, but it has certainly spread since then. July saw terror return to the British capital. This time it was not the IRA but Islamic suicide bombers.
Coincidentally, in the same month, the IRA renounced terrorism, encouraging hopes of peace in Northern Ireland.
War and peace have been constant themes throughout history. Wars are fought and peace follows. Eventually, other wars come along, followed by peaceful interludes. Man seems unable to learn the lessons. The Old Testament prophet Isaiah summed up one of man's greatest weaknesses when he wrote, "The way of peace they have not known" (Isaiah 59:8).
We live in worrying times, with the constant and spreading fear of terrorism coupled with a growing threat of nuclear terror. Jesus Christ warned that man would eventually come to the point of self-extinction, except that Christ Himself will intervene to save mankind (Matthew 24:21-22). He will then establish the Kingdom of God, the central message of His ministry 2,000 years ago (Mark 1:14).
One of the primary causes of terrorism is religion. Different religious beliefs have caused conflict in various parts of the world for thousands of years.
In the last decade we saw conflict in the Balkans between Croatian Catholics, Serbian Orthodox Christians and Bosnian Muslims. War and the threat of war have been a constant for six decades in the land of the Bible as Jews and Muslims struggle for mastery over the Holy Land. In India, Hindus and Muslims are in conflict; in Sri Lanka it's Buddhists and Hindus.
For almost 14 centuries there has been repeated conflict between Muslims and Christians, with the threat of a return to such wars on the rise again today.
When the disciples asked Jesus Christ what sign would signal His second coming (Matthew 24:3), He responded with the following words: "And you will hear of wars and rumors of wars. See that you are not troubled; for all these things must come to pass, but the end is not yet" (verse 6). He added: "For nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom" (verse 7).
Of the time His Kingdom is established on earth, God says, "They shall not hurt nor destroy in all My holy mountain, for the earth shall be full of the knowledge of the LORD as the waters cover the sea" (Isaiah 11:9).
Isaiah was inspired to write of this coming time of Christ's rule: "Of the increase of His government and peace there will be no end . . . from that time forward, even forever" (Isaiah 9:7).
Jesus told His disciples to "seek first the kingdom of God" (Matthew 6:33) and to pray daily for that coming Kingdom (verse 10). That is the only real hope for lasting peace for the world. GN

Peace in the World: The Contribution of Interreligious Relations

2006-01-27T16:29:00.000-08:00

Peace in the World: The Contribution of Interreligious Relations
Archbishop Michael Fitzgerald, at Georgetown University
It is a great honor for me to me to address you this evening at this prestigious university, and I wish to thank President DiGioia for his gracious invitation. I wish also to express my appreciation for the initiative taken by Georgetown University, in instituting the Pacem in Terris lectures, to keep alive the teaching and spirit of Blessed John XXIII's seminal encyclical.
The doctrine of this letter is so rich that it can give rise to reflections in many different directions. I wish to take as a starting point not the encyclical itself but a passage from the letter of John Paul II, Pacem in Terris: A Permanent Commitment, commemorating its fortieth anniversary. The passage reads:
"With the profound intuition that characterized him, John XXIII identified the essential conditions for peace in four precise requirements of the human spirit: truth, justice, love and freedom?..(H)e was convinced that, despite the dramatic situation, the world was becoming increasingly conscious of certain spiritual values, and increasingly open to the meaning of those pillars of peace" [1]
John XXIII does not appear himself to have used the expression pillars of peace, but he does bring together these four requirements. He speaks of the order which prevails in human society:
Its foundation is truth, and it must be brought into effect by justice. It needs to be animated and perfected by men's love for one another, and, while preserving freedom intact, it must make for an equilibrium in society which is increasingly more human in character. (37, see also 45,163, 167).
My purpose in this talk is to examine these four pillars and see how interreligious dialogue can help to develop or consolidate them, and thus contribute to peace in the world.
Truth
There is a danger that interreligious dialogue may fall at the first pillar, for there can be a wrong conception of what is meant by truth. One of the obstacles to dialogue is self-sufficiency, which leads to a lack of openness to others. If one party declares that it has the truth, and that all others are in error and are therefore not worthy of consideration, no relationship can be possible. This is a temptation besetting Christians in particular who will often quote to uphold their position the words of Jesus: "I am the Way, the Truth and the Life" (Jn 14:6), yet others too can adopt an exclusive position.
How can this difficulty be overcome? It is good first of all to call to mind the distinction made by John XXIII in Pacem in Terris between error as such and the person who falls into error. Even if we are convinced that truth is on our side, and that others "err regarding the truth or are led astray as a result of their inadequate knowledge, in matters either of religion or of the highest ethical standards", these others never forfeit their personal dignity (cf. 158). They are therefore always to be treated with respect. Moreover we, as Christians, must remember that
"the fullness of truth received in Jesus Christ does not give individual Christians the guarantee that they have grasped the truth fully. In the last analysis truth is not a thing we possess, but a Person by whom we must allow ourselves to be possessed" [2]
Dialogue can help us on the way to Truth which is always before us.
Here, in passing, I think it is necessary to make a distinction between strictly ecumenical dialogue, that is dialogue among Christians of different denominations, and interreligious dialogue. The former, when it is a question of religious truth, aims at a common expression of the Christian faith signifying a communion in belief as a foundation for communion in practice. People belonging to different religions cannot hope to achieve such a communion in belief -- the differences are far too fundamental -- so all that can be expected from dialogue is a clarification of these differences. This is surely not to be despised, for when we understand the other's position more fully we can speak the truth in love. In other words, we are not satisfied with half-truths, with approximations which can lead to false accusations, but rather we treat our partners in dialogue with due respect.
One of the tasks of dialogue is to overcome prejudice. This task was taken up by the Secretariat for Non Christians (now the Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue) right from the beginning of its existence. This can be seen in the guidelines for dialogue that were produced in the late-Sixties. Let me take as an example the Guidelines for Dialogue between Christians and Muslims.[3] Considerable space is given to a refutation of the accusations laid at the door of Islam, that it is fatalistic, legalistic, morally lax, fanatical, opposed to change, and that it is a religion of fear. Today one would have to add the accusation that Islam is equivalent to terrorism. A group of American Christians and Muslims who have been in dialogue on the West Coast of the US, at their third meeting which took place after the events of 9/11, shared their experience of "horror, shock, outrage, sorrow, fear and powerlessness". Their joint report states that "Our Muslim friends felt an extra measure of pain because these terrible acts, which clearly violated their faith, were strongly associated with Islam. The partners in dialogue agreed "that accurate introductory information is a first step for overcoming false ideas and negative views of one another and for breaking down barriers to understanding." They noted the fatigue of responding to "false accusations and random placements of blame", the frustration when encountering bias, yet they also acknowledged their need to confront their own prejudices.[4]
It is worth continuing to quote this report, since it underlines an essential condition for fruitful dialogue: "We each enter into dialogue accepting one another equally as spiritual companions on the journey to God although this does not mean that we value all ideas about God identically." Dialogue is not just laissez-faire; it is more than mere tolerance. It includes a willingness to be open to the other, as a form of openness to God, allowing oneself to be challenged and changed. So the participants in the West Coast dialogue continue:
We may disagree on certain points of doctrine, even as we respect the others' rights to a fundamental integrity of their teachings and affirm all their human and religious rights. With love and in the pursuit of truth, we will offer our criticisms of one another when we believe there is a violation of integrity of faith in God. We must avoid demonizing one another and misrepresenting one another's teachings and traditions.[5]
Misrepresentation is, unfortunately, a fairly frequent fault of the mass media, sometimes due to the pressure under which journalists have to work. There is an ample field here for interreligious cooperation. The way the media report religious news was the focus of one of the dialogues organized by the Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue and the World Islamic Call Society, an international organization which has its headquarters in Tripoli, Libya. This was followed by a workshop for a small group of Catholic and Muslim journalists. The Interreligious Assembly, held in the Vatican on the eve of the Holy Year, also addressed this question under the heading of education. The Message of the participants stated that "education implies using all means, including the mass media, to impart objective information about each other's religious tradition."[6] The final report of the same assembly, while noting that education "is committed to seeking truth, justice, peace and reconciliation", went into further detail suggesting some practical steps, such as the joint examination of text books, not only as regards religion, but also for other subjects, and particularly history. According to the report:
"The lamentable ignorance and misinformation with which we sometimes bring up our children concerning other people's religious traditions needs to be rectified. This underlines the need for religious traditions to speak for themselves. We must strive to present all religious traditions in an objective manner so that individuals belonging to these traditions can recognize themselves in that representation."[7]
Another aspect of truth is sincerity, something essential for mutual confidence and fruitful dialogue. Where there is no real trust, because of a suspicion of lack of sincerity, dialogue becomes impossible. This is true in relations between husband and wife, or parents and children, or between friends, but it also holds good for political negotiations. A climate of trust has to be created, even if only through a coincidence of self-interest, which can lead to a common commitment. Could an example of this be seen in the relations of Native Americans to the State, where the claim to ancestral lands is not pushed as long as that claim is recognized as legitimate? What interreligious dialogue can do is help to create such a climate of trust, not only among the negotiators but also among the people they represent, so that solutions, which nearly always entail compromises, may become acceptable.
Justice
"Justice will build peace if in practice everyone respects the rights of others and actually fulfils his duties towards them." So John Paul II summarizes the teaching of Pacem in Terris.[8] The encyclical lists many rights, starting from the right to live, then moving to rights concerning moral and cultural values, the right to act according to one's own conscience, economic rights, including the right to emigrate and immigrate, as also political rights. Yet the corresponding duties are also emphasized.
It is obvious that interreligious dialogue can contribute to the appreciation of these rights and the fulfillment of these duties. There have been joint efforts to uphold moral values, such as the collaboration between the Holy See and various majority Muslim countries, at the UN conference on population and development, held in Cairo, 1994, to oppose abortion as a means to population control, to maintain the traditional concept of marriage and the family, and to uphold the rights of parents. Where human life itself is threatened, whether at its very beginning or at its natural end, we see people of different religious traditions coming together in its defense. A number of the dialogues in which the Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue has been engaged have examined or touched upon different aspects of human rights. There was a multilateral colloquium on marriage and the family in the modern world. There have been bilateral dialogues with Muslims on the rights of children, and on the use of the earth's resources. There has been an international seminar on migrants and refugees jointly organized by Christian and Muslim bodies.
There can be interreligious cooperation in opposing legislation which is deemed to be unjust. In Pakistan, for instance, Muslims joined Christians in protesting against the introduction of the mention of religion on identity cards. They have also backed Christians in the call for modification of the blasphemy laws that obtain in that country and which often give rise to abuse. Such joint action has been made possible by the fellowship that has developed through the Pakistan Association for Inter-Religious Dialogue. Yet it is not only overtly religious bodies that can encourage joint action on the part of people of different religions. Amnesty International is a movement open to all, and ready to act on behalf of all, including those who are suffering on account of their religious beliefs. Similarly a movement like SOS-Racisme in France has brought people of different religious convictions together in the fight against racial discrimination.
It can be said that the lack of justice, in individual, social and international relations, is a cause of much unrest in our world today, unrest which often breaks out into violent conflict. There are some who tend to blame religion for conflict so that, as the slogan goes, "there can be no peace in the world without peace among the religions". This view is misleading, and even unjust, if it is construed as meaning that all the ills of society and all conflicts owe their origins to religion. Conflicts, in fact, usually have other causes, economic, social and political. Yet there is a grain of truth in this saying, for religious differences can indeed contribute to the building up of tension and can make opposition between opposing factions more entrenched. This means that in times of violence joint interreligious action can be extremely significant. The destruction of the Babri Mosque in Ayodhya, India, provoked grave clashes between Hindus and Muslims. In Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu, one of the chiefs of police, a Hindu, invited a Catholic priest to accompany him in visiting the quarters of the city most likely to erupt, in order to calm the population. This was possible because the two men already had a good rapport, developed through the activities of the Catholic dialogue center. Similarly in Mumbai (at that time still known as Bombay), where the rioting was extremely serious with the loss of many lives and much material damage, one quarter of the city was hardly affected at all. The reason for this is that in that particular area considerable efforts had been made to build up good relations between people of different religions.
Religious leaders can work together to create the conditions for bringing about peaceful solutions to ongoing conflicts. I should like to refer here to the initiative of Lord George Carey, the then Archbishop of Canterbury. Under the joint patronage of Dr Mohammed Sayyid Tantawi, Sheikh al-Azhar, he was able to get Israeli and Palestinian political and religious leaders, Jews, Christians and Muslims, to meet in Alexandria. In January 2002. The declaration issued at the end of the meeting included the following article: "We seek to help to create an atmosphere where present and future generations will co-exist with mutual respect and trust in the other. We call on all to refrain from incitement and demonization, and to educate our future generations accordingly." They pledged themselves to continue the "Alexandrian Process".[9] Mention could be made also of the Bishops'-"Ulama" movement in the island of Mindanao, Philippines, where conflict has been going on for many decades. These leaders have been meeting regularly, sometimes three or four times a year, and this has strengthened mutual confidence. At the international meeting of Bishops and "Ulama" in Manila, in August 2003, encouragement was given to other countries to build up a similar movement. On this occasion the representative of the Government of the Philippines exhorted the religious leaders of Mindanao to give their moral backing to the Government's projects for development in the area as a way to greater peace in the island. The leaders themselves felt the need to bring their own understanding down to the local level, by encouraging meetings of priests, pastors and imams.
The tragic events of 9/11 have emphasized the need for greater collaboration among religious leaders, and more specifically between Christians and Muslims. Such collaboration already exists, as can be seen from the joint statements issued after these events. In this country a statement was published signed by Bishop Tod Brown, of Orange, California, on behalf of the Catholic Bishops, and by five Muslim leaders representing different Islamic organizations. The two committees in which the Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue is engaged, the Islamic-Catholic Liaison Committee, and the committee set up with al-Azhar, both issued brief declarations. All these statements contained an unequivocal condemnation of terrorism and called for common action by religious leaders. It is only right to recall the common commitments taken by representatives of different religions who gathered around Pope John Paul II, in Assisi, on 24 January 2002. they included the following:
We commit ourselves to proclaiming our firm conviction that violence and terrorism are incompatible with the authentic spirit of religion, and, as we condemn every recourse to violence and war in the name of God or of religion, we commit ourselves to doing everything possible to eliminate the root causes of terrorism.
We commit ourselves to educating people to mutual respect and esteem, in order to bring about a peaceful and fraternal co-existence between people of different ethnic groups, cultures and religions.
We commit ourselves to fostering the culture of dialogue, so that there will be an increase of understanding and mutual trust between individuals and among people, for these are the premises of authentic peace.
We commit ourselves to frank and patient dialogue, refusing to consider our differences as an insurmountable barrier, but recognizing instead that to encounter the diversity of others can become an opportunity for greater reciprocal understanding.[10]
Of course there is a need for such resolutions to be put into effect. This has to be done, and is being done to a certain degree, at the local level. Nevertheless there is still room for greater progress.
Love
Justice is a condition for peace, but it is insufficient. There can be the temptation to remain solely at the level of justice, making an absolute of demands for rights to be recognized and fulfilled. In the process there may be an infringement of the rights of others. So justice has to be tempered by love. It could be said that love functions as a cement for society, or as mortar between the bricks of individual and collective rights. There can be many expressions of this love. Only two will be considered here.
The first of these takes the form of solidarity. It is based on the recognition that we all belong to one human family. Because of this we can see our fellow human beings as brothers and sisters, despite differences of color or creed. It was this conviction that led Pope John Paul II to stress fraternity in addressing Muslims. To representatives of Muslims of the Philippines he said:
I deliberately address you as brothers: that is certainly what we are, because we are members of the same human family, whose efforts, whether people realize it or not, tend toward God and the truth that comes from him. But we are especially brothers in God, who created us and whom we are trying to reach, in our own ways, through faith, prayer and worship, through the keeping of his law and through submission to his designs.[11]
The document Nostra Aetate had connected this idea with the paternity of God, stating:
We cannot truly pray to God the Father of all if we treat any people in other than brotherly fashion, for all men are created in God's image. Man's relation to God and man's relation to his fellow men are so dependent on each other that the Scripture says "he who does not love, does not know God" (1 Jn 4:8) (NA 5).
This is a very Christian approach but it can be shared by others. Jews, I think, would have no difficulty with this statement, particularly as it is taken as the basis for condemning discrimination. The text puts this very strongly:
Therefore, the Church reproves, as foreign to the mind of Christ, any discrimination against people or any harassment of them on the basis of their race, color, condition in life or religion (ibid.).
Muslims could object to the name of Father given to God, but they accept the idea of human dignity rooted in being God's creation. Buddhists would not want to speak of God, but they could accept the idea of the human family as part of the interdependence of all things. The common commitment in solidarity can be strengthened by sharing these religious motivations.
Love gives the capacity for empathy, sharing in both the joys and sorrows of others. The ready international response to the disasters caused by the tsunami is an expression of the sense that we belong to one human family. Yet tensions have been noted. Some opposition was expressed in Aceh, Indonesia, with regard to accepting aid from Christian organizations. This opposition was motivated by a fear that such aid was being used as a tool for converting people to Christianity. It is good to learn that a Christian organization, "Keep Kids off the Street", has been able to agree with the large Indonesian Islamic organization, Muhammadiyya, to build a home in Aceh for orphans. This only goes to show the need for transparency in humanitarian work, and the usefulness of dialogue. The problems of this world are so great that the efforts of all are required to solve them. This means that religious forces should work together, but for this to happen confidence needs to be established and maintained, and this cannot come about without dialogue. It is necessary to decide together what is to be done, what means are going to be used to achieve the goal set, and to apportion clearly the responsibilities, including financial responsibility. This "dialogue of action" is the way forward taken by the Catholic body, Carits Internationalis, with an Islamic humanitarian organization, Islamic Relief.
The multi-religious organization, the World Conference: Religions for Peace (WCRP), has been active in bringing persons of different religions together to tackle current problems. A number of interreligious councils have been set up to monitor local situations. In Uganda, for instance, the interreligious council set up by WCRP has been encouraging the common commitment of religious bodies to combat the scourge of AIDS. Others too have been active in promoting interreligious cooperation. The Lutheran World Federation is holding this year its second Summit of religious leaders of Africa. The World Islamic Call Society, already mentioned, will be present at this summit and is looking to coordinate its efforts with representatives of the Catholic church.
Many other initiatives could be mentioned. It can surely be said that they all contribute to tending humanity's wounds, and therefore to creating a world which is healthier and more peaceful. Yet conflicts still rage, calling out for resolution. A second expression of love will be needed here, namely forgiveness. When injury is done there is a temptation for the injured party to strike back, but retaliation only perpetuates the cycle of violence. That is why Pope John Paul II, in his letter for the Day of Peace 2002, stated that there can be peace without justice, and no justice without forgiveness. An earlier message, that of 1997, had been entitled Offer Pardon and Receive Peace. Peace is not possible unless pardon is both given and received, for without it the wounds of past wrongs only fester, to break out again in violent reactions. To the representatives of different religions gathered in Assisi on January 24, 2002, John Paul II shared once more this deep conviction. While acknowledging that "situations of oppression and exclusion are often at the source of violence and terrorism", he went on to stress the need for forgiveness, "because human justice is subject to frailty and to the pressures of individual and group egoism." He went on: "Forgiveness alone heals the wounds of the heart and fully restores damaged human relations."[12] It is love, making allowances for human frailty, which gives the ability to forgive, and this forgiveness is essential to the restoration of peace, for it opens up the possibility of beginning again, of making a new start, on a renewed basis, in a restored relationship.
Can any examples be given of interreligious cooperation in this field? I have met, in Kaduna, a city of Northern Nigeria which has seen grave clashes between Christians and Muslims, members of both these communities who are working together to resolve the tensions. Not only are they active themselves, but they are handing on the skills of conflict resolution to younger members of their communities. A former functionary in the Council of Europe has set up the International Communication and Leadership School. This body has organized workshops for young people of different religions in areas where conflicts have taken place, for example in the cities of Bradford and Leicester in the U.K., in Indonesia and in Pakistan. Friendships are made as skills are learnt. Emulation is in fact an important element in interreligious dialogue, as it is in ecumenical dialogue. The Government of Kazakhstan organized an interreligious meeting for peace in Astana, the capital, in September 2003. One of the persons present was Dr Somaiya, the founder of a Hindu university in Mumbai. He was so impressed by the atmosphere of the meeting in Astana that he has now just recently organized a meeting, in Mumbai, of Christians, Hindus and Muslims. When one realizes the communal conflict that is continually breaking out in India, particularly between Hindus and Muslims, such an initiative can truly be considered a contribution to peace.
Freedom
Freedom is essential to peace for it allows people to act responsibly. A solution that is imposed from above, and not accepted willingly, will not last. This is why it is important that peace processes not be confined only to select negotiators; the process needs to be shared with the populations involved in the conflict.
Pacem in Terris, after having mentioned first the right to life and all the means necessary to sustain life, moves on to freedom. Here is the key passage:
Moreover, man has a natural right to be respected. He has a right to his good name. He has a right to freedom in investigating the truth, and --- within the limits of the moral order and the common good -- to freedom of speech and publication, and to freedom to pursue whatever profession he may choose. He has the right, also, to be accurately informed about public events (12).
The proviso about respect for the moral order and the common good calls attention to the limits of this right. Access to information has to be combined with the necessary respect for confidentiality in some areas. Libelous assertions or incitements to hatred cannot be justified on the grounds of freedom of speech. Yet the principle of freedom remains, to be respected both in the private and the public sectors.
Religions have a role to play in safeguarding this fundamental right. They are, or can be, a significant part of a communications network. They help to form public opinion. They have a duty to educate people about the issues that concern society, particularly from the moral aspect. They must be concerned about inculcating respect and protecting human dignity. Their voices will be more powerful if they can be joined together. Hence the importance of joint statements by religious leaders, whether emanating from established interreligious bodies or ad hoc groups. In order to accomplish this task, religious bodies themselves need to enjoy freedom.
The encyclical thus goes on to enunciate this other basic freedom:
Also among man's rights is that of being able to worship God in accordance with the right dictates of his own conscience, and to profess his religion both in private and in public (14).
Pope John Paul II has been even more radical, identifying religious freedom as the most basic human right after the right to life. In his peace message for 1999 he put it this way:
Religion expresses the deepest aspirations of the human person, shapes people's vision of the world and affects their relationships with others: basically it offers the answer to the question of the true meaning of life, both personal and communal. Religious freedom therefore constitutes the very heart of human rights.
It must be observed that this principle of religious freedom has a public, a communal dimension. It cannot be reduced to a merely private matter. There cannot be harmony in a given society if certain sectors of it feel oppressed on religious grounds. Respect for religious freedom is therefore a factor in establishing and maintaining peace.
It is obvious that this principle and its application have to be part of ongoing interreligious dialogue. Religious leaders may not themselves be able to rectify abuses of religious freedom, but they can put pressure on governments that may be guilty of such abuses and at the same time help to create a public opinion favorable to greater freedom in the religious domain.
In certain countries legislation has been introduced, or proposed, forbidding "unethical conversions". If what is banned is proselytism, that is the use of undue means to bring about conversion to a particular religion, then such legislation may be considered justified. If, however, any passage from one religion to another is forbidden, then there is a radical contradiction of a fundamental aspect of the principle of religious freedom. Let me quote again John Paul II in the same message of 1999:
(The) inviolability (of religious freedom) is such that individuals must be recognized as having the right to change their religion, if their conscience so demands. People are obliged to follow their conscience in all circumstances and cannot be forced to act against it. Precisely for this reason, no one can be compelled to accept a particular religion, whatever the circumstances or motives.
It is readily understood that a religious sanction may be applied by the authorities of a religion on a person who leaves that religion to join another -- canon 1364 of the Code of Canon Law lays down that an apostate from the faith incurs automatic excommunication -- but the change of religion should not entail deprivation of civil rights. This is a delicate topic, one on which dialogue is already taking place but needs to be pursued.
There is also the question of "reciprocity", the equal treatment of religious minorities. This concerns first of all the possibility of having places of worship, or even more minimally, the possibility of gathering for worship without being harassed by security forces. It is not sufficient for the civil authorities to say that people can pray at home. Religion has a communitarian aspect which has a right to find expression in common worship. Religious communities should also have the right to freedom of expression, the possibility to publish materials for the education of their members, and also to import such materials. Furthermore these communities should have the right to propagate their views to others. There does need to be a respect for public order, so it is understandable that the authorities would ban any form of preaching or publication which is disrespectful of the religion of the majority, or indeed of any religious community. It is nevertheless a violation of the right to religious freedom if communities are condemned to a clandestine existence.
Let me conclude this section by quoting from a non-Catholic source, a report of a regional consultation organized in India, in the Fall of 2003, by the Network for Interfaith Concerns in the Anglican Communion:
"We believe that it is crucially important that Christian interfaith work should embrace advocacy for the Church in places where it is under persecution, or where its freedom to propagate the Gospel, to engage in mission and ministry, and to welcome new members is denied. More widely, we recognize an obligation to be in solidarity with all religious minorities where their fundamental rights are under attack."
In divided societies and a divided world where religious difference is often used or perceived as a cause of conflict and destruction, we affirm that working for reconciliation between different faith communities is a responsibility laid upon us by God, and that as Christians we must do this in partnership with members of other faith communities, with secular organizations, and with all people of good will. Our vocation to share in God's work of reconciliation requires us to strive to build up open, trusting and honest relationships with our neighbors of other religions, even in situations where this is very difficult. We see such interreligious reconciliation as an integral part of the mission of God in which we share.[13]
Prayer
Truth, justice, love, freedom -- four pillars of peace. To these I would be inclined to add a fifth, namely prayer. We know our weakness, and how difficult it is to live up to these principles. We need to implore God's help. Blessed John XXIII drew attention to this. He presented peace as:
An order that is founded on truth, built up on justice, nurtured and animated by charity, and brought into effect under the auspices of freedom.
So magnificent, so exalted is this aim that human resources alone, even though inspired by the most praiseworthy good will, cannot hope to achieve it. God Himself must come to man's aid with His heavenly assistance, if human society is to bear the closest possible resemblance to the kingdom of God (167-168).
John Paul II has shown his deep conviction of this need by inviting representatives of different religions to pray for peace, in Assisi, first in October 1986, and again in January 1993 for peace in Europe and in particular the Balkans, and more recently in January 2002. The "spirit of Assisi" has been kept alive, by the annual gatherings organized by the Community of Sant'Egidio, but also by the Organization of Religious Leaders of Japan, under Buddhist inspiration, who have gathered people to pray for peace, on Mt Hiei, every year since 1987, in the first part of August during which occur the anniversaries of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. There have also been innumerable initiatives of interreligious prayers for peace at the local and national levels. I wish to mention one event that took place at Clermont-Ferrand, France, in 1995, during the "calling to mind" (not the celebration) of the ninth centenary of the First Crusade. A friend of mine was asked to preside and moderate a prayer vigil for Jews, Christians and Muslims. He was rather skeptical, but he felt he could not opt out. He was agreeably surprised at what a difference the prayer made. People had been rather cool and distant from one another before the ceremony, but the fact of standing together before God changed the climate. The members of the assembly discovered themselves to be truly brothers and sisters, despite their differences.
Prayer for peace can be a distinct interreligious activity, but prayer should permeate all interreligious endeavors. As the participants in the West Coast dialogue put it:
Prayer is an essential element in the schedule of an interreligious dialogue to sustain the intense conversation.[14]
It is the spirit of prayer that reminds us that in meeting and cooperating with people of other religions we are not seeking the advantage only of our own group, but the good of all. In this way interreligious dialogue can truly be a contribution to peace in the world.
NOTES
[1] Message of His Holiness Pope John Paul II for the celebration of the World Day of Peace, January 1, 2003, no.s 3,4; emphasis in the original.
[2] Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue, Congregation for the Evangelization of Peoples, Dialogue and Proclamation, 1991, no.49.
[3] Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue, Guidelines for Dialogue between Christians and Muslims, New York/Mahwah, N.J., Paulist Press, 1990. This is a second edition, written by Maurice Borrmans (original French edition, Paris, Cerf, 1981), translated by R. Marston Speight. It builds on the first edition which had been prepared by Louis Gardet.
[4] The West Coast Dialogue between American Catholics and Muslims, Friends and not Adversaries: a Catholic-Muslim Spiritual Journey, in Islamochristiana 30(2004) pp.178-9.
[5] Ibid. pp.182, 186-7.
[6] Central Committee for the Great Jubilee of the Year 2000, Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue, Towards a Culture of Dialogue, Vatican City, 2001, p.80.
[7] ibid. pp.86-87.
[8] Message for the Day of Peace, 2003, no.3.
[9] Cf. Islamochristiana 28(2002) pp.178-179.
[10] Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue, Peace: a Single Goal and a Shared Intention, Vatican City, 2002, p.93
[11] John Paul II, To Representatives of Muslims of the Philippines (Davao, February 20, 1981), in Gioia, loc.cit.no.363, emphasis in the original.
[12] Cf. Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue, Peace: a Single Goal and a Shared Intention, Vatican City, 2002, p.90.
[13] Cf. Pro Dialogo 115 (2004/1), pp.93-94.
[14] Cf. Islamochristiana, 30(2004) p.174.

TO THOSE WHO ARE HARRASSING AND THOSE WHO ARE SUPPORTING THEM:

2005-12-10T04:05:00.000-08:00

In the name of God,
When some with extreme and unrealistic mottos, knowingly or unknowingly engage in brutal activities, they represent the Islam religion in the world’s mind, as a religion based on sword and pressure, with no value for human lives. When these things happen, I find the best reaction is to is to publicize the actions, to prove to the humane world that the Islam religion and their followers are not against human life, but value it highly.
Therefore, I have written in calligraphy the Holy Book of Torah, which is accepted as a Holy Book by Jews and Christians, and they have a special respect for it. I asked a respectable artist to gild it with gold.
In 2001, after I illuminated the Holy Book of Torah, in an announcement, I presented the simplified version as a symbol of respect toward humans and humanity, ideas and different ideologies, peace and peaceful co-existence among people of different religions.
This event brought different reactions. Some of the world’s politicians and educators supported me with their emails. On the other hand, some inside Iran, without understanding the motive for what I did, have made accusations that I have preached some bad religion, and some say that I am receiving money form Zionists. Some who had a little bit of understanding didn’t care about it and ignored it.
I heard all kinds of accusations and instead of answering this nonsense, even though I had a lot of restrictions and was under a lot of emotional stress, I wrote in calligraphy the Psalm Book, from the Book of David, into two languages----Farsi and Hebrew
After I illuminated the book of Miramar, I announced it to the world, while the world was witnessing the brutal beheading of some innocent people, by those who pretended they were Muslim. The only result of this kind of activity was to embarrass the Islam religion in the world. I feel sorry for those who act as Islam followers, but don’t say anything against this kind of activity while they were making accusations against me because I had said to all humans, no matter what their religions are, I love you and I value your life. However, some people did not like that, and they made a campaign and issued a verdict against me.
During these years, I heard all kind of accusations, and I didn’t say anything, hoping one day that the fanatics will realize living in the world takes a special manner of living, but unfortunately, my silence gave some people the idea that they could threaten me. I warn those people and their supporters who don’t like my ideas because these are against theirs and those who want to destroy the books of Torah and psalms and stop the simplifying of the Holy Book of Angel, which I am working on at the moment. This time, I warn them directly. If I am silent in front of the fanatics, it doesn’t mean I am afraid. I know my values.
My silence is not because I am afraid of anyone, any group, or any system. The only one I am afraid of is God. But from now on, I will react to any unreasonable activities and I am not concerned about anybody, no matter what title they have. I am not the kind of person who wants to cause turmoil. I always was a follower of the idea of peacefulness---peace and friendship. I have said this many times in writing and verbally. I have not been associated with any group or political group. I don’t have any hostility toward any group of any policy. I distance myself from politics. . My living expenses are from my income, and I don’t owe anyone any money. I don’t have anything in this world and I don’t have anything to loose, but if some fanatics draw a sword to force me to do something, they can be sure I won’t remain silent, and at that point I will not recognize any boundaries.
I won’t accept any nonsense or unrealistic words and I will never give up publicizing my ideas. I will not destroy the Holy Book of Torah and psalms, and if someone tries to do so, I will break his hand. I am not going to stop the simplification of the Book of Angel, and as far as I may live I will do my best to write in calligraphy the Book of Avesta. I am not afraid to die, and it is a shame for you. Don’t despise the holy religion of God, otherwise, God will punish you, and at that time it will be too late. . I have said, many times, if you are Muslim, I will stay away from this kind of Islam.
I want to repeat my words, and I believe in them. To all of you who are Jewish, Christian, Muslim, Zoroastrian, Buddhists, Bahain, and to those who have no religion, I love you and I value your life. However, it is hard for the narrow-minded to accept. I hope that God will show all of us the right way to love each other and value humanity, regardless of their ideas or religions.
Iran-Tehran
10/12/2005
AbdolHamid Masoumi Tehrani

What is Islam religion?

2005-11-18T16:08:00.000-08:00

In the name of God, The Compassinate, The merciful
Praise be to God and Greeting to all prophets and messengers.
The word of “Islam” has used by people, groups and governments in different times .
In current era also this word nearly uses in all of the world . The word of “Islam” is explains collection of the ideas and the commands of God, that we have them in form of “Book and Tradition”. Why this word and collection has different definitions or contrast ?
In this meeting the writer intends to discuss about this word and God-willing in another meeting he will speak about areas and details of it .
What is the meaning of “Islam”?
The word of “Islam” is the infinitive of “Efall” verbs that its root is “Salama”, it has different meanings in Arabic language, but among its meanings which be used here is the meaning of healthiness, submition and giving up, due to this meaning if the roots of “Islam” is “healthiness and correctness” its meaning is to be healthy and to be correct, if its root is submition that meaning is to be obey and obedience and if its root is givingup, its meaning is to be give up, for this reason the word of Islam means : to be healthy and to be correct of mind, idea and soul by obeying, submitting and giving up the commands and orders of God, this is the comprehensive meaning that it has chosen from some Quranic verses for Islam. The aforementioned definition is meaning of Islam.
What is Islam religion?
Now the religion of Islam has a special definition. When told you: Islam, designed in your mind Saudi Arabia, Mohammad, Koran and historical events of 1400 years ago, in fact this definition has stabilized among religious scholars, so the religion of Islam means Arabic religion in which mohammad has been raised up in mecca in 1400 years ago and has stabilized it.
This definition has been chosen from historical events, cultural, racial and ethnical but it don’t introduce mohammad to founder the religion of Islam, but according to some verses its founder is Abraham, (1) (2) even he called himself to guidance by God in the straight path and in fact harping at Abraham’s honest faith . (3)
Therefore in the view point of Koran Islam hasn’t limited to one custom, according to this theory Islam is a verb that indicates the acts and behavior .
Moslem is fael noun of Efall verbs, it means that; someone with will and satisfaction withoutpredestination has yield to commands of god, this word in Koran except for Arabs and some who had beliefed to custom of Mohammad has named to another persons, for example; Koran to be called Moslem the children of Jacob because they dedicated themselves to Him and obeyed his cammands and apostles said to Jesus : we beliefed to god and to bear witness that our Moslems. (4)(5) Koran to be named Moslem the Jews, Christians, Zoroastrian and the followers of Mohammad (6)Islam has three main principle that who dose belief to it Moslem.
First, Monothism means The sole One worship, Second, believe in the Resurrection Day and Third, to encourage people in doing good deeds means Philanthrophism. These three tenets to be called the principle of faith. Religiouns scholars said :these tendencies are against with opinipn of Koran.
The three main principles are common among all of the religious. In the religion of jews the commands is (7) and in the religion of Christians has said thes principles in the Matthias Good-News and it also was exist in the Zoroastrianism, some who believed in which their prophet was not real and the religion of Zoroaster is a trrestrial not heavenly some verses existed in avesta , for example the sole one worship (Ahora . Mazda) who is superior of all creature (8) He has the just arbiter (9) The sole god who is with self-wise power created the truth always is same and dosen’t change (10). Furthermore about Hear-after and The Resurrection Day have many verses, like this verse : promising reward in paradise of Mazda , Homan and esha will awarded to them for doing any kind good-deeds. (11)
Many modern beliefs of Iranian has been resulted of Zoroastrianim. [Be refer Polytheist book ].
Religion is common among all of the creation, but their languages are different.
Each tribes Praying god with one language; Arabs said: Allah, persions Alvahim inall cases its meaning is the same, so the basis of Islam has been basedon the three mentioned axes that Prophets expressing them for mankind in diverse forms and language and their targets were not just then people , but later descendants in all eras.
In other verse He said: If some one was been chosen another religion , it didn,t accept him and any Person has been the followers of Abraham tobesalva ted. (12)
Why the religion of Islam has limited to one custom ? And why exists many diverse ideas ? This discition has many different reasons in which the writer will state a summary of it .
Absolutism custom
The first reason that has been caused we have many religione, exists in Absolutism custom among the followers of it. Religions have same tenets that are Monotheism, believe in The Resurrection Day and Philanthropism, but each sects and groups have special Customs (rites) whereby they can shows their servitude (e.x: the form of praying among them are different), Unfortunately the followers of religion absoluted their habits and also to be denied the customs of another sect, the aforesaid cases to been called the Branches of faith. In Islamic theological center doesn’t any discussion about principels when theological students enter to it, they learned the litrature of Arab in first step and then to be understand those three tendencies.
This attitudes has been in the mission of Mohammad between Jews and Christians in Arabia.
He was remove of people any sort of doubt, any form of dualism and make them aware of the Hear after, paradise and Hell.
The Jwes of Maddineh were not agree with Mohammad because He hasn’t do the acts of them, this idea had been Absolutism custom. God has down the verse for the Jews and Christs that they were absoluted their customs and attributed it to Abraham.
He said: Abraham was neither the custom of Jews nor the custom of Christ, He was only a pure Moslem.(13)
God expediently sends prophets on mission to make humankind understand the pnincipel of faith not to be taken them to Absolutism custom. In spite of these speech the prophet, Book and devotional language of the followers of Mohammad was common, they Just have quarrel in branches and nobody paying attention to it. (e.x: Get ready for praying God, Hajj rites, marriage-Divorce). The verse existsin koran that it is very important, let’s look at it; obelievers of the Book! Come to an equitable proposition between us and you that we shall not serve any but God and we shall not associate aught with Him, in continues said: that some of us shall take others for lords besides Allah (14) In this verse the mearing of lord is master, in Arabic language Rabb means owner, sir, reformer, the word Rabb in konan uses for God.
What is the meaning of <ارباباً من دون الله >? its mean the masters that didn’t call themselves God, even shall not associate aught with Him, they are only deputier for people so the meaning of this section is land you shall not accept every person the deputier or authorities from God. There fore, in all religions the principle of faith is more important than the brandes one.
2-Believein to being tampered the Torah and Good-News Books.
The second reason is related to Holy Books (Torah and Good-News), religious scholars to be believed that these Books have been al tered, they say: Torah and Good-News were not the Books of Moses and Jesus that had brought them, we read in historical events, Torah has disappeared for attacks of some tribes suchas Babylons, Romans, then has been collected. This Book made the base of the Jews on one side and some sect of Christs on the other side, it hasn’t written then by Azra in the year of 444(B.C).
Historical religious scholars due to Good-News Litrature said: it has been compiled in first and second century (A.D).
With briefview in the history of written the holy books can prove its alteration.
This subject is very important that you know, Mohammad has been raised up to prophet in 612 or 613 (A.D) and last time that Torah has been re-written in the year of 444 (B.C), from that history to the mission of Mohammad was ab, ut 1055 years and as such time Torah has been re-written by Azra and among Jews recognized to Holy Books.
In the mission of Mohammad the creed of christs had conquered the European continent, some areas of Asia some Africans contrys suchas Abyssinian and Good-news Book among christs (to be al terated or not) organized the base of this creed.
When did this alteration happen?
Before the mission of Mohammad or after His decease?
If they were alterated before His mission, God any thing say in koran and he has criticized the Jews and christs because they didn’t observed the commands of God, also refused some verses and said to them: in the view point of religion, you are worthless unless obeying the instructions of Goog-News (15). On the another place said: Torah is a complete book to word the soul and thought of A Real Human and toward the mercy and guidance to all creature (16).
The verse is in koran that many persons paying at tention to it, in this verse said: one who wrote book and said, God sent down (17)
First, the nature of this verse is the Telmood Book [Telmood Book describes problems of the Jews] second, this verse is the unque news against of many verses in which they has con firmed the Torah and Good-News, third, it doesn’t depend on these books.
If its alterations has being after dead of Mohammad, logically this theorv isn’t true, because in the mission of Him, their religions and the Holy Book with any forms had confirmed among them and noperson can not manipulating to it. Such claims are only absurd fanaticisms, even to be use for koran. In O,sool-e-cafi (18) to talce averse from sadeg(A.S), He said: The koran that Gabriel has brought for Mohammad, have been 17000 verse, and now in ourage, Koran has 6660 verse (If in the name of God in each sura has a verse) whereupon of this tradition, has been stolen about 11000 verse and nobody understand it.
3-The Koran Book is abrogating the ancient Books.
The third reason has been causesd to be limited Islam to special meaning and custom.
The Islamic scholars said: The last and most perfect heaveniy Book is Koran, so the ancient Books have any validity.
Firstly, what is the meaning of ancient Books that Koran has abrogated them? (The alteration Books or the stolenone) If Torah and Good-News don’t have any validity; why we think of saviour of the end of time will been shows the stolen Holy Books to people. Secondly, These ideas has been resulted from which verse.
There isn’t any verse in Koran that it has fall into oblivion the validity of ancient Holy Books. [In Koran, He has not denied the Jews and Christian on one hand and according to some verse the only reason that God has sent Mohammad in which He tobe confirmed the Torah and Good-News heavonly Books.
If He said: Torah and Good-News were correct and then said: my koran has disappeared the validity of these Books (This speech is false). Mohammad in His mission era didn’t request them to desisted of their religions and believed in to His custom (because they had the followers of Abraham before the mission of Mohammad.20)
Besides He has expected of them that they confirmed His custom and Book, to be helped Him against in the attacks of polytheists, so that they were being the followers of Abraham, according to aforesaid reasons the Jews and Christs (resident in Arabia) has taken the absolutism custom, and didn’t assist Him (at last fighted with him) furthermore those fights being continue without any corret logic and reason, so Koran dosen’t abrogating the ancient Books and It has follow them.
4- The absolutism custom of racial and nation.
The most fundamental and important reason that has caused Islam exclusive to one custom, is the absolutism custom of racial and nation.
This attitudes belong to most nations and tribes, for instance; old Iranian called themselves the race of Arya [Arya in ancient persion litrature was sir and Master] or some of American Indian have a story about their race; they said: God for created Adam made four statue with mud and placed them in oven, in few moments He brought out one of those and see it wasn’t cooked well, for this reason called them Whites, after minutes brought out another one and see its color little changed but it was not cooked well so called them Yellow, for the third time He brought out another statue and see completely cooked, its color was very beautiful, therefore called them Indian Red, finally God forgot to brought out the fourth statue and that ones been burnt so called them Blacks.
This story is myth and has been selected from the oriental ideas but denoted those tendencies and racial absolutism.
Jews said: we are the children of God, our race is the best in world or even Zerman said: my race is the master of all creatures, these opinions are false and indicates the absolutism racial and nation.
At last the religion of Islam between Jews and Christs converted to racial, inherent habits and useless rites.
Mohammad has raised up in environment that existed many problems and He tried to established the unique nation, Fraternity & friendship, honesty and sincerity during His mission, the policy of Mohammad in era shown this realities also He was intended to replaced merits and competence.
The best confirmer of history is the primary events of Islam. You recognized Balal, he was the followers of Mohammad that polytheists of Mecca have tortured him but didn’t retreat of his belief when the religion of Islam was settled in Madineh the extreme responsibility that prophet gave to him had Muezzin of Mosque (one who calls people to prayer) in other side, Kaled the son of valid (he had been one of the stronger enemies of Moslems in which in Ohod war was caused Moslems defeated) when he believed in Islam in seven Hegira year at once Mohammad gave him the commands of Moslems army and also has been sent on to the war commission.
This behavior shown the prophet of Islam has paying attention to merit and competence not to tribe of people and their belief because for doing the social, political and military duties was need to these abilities.
The prophet of Islam had not succed to disappeard the prejudices because many times the Moslems of Maddineh [Ansar: some who lived in Maddineh, Mohajerin: some who emigarated to Maddineh ] encountered disputes, the most important event that proved the speech of writer, it was the problem of Saqifeh the son of Saedeh (the place in which to been counseled it) Mohammad dead after 23 years of his mission, at once Ansar were collected in Saqifeh for choose Kalifeh that Mohajerin to be awared of this gathering and entered to Saqifeh (because they frightened in which Ansar selected Kalifeh among themselves and to swear allegiance whit him), their criterion for choosing Kalifeh was superiority in Islam, battle for God and the affinities with Mohammad. The skill and merit wasn’t important for them. Even Ameerul Momineen (A.S) said: we are the generation of Mohammad and you have certainly known that I am the most rightful of all others for the Caliphate. In general Mohammad has not succed to disappear the prejudices of Arab even among His family.
There isn’t any logically reason for conquerness of Moslem in the Abobakr and Omar era.
These fightings has resulted from superiorities and absolutism of Arabs.
Apparently the attacks of Arabs to different countries has not for promotion the religion of Islam but their purpose had advertised the culture of Arab to another nations, besides this when they conquerd anyplace, to be change the religion, custom, language and culture. Now most countries that you recognized them to the name of Arabs, never been Arabs such as Egypt, Morocco, Libya, Sudan, even Iranian and Turkish didn’t protect from this offense, but Iranian has retained their culture and language, additionally Iran in the member of Islamic countries, yet dosen’t belonging to Arab countries. (Iran that had belonging to Sasanian era have including parts of Afghanistan, Pakestan, Azarbaejan, Armanestan, Torkamanestan and Iraq) these aforesaid countries were Moslems but not Arabs.
Furthermore these attacks and conquests of Arabs have caused that the religion of Islam (specially among Moslems) turned to the religion of Sword and Fatalism, and you see that on the flag of Soudi Arabia has been written the word God is Unique and Mohammad is the Messenger of God) and under it exist the form a Sword, what is your purpose about it?
The result of this argument is that the religion of Islam has the unique religion whit different custom and rites like Jews, Christendom and Arabs that we called them Islam.

Bibliography
1: The Family of Imran Sura(67)
2: The Cow Sura(131)
3: The Cattle Sura (161)
4: The Cow Sura (133)
5:The Family of Imran (52)
6: The Story Sura (52)
7: Torah, Exit Book, Part 20
8: Yasna (28)
9: Yasna (4-29)
10: Yasna (7-31)
11: Yasna (10-30)
12, 13, 14: The Family of Imran(85-67-64)
15: The Tabble Sura (68)
16: The Cattle Sura (154)
17: The Cow Sura (79)
18: The Osool Kafi Book (The forth Cover, 3582)
19: The Cow, The Family of Imran, The Tabble and the Fater Sura (97-3-48-31-19)
20: The Tabble Sura (43)

عيد نزول تورات مبارك

2005-10-25T12:29:00.000-07:00

ויאמר אלהם שימו לבבכם לכל-הדברים אשר אנכי מעיד בכם היום אשר תצום את-בניכם לשמר לעשות את-כל-דברי התורה הזאת: כי לא-דבר רק הוא מכם כי-הוא חייכם ובדבר הזה תאריכו ימים על-האדמה אשר אתם עברים את-הירדן שמה לרשתה: דברים (לב , מו-מז

روز نزول تورات ( סימכה תורה ) بر يهوديان جهان بخصوص برادران و خواهران يهودي ايراني مبارك باد

يادي از مردي بزرگ

2005-04-04T13:58:00.000-07:00

جهان بشريت شاهد از دست دادن شخصيتي بي‌نظير بود كه در طول بيست وشش سال رهبري ديني مسيحيان كاتوليك جهان، تمامي همت خود را مصروف احياء و ترويج معنويات در جوامع مسيحي و ايجاد صلح و دوستي بين ملل و اديان كرد
پاپ جان پل دوم توانست در طول دوره‌ي رهبري خود، كليساي كاتوليك را به قدرتي معنوي و تأثير گذار تبديل كند. او اين كار را نه با شعار و توهين و تكفير ديگران، كه با محبت و احترام به مخالفانش انجام داد
به هر كشوري كه پا گذاشت به احترام مردم آن كشور خاضعانه زمينش را بوسيد و كسي كه قصد جانش را نمود با محبتي پدرانه در آغوش كشيده و سر بر شانه‌اش نهاد
اميد است رفتار اين مرد بزرگ سر مشقي براي رهبران ديني ديگر اديان باشد
يادش گرامي و راهش مستدام باد

قابل توجه رهبران ديني مسلمان

2005-04-04T13:50:00.000-07:00

پاپ جان پل دوم علي‌رغم اعتقادش به كتاب قرآن بر آن بوسه زد؛ و به اين وسيله زيبايي، لطافت، احترام به مخالف و منطق بالاي كليساي كاتوليك را به جهان اثبات نموده و در تاريخ ثبت كرد. رفتاري كه رهبران ديني مسلمان از آن بي‌بهره‌اند
در خانه اگر كس است يك حرف بس است

The Manifesto of Islamic Terrorism ‏‏‏and Peace International

2005-02-07T06:22:00.000-08:00

In the name of God, the Compassionate, the Merciful
In year of 2001, when the writer finished the holy book of Torah, which was written as a symbol of peace between the followers of different religions, respect for humans and humanity, and opposition to war and bloodshed just because of some religious beliefs, the September 11 tragedy happened.
After that time, the life of humanity and international security has been ventured by a very dangerous tumult.
Some egotist fools and self-proclaimed followers of truth, in the name of the holy Islamic Sharia, have defied the life of humanity and international security.
The Islamic fascists have shamelessly called their criminal acts "Jihad," and their suicide attempts "Estesh'had."
Unfortunately, in spite of all the abuses that have done to Islam and Muslims, the Islamic scholars do not pay attention to the injustice and religious innovations; and they do not seek a remedy for protection of Islamic religious law (Sharia).
In fact, the neglect and conservatism of real Islamic scholars and the activities of religious hypocrites is the cause of Islamic fascism. Without a doubt, the Islamic fascism will some day devour both sides.
I, as an Islamic religious scholar, proclaim that: the religious law is innocent from terrorism; and the terrorist parties, institutions and governments who have put the Sharia as the shield of their activities, know nothing of the holy Sharia, and do not represent Islam and Muslims.
I warn the world real Islamic scholars that, if they continue to remain silent without any reason and do not take up a fortified against Islamic fascism, they have abused justice and are accountable before God.
I, representing myself and all those many Muslims who agree with me, specially Iranian Muslims, proclaim my dislike and disagreement with terrorists and terrorism.
I confess that not only I do not believe in Islamic fascism, but also I will do my best to fight against it.
In this important time, I present this precious book of Psalms of David, which is adorned with gold and other beautifications, and is written by me and my assistant in both Persian and Hebrew in 15th of July, 2004, as a good news of a peaceful future, and a symbol of respect for the followers of different religions, and as a gift to all survivors of world terrorism, specially the survivors of September 11 tragedy.
I also present the holy book of Gospel, which I am now writing in English, as a gift to all survivors of terrorist attacks.
I proclaim the massage of life, security, and peace. I proclaim to all Jews, Christians, Zoroastrians, Buddhists, Muslims, Baha'is, and atheists, that I love them and respect them.
We pray for the day the all humans live together with peace.

IRAN – TEHRAN
6/February/2005
AbdolHamid Masoumi Tehrani

Specifications of Psalm Book

2005-02-04T21:16:00.000-08:00

Dimension : 25 X 35 .
The number of page : 570 sheet(All page has been Illumination and gold Filled).
Language: persian / Hebrew .
Calligraphist: Abdolhamid Maasoumi Tehrani .
Illumination by: Mehdi Bahman .
The amount of gold: 5000 leaf gold (24-carat gold) .
Date of commence activities: 12 / April / 2001.
Date of finish: 15 / July / 2004 .

Two first page of Psalm Book

2005-02-03T20:12:00.000-08:00

Two first page of Psalter for David

2005-02-03T20:09:00.000-08:00

Two end page of Psalter for David

2005-02-03T19:23:00.001-08:00

Two end page of Psalm Book

2005-02-03T19:23:00.000-08:00

Specifications of Good News Book

2005-02-02T19:08:00.000-08:00

Dimension : 24 X 34.
Language : English .
Ccalligraphist : Abdolhamid Maasoumi Tehrani .
Illumination by : Mehdi Bahman .
Date of commence activities : 22 / November /2004 .
This Book isn't finish .

Two first page of Good News Book

2005-02-02T19:05:00.000-08:00

2005-01-28T15:37:00.000-08:00

Mr. Mehdi Bahman, Illumination of Torah, Psalm and GoodNews Books

Attention of peace

2005-01-20T13:34:00.000-08:00

In the name of GOD, The compassionate, The merciful.
In the name of GOD,"THE unique GOD", who this world has been created with the science, option and power of him. The unique GOD who does not have any partner, associate, companion, representative, proxy, successor or replacement. Lordship and sovereignty that each national or ethnical knows and reads him with a different. Ahouramazda, Elim, Elwahim, Yahovah, Allah, Brahman, etc.
Brotherhood, friendship, mercy, compassion, cooperation, peace, serenity, sincerity, cordiality, relaxation, personal and social security have been the permanent, constant and ancient desires of the human being in the length of time or duration of the history. The excessive demanding human being, self-superior seer or self-conceited superior, self-correct seer and self-just or fair, have contaminated or involved themselves in the bloodshed of their own mankind and human being many times under the means of nationalities, races, religions, faiths, creeds of right, truth and else. Otherwise they have showed, pretended and accounted the encroachments, injustices, oppressions and cruelty, war and their own bloodshed exactly under the name of the morality, legitimacy, justice and equity.
In these crimes, bloodshed, killing fellow creature of the same of race or another homogeneous, the masters and holders of the money, power, dissimulation and guile have had axial or pivotal role or part, in the duration of history by making nationality, race, religion and faith as a tool or instrument. Sometimes they have appeared themselves in peace and friendship, by slogans and mottoes to hide their belief on the animosity, enmity, hatred and sect or ethnical fanaticism amongst the nations, for deviation of the thoughts and ideas.
This ominous and sinister tradition has been continued generation in generation until now.
Have not been Zoroaster the good, excellent axis and benevolent prophet of ancient Iran killed by the niggard and miser masters and owners of the money, power and dissimulation, with the weapon and of nationality and religion? Have not been the children of Israel or Jews, taken as captive or enslaved and forced as labors or up aid labors with the superior race slogans? Have not the Eramian people have killed their prophet by the weapon of religion in a pit of mud and clay? Have not been Jesus Christ, crossed to protect and support of the Moses religious laws? Have not been in the medieval ages, the men, women, children, scientists and many thinkers killed or burned alive into the fire by becoming the Christ and Mosaic's religion to an instrument? Have not power believers and government lovers, killed many people with their swords with their Islamic slogans? Has not been Hussein, grandchild of the prophet of Islam beheaded in not humanistic method of killing in the name of Islamic religious laws? Have not been millions of old, young and children killed in the name of superior race in the First and Second World War? Are not they killing now our homogeneous with the excuse and pretext of nationality, race, religion and faith clandestinely or openly? Prejudices or fanaticism, self-great seeing, self-right seeing and self-absolute or independent seeing of national, racial, religious and faith has created and imposed much more hardships, troubles, disasters to the human being. The humanity history papers have been or would be blackened.
Now that the human being could discover many secrets of the nature conquer and capture the space, and with the abundance of the scientific and industrial achievements, we should believe this earthy world would be changed to a small village.
Isn't it the right time to leave from these fanaticism, prejudices, self-made hatred, revengeful and avenging of national, racial, religious, faith actions and also leave accusing and impeaching each other? And instead of boasting and priding to our nationality, race, religion and faith, it is better to honor to our humanity and being a noble human being of us.
Isn't it the time to act to the holy books or scriptures and the prophet's religious laws and divine law and some of the peacemakers or reformists whom the ethnical and tribal prejudices have not been imposed over their viewpoints?
Their exalted and eminent meanings and the understandings for acknowledgement and prove of ourselves not to be used and do not change their meanings for the excommunication and accuse of heresy of others.
Don't you think that the right time has reached to refuse those traders of money, power and dissimulation, superstitions distributors and the innovators and heretics who using nationality, race, religion and faith as a tool want us to be enemy against each other and bleed each other's blood on the ground with the feeling of quietness? We should refuse and cease them.
Peace, friendship, corporation and agreement, tranquility, repose, the individual or social security in which is permanent and constant in the world will not be certain and verified unless the mankind leaves all self-superior seeing, self-right seeing, self-absolute seeing of national, racial, religious and faith from himself and refers to his humanistic or philanthropy nature, also acts to the way of holy books and the prophet religious laws and peacemakers as they were and they are and doesn't explain and interpret of these way for his own acknowledgement and sanctification or excommunication and accuse of heresy and demolition of other people. Considering nationality, race, and his own religion mankind should only looks to the other as humankind to his values or his honoring, nothing else.
Therefore now that the mankind has entered the third millenium I advise all the brothers and sisters all over the world to leave the hostility and prejudices of national, racial and religious, to be honored to the humankind and humanity apart from and irrespective the creed and belief or credence faith tendencies and inclinations of religious and national and racial citizenship or allegiance, to the peaceful coexistence, friendly and honorably of the mankind societies in spite of differences of believes and thoughts, attention to the humanistic common affairs and keep aloof from and avoid and refrain from the absolute and inclination and independent searching of belief, culture, nation and race, on the basis and according to the following the holy books and scriptures-which are all remaining God's promises-, not to follow the superstitions, innovations or whimsical, chimerical, innovators and traders of money, power and dissimulation, to move toward the constant peace in the world, coexistence, philanthropy, to avoid from encroachment, injustice, aggression, war and bloodshed and killing the or homogeneous especially with the religious, racial, cultural and national tools, to create a monotheism world-GOD who create all worth to the mankind just for his humanistic and not because of race or kind of worship or prayer.
And with the condition that I am a Moslem and follower of the holy book of Koran in spite of the general tradition among the follower artists of the each religion only write and decorate their sacred book, and in order to show the rightness and correctness of my talks and invitations, I write and decorate the Persian translation of the holy book of Mosaic law in the style of Islamic and Iranian artists-5 volume of Old Testament-which is one of the basic and sacred books of Judaism and Christianity are as a symbol of leaving prejudices and honor to other opinions and other religions with the honesty and trustee in text of the translation by the association of the holy book of Iran printed in 1987 and with the observance of the Judaism and Christianity religious laws, and with the favor of GOD in spite of difficulties and hardship or shortage of severe financial problems, without any kind of material and spiritual helping from the real or legal persons internal or foreign, after passing three years of writing this important book, in the first day of 2001 it was finished and now the pages of this valuable book with the effort and endeavor of some of my cooperators with the special method and style are in the process of illumination and gilding.
This spiritual and valuable literary book in which has been written in Farsi language and has been decorated with the style of Islamic artists will be offered and presented to all of my brothers and sisters from any race, nationality, religion, faith and language, especially to my Jewish and Christian as a clear proof to honoring the mankind, altruism, philanthropy, humanity, peace and sincerely in spite of difficulties of believes, thoughts and cultures and I invite everyone from every race, nationality, religion throughout the world to be my cooperate and support in order to perform the ancient desire of the mankind which indeed is being comfort, having individual or social security and getting in touch with constant peace.
This book is not any kind of propaganda or delivering of any message or acknowledgement of any religion or faith but only hoping that this book causes to create a kind of incentive and motivation for more investigation and survey of our thoughts and actions and also causes avoiding our self-correct seeing, self-superior seeing, self-right seeing and in one term avoiding our own absolute seeing from the view of religions, thoughts or cultures to be found the start point to join of the hearts of all human being all over the world in this new century.
Best regards and may GOD bless you
IRAN - TEHRAN
21 / June / 2001
Abdolhamid Massoumi Tehrani

Specifications of Torah Book

2005-01-19T17:23:00.000-08:00

Dimension : 44 X57 .
The number of page : 590 sheet (All page has been Illumination and gold filled)
Language : Persian ( Translation of Iranlan holy Books association in 1987) .
Calligraphist : Abdolhamid Maasoumi Tehrani .
Decorated by : Mehdi Bahman .
The amount of gold : 15000 leaf gold (24-carat gold .
Date of commence activities : 17 / August / 1997 .
Date of finish : 1 / January / 2001

Torah, Picture's

2005-01-18T20:42:00.000-08:00

Two first Page of Torah Book

Two first Page of Numbers Book

Two first Page of Exist Book

Two first page of Existence Book

Information of Thuggee operation in Israel

2004-12-27T13:51:00.000-08:00

In the name of God, The Compassionate, The Merciful
The Pogrom of the Jew in Israel that has been done by some organization of Palestine is a wrong action and shows the manifestations of terrorism because:
Firstly according to 29 sign of Women sura suicide in Islam is a great sin and every one that perform this tasks, and there awaits them a mighty chastisement.
Basically in the view point of Islam protection of soul is important even in battlefield.
Secondly if a person with will and awareness killed another people has commita premeditated murder and they will be punished because according to 32 sign of The Table sura the premeditated murder has equal with killed all of human.
So the killers that have performed shameful acts as homicide and killing men without any reason, God has prepared for them a painful chastisement.
Thirdly in Islam one action with some motivation and ideas has not many different command because the command of God don't ever change.
In conclusion the challenging of Palestin nations for take self-rightful claims in which they organized the independent country with international frontier and to be formed the enjoying self-government, is national fighting.
The fighting of Palestin nations is to retake the first Kiblah* of Moslem and the Mosque of Jerusalem.
We must pay attention to this point that 6 century prenatal of Mohammad the Mosque of Jerusalem was the Kiblah of Christians and also 9 century prenatal of Jesus was the Kiblah of Jews and Mohammad has spend only one night in the Mosque of Jerusalem, so we conclusion that these places belongs to all Moslem of world.
The operation of Israel army that attacks to Palestin cities and general massacre of sinless people is a foul acts and it has against the Torah commands.
Rabbis must know they don't ignore the rightful claims of Palestins and verily the foremost delight of the eye for rulers is the establishment of justice in the land and the appearance of love for them.
My God, Infuse our heart with mercy, love and kindness for our fellow creature and Grant ours, your pardon and forgiveness, I ask God by the amplitude of His mercy and His tremendous power to grant every desire to bestow upon all Humans in that where in His pleasure success in presenting Him and His creature with a clear justification(for our action).
IRAN – TEHRAN
14 / July / 2002
AbaolHamid Massoumi Tehrani
* : Direction to which Mohammadans turn in Praying

Information of U.S attacks to Afghanestan

2004-12-25T13:41:00.000-08:00

In the name of God, the Compassinate, the Merciful
Terrorism Air attacks to world building and Pentagon in New-York And Washington DC if caused heavy losses of life and property to American nation, but indicative the method of word's progress in current era.
Realities thoughts caused world liberal nations Pay attention to roots and factors of Terrorism phenomenon, and for eradiction of this phenomenon must to think seriously.
Now the purpose of public world want fighted with terrorism and finally Terrorism would to be disappear.
Fightings in which the protector are military power and also the defenders are Just and liberal nations. 11"th" September attacks with all sadness contained many learn and valuable points for humanity and international nations.
Many simple points if in previous era was declared as a important point maybe this events didn't happen but unfortunately international nations went Into a deep sleep.
The writer pay attention to this event once more time and remembered this Important points to humanity societies:
1) If religions has a tools in the control of the ruling and monarchists that its result caused many people killed and also cities destroved.
2) The governments haven't any response in front of self nations and certainly will not any respect for another natios.
History has been shown this dictator governments and criminal men In which they provoke a destructive fights among nations, even self nations haven't any worth for them. Now the writer to cast a glance over previous history : Adolf Hitler between 1925-1927 years in his (My Battle book) state frenzy thoughts abviously.
After he has the ruler of Germany, first he suppressed the Germany nations and then he said : if anyone revolted against him, certainly have been killed.
This section of real history that happened in 20 century, even repeated in current era.
The self-conceited and egotism individuals called self crimes the order of God.
The Algaedeh organization and Taleban rule that claimed they were the ruler of Moslems.
Some persons supposed with diplomatic methods can forced such Organizations and obstinate governmente follow the international Rights, but their thoughts are erroneous.
Unless church governs or Osmani ruler, Fascist in Germany have been controlled with this methods.
How about now?
In conclusion the only method for control the organizations and terrorism Is one powerful confront without any peace.
In addition in attacks and offences many of sinless people have been Killed, whenever the U.N. has condemned aggression against countries.
Why don't take decisive action against anti-humanity rules? The oppressed Afghan people and the other nations must fight with this Organizations so that closer to freedom and peace.
The writer as a Moslem religious scholars in large human societies Always has remined some dangerous thoughts in current era and he takes support of American country because they doing security measures against terrorism.
Now the only method for control the manifestions of terrorism is that measures.
Writers once more has remined to all of human societies especially Islamic world in which to become united for disappeared foolish persons.
If we don't took great measures and wise step in this respect the world will encountering the political crisis.
It is hoped that in 21 century all the enmities change to friendship.
IRAN - TEHRAN
2001 / Oct / 22
Abdolhamid Masoumi Tehrani

Calling People for truths...

2004-11-17T18:18:00.000-08:00

In the name of God, the Compassionate the Merciful
say : O followers of the Book ! come to an equitable proposition between us and you that we shall not serve any but Allah and "that" we shall not associate aught with Him, and "that" some of us shall not take olhers for lords besides Allah; but if they turn back, Then say : Bear witness that we are Muslims. (Koran. 3-64)
God expediently sends prophets on mission to make humankind understand three points.
First, to help them recognize the world creator as well as remind them the sole, Matchless one who created entity through His Knowledge, authority and power. They also were to remove from the people any sort of doubt, any from of dualism and sacrilege stirring them toward "the Sole One worship".
Second, to make people aware of the Day of Reckoning; That any kind of deeds shall be made up in its own way and recorded, even if its a bit until every body is called for the divine judgement "The Resurrection Day & corporal awakeness".
Third, to encourage people in doing good deeds, observing philanthropism and fraternity, Keeping peace and social security, on one hand, and making them beware of hostility, rights trampling and injustice, aggression and dishonored acts and killing and looting, on the other hand.
Considering the messengers' history and temporal-locate situations in which they are delegated__especially that of the Ololazm* ones__disregarding the pre-induced opinions, it'll be seen whenever the three aforesaid tenets fall into oblivion, God sends His messenger to help them__those who have forgotten their Creator, who have considered real or legal objects and individuals as , who have determined an inter-medium, who are far away from final consequences of their deeds, who have forgotten the Day of Judgement, or, think of it as an old myth and something for-fetched, and finally helping those who are along way far from humanity, benevolence and good behaviour and lable their nasty acts with rightousness__come to Sense, inviting them to worship "the only One", reminding them the Last Hour, restoring humanity through expression of divine laws and sowing the seeds of salvation, equanimity and the two world security among people.
The mission of Abraham, Noah, Saleh, Hood, Lout, Jonah, Moses, Jesus, Mohammad and the other prophest (peace be upon them) has been based on the Three mentioned axes.
They were neither touting__advertising their goods-nor were they in persuit of popularity, power, monopoly or wealth; They were but divine messengers and those who were specifying laws and limits and, gerenally, expressing the principles for people in diverse forms and languages; The targets were not just then people, but later descendants in all eras.
But for another time, some forgetfuls, materialists and totalitarianists trampling over the divine laws, as the time passes, and considering pure instructions of prophets as barriers, interpret them willfully, deviating (misleading) people from the three tenets through manipulating divine laws, mandates and spreading cheatful superstitions and finally turn the faith of spritual development, equanimity and liberality into shackes of absolutism and exploitation and using it as a tool to fool gullible mankind; They, thereby, make people engaged in petty activities,bloodshed, tribalism, grouping, false fightings, vain discussions, absurd thoughts and sciences, futile loves and feuds, ineffective cries and prays, fancy foes and unreasoned laughs so that it results in waging a universal war.
Nations renounce the three princioles while proceeding toward out-dated tales, old wreckages and spoiled bones. cleared off the books and appeared in form of "words and polytheism" in society; in form of classes, sects and tribes. Each of the existing sects and schools as__reformists, religious ones, Zionists, on one side, and shiite, sunnite sub-factions, on the other side,__considered itself as the right, true religion while thinking of others as false, polytheist ones; Each pieced its specific strings of stories together, presented its miracle, wrote its book, issued its mandate versified its epics about prodigies, set up its innovations and attributed it, directly or indirectly, to God in order to prove its reality & rightousness people were 'torn' into pieces each of which an oily bite, soft and digestible to the Pharaohs and Nimruds; Those who were not namely "Pharaoh and Nimrud", but of the same customs and habits.
And Now, we live in similar age when momotheism has been replaced by different forms of polytheism and profanity; These two 'tendencies' have penetrated so deeply into our bodies and spirits that, like prophets' contemporary factions, bearing no doubt, we think of them as real salvation and monotheism. We are not a ware of our deeds' consequenses and consider the Last Day among childlike tales, Fraternity & friendship, honesty and sincerity, trusteeship and respect to others, benevolence and philanthropsism, tender and cooperation, peace and intimacy, self-sacrifice and self-denial, sympathising with fellow kind and helping him, humbleness and generousity have lost color within diverse communities being replaced by hostility, lying, treachery and aggression, hypocricy and roguery, formalism and disrespect, malevolence and crime, fighting, looting and bloodshed, insolence and unmanliness, repression and exploitation. Nowadays, we are more badly in shortage of pure divine knowledgesthan ever.
Lets, thus, set aside all that woeds, superstitions, innovations, futile discussions, baseless disagreements, groopings and factionisms and harp at the divine string paying attention to Moses'Ten Instructions, listening to the Jesus'enlivening admonitions, Mohammad's eternal Koran and, infact harping at Abraham's Honest faith.
Lets, praise no 'god' but the only creator of the world; Not to ask for but His assistance and not to put a medium in between. Lets dedicate ourselves to Him and obey His instructions.
Lets, think of our ultimate acts and be sure that even the tiniest ones are recorded, verified and affect our lives in both worlds.
Lets, abstain from nasty deeds and put humanity clothes on.
God sent His last messenger 1400 and more years ago and not any other one follows him. Then, we should instigate an uprisal through praying to God for help, away from false imaginations and sect's impurities, seeking salvation and saving our societies.
IRAN - TEHRAN
31 / December / 1994
Abdolhamid Masoumi Tehrani
__
*.Prophets (5 ones): Noah, Abraham, Moses, Christ and Mohammad.

humanity

2004-11-16T13:09:00.000-08:00

Human is a responsible being. Being committed toward his creator, his body, soul and thought, toward his behavior, fellow kind, his community and environment, 'man' was attributed "the most honorable creature".
As such responsibilities convert to carelessness and indifference, there will emerge egoism, egotism, superiority seeking, totalitarinism, repression and tyranny, aggressions, and the like.
Lets look at 'the' ourselves, our sorroundings, at far distances; Lets see how progress in science and industry has taken spacial distances away, turning the world into a small hamlet. But, our hearts diverge more and more the day after day. Love, friendship, succouring and humanity, in one word, disappears gradually and loses its nature even in the books. Lets look, understand and feel well.
We breathe in an atmosphere infetched with pessimism, distrust, cruelty and heedlessness which have made our spirits poisoned as well as causing us to be some moving dead bodies devoid of any feeling and apathy.
Lets look at 'the' ourselves, our surroundings; Think about ourselves, our environment, justifications, philosophy-weavings and suspicions. Lets renounce despaire and decide to move.
Each of us, of any age or idia wherever lives, try to be "human"; "A Real Human", before becoming a learned man, scholar, inventor, trader, worker, employee or a politician.