Dr Zakir Naik invites Pope Benedict XVI for open interfaith dialogue
The Pakistani Newspaper
Eminent scholar of comparative religion Dr. Zakir Naik has invited Pope Benedict XVI for an open inter-faith dialogue.
The Pope’s recent statement, which included a quote from a 14th century Byzantine emperor, sparked outrage in the Muslim world. In his latest efforts to calm down the Muslim anger the Pope invited diplomats from 20 Islamic countries at his summer residence in south of Rome.
This extraordinary gathering was seen as the latest effort by Benedict XVI to quell the furor stirred two weeks ago by controversial remarks he made about Islam. He is attempting to channel the emotion into what he calls an authentic and respectful dialogue.
Dr. Naik sees the Pope’s statement on Islam as pre-planned. "He (the Pope) knew very well what he was speaking at University of Regensburg in Germany on September 12," he said.
"The Pope’s apology to the Muslims was at all not an apology rather it was putting salt on the wounds," said Dr. Naik, adding that the Pope should have explicitly apologized and retracted his statement.
Benedict XVI seems to be toeing the same line of neo-con as that of President George Bush, he said.
Dr. Naik said if the Pope wants to initiate an authentic dialogue then he is more than willing to participate in such an inter-faith debate.
"I am more than willing to participate in the inter-faith dialogue with Pope Benedict XVI. I am ready on any topic he (the Pope) wishes as long as it focuses on Qur’an and the Bible," Dr. Naik said.
He said he can go to Rome or Vatican to meet the Pope.
"I can go to Rome and to Vatican on my own expense if an Italian visa is arranged for me," he told ONLINE after delivering his lecture on "20 most common questions about misconceptions of Islam," organized by Sri Lankan Embassy in Riyadh, attended by a number of ambassadors, diplomatic staff and members of the Sri Lankan community.
Dr. Naik during the past three years has delivered over 600 lectures in the US and Canada.
"I am absolutely ready for an open and public debate with the pope under live international TV coverage," he said.
Let the 1.3 billion Muslims and 2 billion Christians around the world listen to the debate based on equal slot of time allotted to both sides, he said. "It is not only a debate but also a question and answer session allowing the people to ask queries," he said.
He said he is not in favor of closed-door meeting with the Pope, as was suggested by his predecessor Pope John Paul II, when South African-based Islamic scholar Ahmed Deedat invited him for open dialogue, he said.
"Pope John Paul told Shaikh Deedat to come to his cabin for a debate," he said and added why does the inter-faith dialogue be held behind closed doors?
Dr. Naik said the best way to counter the onslaught on Islam is that the Muslims should have their own media.
"Unfortunately, most of the international media is controlled by the Western (lobby). Unless you (Muslims) have your own media they (Westernerns) can very conveniently convert black into white, day into night, a hero into a villain and a villain into a hero," he said.
Dr. Naik, who has launched his own religious satellite channel called Peace TV, said Muslims do have their own media but what he meant by international media is similar to the Time and Newsweek and TV channels such as the BBC and CNN, when Muslims can project their views and convey the message in right perspective. "I have a future plan to launch a news channel," he said.
He said there are at least 100 Muslims that he knew, who can take such an initiative and launch at least 10 satellite channels. People should not wait for Muslims organizations such as IIRA or OIC to take steps in this direction, he said.
"Any individual businessman can take the initiative if Muslim bodies such as OIC or IIRA are not coming forward in this direction," he said.
Dr. Naik has also endorsed former Malaysian prime minister Mahathir Muhamamd’s views that the Muslims should stop to operate US dollar-denominated bank accounts. "I have been preaching (that) Muslims should stop dealing in dollar," he said.
He also called on the Muslim world to launch an Islamic currency to counter dealing in dollar. Muslim countries should not peg their currencies to the dollar. "By that time the individuals and businessmen should stop dealing in dollar," he said.
He said he has been mobilizing the people wherever he goes asking them not to keep dollar accounts or even the currency. The moment you exchange dollars you simply convert that amount with any currency such as riyal, dirham, dinar or be it yen or euro "but not to keep in dollar-denomination account," he said.
Saturday, September 30, 2006
Enam Pertanyaan Imam al-Ghazali
Suatu hari, Imam al-Ghazali berkumpul dengan murid-muridnya. Lalu Imam beliau bertanya bebeapa hal.
Pertama, "Apa yang paling dekat dengan diri kita di dunia ini?. "
Murid-muridnya ada yang menjawab orang tua, guru, teman, dan kerabatnya. Imam al-Ghazali menjelaskan semua jawaban itu benar. Tetapi yang paling dekat dengan kita adalah "Mati". Sebab itu sudah janji Allah SWT bahwa setiap yang bernyawa pasti akan mati. (QS. Ali Imran 185)
Lalu Imam al-Ghazali meneruskan pertanyaan yang kedua. "Apa yang paling jauh dari diri kita di dunia ini?".
Murid-muridnya ada yang menjawab negara Cina, bulan, matahari, dan bintang-bintang. Lalu Imam al-Ghazali menjelaskan bahwa semua jawaban yang mereka berikan adalah benar. Tapi yang paling benar, ujarnya, adalah "MASA LALU."
Bagaimanapun kita, apapun kendaraan kita, tetap kita tidak bisa kembali ke masa lalu. Oleh sebab itu kita harus menjaga hari ini dan hari-hari yang akan datang dengan perbuatan yang sesuai dengan ajaran Agama.
Lalu Imam al-Ghazali meneruskan dengan pertanyaan yang ketiga. "Apa yang paling besar di dunia ini?".
Murid-muridnya ada yang menjawab gunung, bumi, dan matahari. Semua jawaban itu benar kata Imam Ghozali. Tapi yang paling besar dari yang ada di dunia ini adalah "Nafsu" (QS. Al- a'araf: 179). Maka kita harus hati-hati dengan nafsu kita, jangan sampai nafsu membawa kita ke neraka.
Pertanyaan keempat adalah, "Apa yang paling berat di dunia ini?".
Ada yang menjawab baja, besi, dan gajah. Semua jawaban sampean benar, kata Imam Ghozali, tapi yang paling berat adalah "memegang AMANAH" (QS. Al Ahzab 72). Tumbuh-tumbuhan, binatang, gunung, dan malaikat semua tidak mampu ketika Allah SWT meminta mereka untuk menjadi kalifah (pemimpin) di dunia ini. Tetapi manusia dengan sombongnya menyanggupi permintaan Allah SWT, sehingga banyak dari manusia masuk ke neraka karena ia tidak bisa memegang amanahnya.
Pertanyaan yang kelima adalah, "Apa yang paling ringan di dunia ini?".
Ada yang menjawab kapas, angin, debu, dan daun-daunan. Semua itu benar kata Imam al-Ghazali. Namun menurut beliau yang paling ringan di dunia ini adalah 'meninggalkan SHALAT'. Gara-gara pekerjaan kita tinggalkan shalat, gara-gara meeting kita juga tinggalkan shalat.
Lantas pertanyaan keenam adalah, "Apakah yang paling tajam di dunia ini?".
Murid-muridnya menjawab dengan serentak, pedang. Benar kata Imam al-Ghazali. Tapi yang paling tajam adalah "lidah MANUSIA". Karena melalui lidah, manusia dengan gampangnya menyakiti hati dan melukai perasaan saudaranya sendiri. [hidayatullah.com]
Pertama, "Apa yang paling dekat dengan diri kita di dunia ini?. "
Murid-muridnya ada yang menjawab orang tua, guru, teman, dan kerabatnya. Imam al-Ghazali menjelaskan semua jawaban itu benar. Tetapi yang paling dekat dengan kita adalah "Mati". Sebab itu sudah janji Allah SWT bahwa setiap yang bernyawa pasti akan mati. (QS. Ali Imran 185)
Lalu Imam al-Ghazali meneruskan pertanyaan yang kedua. "Apa yang paling jauh dari diri kita di dunia ini?".
Murid-muridnya ada yang menjawab negara Cina, bulan, matahari, dan bintang-bintang. Lalu Imam al-Ghazali menjelaskan bahwa semua jawaban yang mereka berikan adalah benar. Tapi yang paling benar, ujarnya, adalah "MASA LALU."
Bagaimanapun kita, apapun kendaraan kita, tetap kita tidak bisa kembali ke masa lalu. Oleh sebab itu kita harus menjaga hari ini dan hari-hari yang akan datang dengan perbuatan yang sesuai dengan ajaran Agama.
Lalu Imam al-Ghazali meneruskan dengan pertanyaan yang ketiga. "Apa yang paling besar di dunia ini?".
Murid-muridnya ada yang menjawab gunung, bumi, dan matahari. Semua jawaban itu benar kata Imam Ghozali. Tapi yang paling besar dari yang ada di dunia ini adalah "Nafsu" (QS. Al- a'araf: 179). Maka kita harus hati-hati dengan nafsu kita, jangan sampai nafsu membawa kita ke neraka.
Pertanyaan keempat adalah, "Apa yang paling berat di dunia ini?".
Ada yang menjawab baja, besi, dan gajah. Semua jawaban sampean benar, kata Imam Ghozali, tapi yang paling berat adalah "memegang AMANAH" (QS. Al Ahzab 72). Tumbuh-tumbuhan, binatang, gunung, dan malaikat semua tidak mampu ketika Allah SWT meminta mereka untuk menjadi kalifah (pemimpin) di dunia ini. Tetapi manusia dengan sombongnya menyanggupi permintaan Allah SWT, sehingga banyak dari manusia masuk ke neraka karena ia tidak bisa memegang amanahnya.
Pertanyaan yang kelima adalah, "Apa yang paling ringan di dunia ini?".
Ada yang menjawab kapas, angin, debu, dan daun-daunan. Semua itu benar kata Imam al-Ghazali. Namun menurut beliau yang paling ringan di dunia ini adalah 'meninggalkan SHALAT'. Gara-gara pekerjaan kita tinggalkan shalat, gara-gara meeting kita juga tinggalkan shalat.
Lantas pertanyaan keenam adalah, "Apakah yang paling tajam di dunia ini?".
Murid-muridnya menjawab dengan serentak, pedang. Benar kata Imam al-Ghazali. Tapi yang paling tajam adalah "lidah MANUSIA". Karena melalui lidah, manusia dengan gampangnya menyakiti hati dan melukai perasaan saudaranya sendiri. [hidayatullah.com]
We cannot afford to maintain these ancient prejudices against Islam
Karen Armstrong
In the 12th century, Peter the Venerable, Abbot of Cluny, initiated a dialogue with the Islamic world. “I approach you not with arms, but with words,” he wrote to the Muslims whom he imagined reading his book, “not with force, but with reason, not with hatred, but with love.” Yet his treatise was entitled Summary of the Whole Heresy of the Diabolical Sect of the Saracens and segued repeatedly into spluttering intransigence. Words failed Peter when he contemplated the “bestial cruelty” of Islam, which, he claimed, had established itself by the sword. Was Muhammad a true prophet? “I shall be worse than a donkey if I agree,” he expostulated, “worse than cattle if I assent!”
Peter was writing at the time of the Crusades. Even when Christians were trying to be fair, their entrenched loathing of Islam made it impossible for them to approach it objectively. For Peter, Islam was so self-evidently evil that it did not seem to occur to him that the Muslims he approached with such “love” might be offended by his remarks. This medieval cast of mind is still alive and well.
Last week, Pope Benedict XVI quoted, without qualification and with apparent approval, the words of the 14th-century Byzantine emperor Manuel II: “Show me just what Muhammad brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached.” The Vatican seemed bemused by the Muslim outrage occasioned by the Pope’s words, claiming that the Holy Father had simply intended “to cultivate an attitude of respect and dialogue toward the other religions and cultures, and obviously also towards Islam”.
But the Pope’s good intentions seem far from obvious. Hatred of Islam is so ubiquitous and so deeply rooted in western culture that it brings together people who are usually at daggers drawn. Neither the Danish cartoonists, who published the offensive caricatures of the Prophet Muhammad last February, nor the Christian fundamentalists who have called him a paedophile and a terrorist, would ordinarily make common cause with the Pope; yet on the subject of Islam they are in full agreement.
Our Islamophobia dates back to the time of the Crusades, and is entwined with our chronic anti-semitism. Some of the first Crusaders began their journey to the Holy Land by massacring the Jewish communities along the Rhine valley; the Crusaders ended their campaign in 1099 by slaughtering some 30,000 Muslims and Jews in Jerusalem. It is always difficult to forgive people we know we have wronged. Thenceforth Jews and Muslims became the shadow-self of Christendom, the mirror image of everything that we hoped we were not - or feared that we were.
The fearful fantasies created by Europeans at this time endured for centuries and reveal a buried anxiety about Christian identity and behaviour. When the popes called for a Crusade to the Holy Land, Christians often persecuted the local Jewish communities: why march 3,000 miles to Palestine to liberate the tomb of Christ, and leave unscathed the people who had - or so the Crusaders mistakenly assumed - actually killed Jesus. Jews were believed to kill little children and mix their blood with the leavened bread of Passover: this “blood libel” regularly inspired pogroms in Europe, and the image of the Jew as the child slayer laid bare an almost Oedipal terror of the parent faith.
Jesus had told his followers to love their enemies, not to exterminate them. It was when the Christians of Europe were fighting brutal holy wars against Muslims in the Middle East that Islam first became known in the west as the religion of the sword. At this time, when the popes were trying to impose celibacy on the reluctant clergy, Muhammad was portrayed by the scholar monks of Europe as a lecher, and Islam condemned - with ill-concealed envy - as a faith that encouraged Muslims to indulge their basest sexual instincts. At a time when European social order was deeply hierarchical, despite the egalitarian message of the gospel, Islam was condemned for giving too much respect to women and other menials.
In a state of unhealthy denial, Christians were projecting subterranean disquiet about their activities on to the victims of the Crusades, creating fantastic enemies in their own image and likeness. This habit has persisted. The Muslims who have objected so vociferously to the Pope’s denigration of Islam have accused him of “hypocrisy”, pointing out that the Catholic church is ill-placed to condemn violent jihad when it has itself been guilty of unholy violence in crusades, persecutions and inquisitions and, under Pope Pius XII, tacitly condoned the Nazi Holocaust.
Pope Benedict delivered his controversial speech in Germany the day after the fifth anniversary of September 11. It is difficult to believe that his reference to an inherently violent strain in Islam was entirely accidental. He has, most unfortunately, withdrawn from the interfaith initiatives inaugurated by his predecessor, John Paul II, at a time when they are more desperately needed than ever. Coming on the heels of the Danish cartoon crisis, his remarks were extremely dangerous. They will convince more Muslims that the west is incurably Islamophobic and engaged in a new crusade.
We simply cannot afford this type of bigotry. The trouble is that too many people in the western world unconsciously share this prejudice, convinced that Islam and the Qur’an are addicted to violence. The 9/11 terrorists, who in fact violated essential Islamic principles, have confirmed this deep-rooted western perception and are seen as typical Muslims instead of the deviants they really were.
With disturbing regularity, this medieval conviction surfaces every time there is trouble in the Middle East. Yet until the 20th century, Islam was a far more tolerant and peaceful faith than Christianity. The Qur’an strictly forbids any coercion in religion and regards all rightly guided religion as coming from God; and despite the western belief to the contrary, Muslims did not impose their faith by the sword.
The early conquests in Persia and Byzantium after the Prophet’s death were inspired by political rather than religious aspirations. Until the middle of the eighth century, Jews and Christians in the Muslim empire were actively discouraged from conversion to Islam, as, according to Qur’anic teaching, they had received authentic revelations of their own. The extremism and intolerance that have surfaced in the Muslim world in our own day are a response to intractable political problems - oil, Palestine, the occupation of Muslim lands, the prevelance of authoritarian regimes in the Middle East, and the west’s perceived “double standards” - and not to an ingrained religious imperative.
But the old myth of Islam as a chronically violent faith persists, and surfaces at the most inappropriate moments. As one of the received ideas of the west, it seems well-nigh impossible to eradicate. Indeed, we may even be strengthening it by falling back into our old habits of projection. As we see the violence - in Iraq, Palestine, Lebanon - for which we bear a measure of responsibility, there is a temptation, perhaps, to blame it all on “Islam”. But if we are feeding our prejudice in this way, we do so at our peril.
Karen Armstrong is the author of Islam: A Short History
In the 12th century, Peter the Venerable, Abbot of Cluny, initiated a dialogue with the Islamic world. “I approach you not with arms, but with words,” he wrote to the Muslims whom he imagined reading his book, “not with force, but with reason, not with hatred, but with love.” Yet his treatise was entitled Summary of the Whole Heresy of the Diabolical Sect of the Saracens and segued repeatedly into spluttering intransigence. Words failed Peter when he contemplated the “bestial cruelty” of Islam, which, he claimed, had established itself by the sword. Was Muhammad a true prophet? “I shall be worse than a donkey if I agree,” he expostulated, “worse than cattle if I assent!”
Peter was writing at the time of the Crusades. Even when Christians were trying to be fair, their entrenched loathing of Islam made it impossible for them to approach it objectively. For Peter, Islam was so self-evidently evil that it did not seem to occur to him that the Muslims he approached with such “love” might be offended by his remarks. This medieval cast of mind is still alive and well.
Last week, Pope Benedict XVI quoted, without qualification and with apparent approval, the words of the 14th-century Byzantine emperor Manuel II: “Show me just what Muhammad brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached.” The Vatican seemed bemused by the Muslim outrage occasioned by the Pope’s words, claiming that the Holy Father had simply intended “to cultivate an attitude of respect and dialogue toward the other religions and cultures, and obviously also towards Islam”.
But the Pope’s good intentions seem far from obvious. Hatred of Islam is so ubiquitous and so deeply rooted in western culture that it brings together people who are usually at daggers drawn. Neither the Danish cartoonists, who published the offensive caricatures of the Prophet Muhammad last February, nor the Christian fundamentalists who have called him a paedophile and a terrorist, would ordinarily make common cause with the Pope; yet on the subject of Islam they are in full agreement.
Our Islamophobia dates back to the time of the Crusades, and is entwined with our chronic anti-semitism. Some of the first Crusaders began their journey to the Holy Land by massacring the Jewish communities along the Rhine valley; the Crusaders ended their campaign in 1099 by slaughtering some 30,000 Muslims and Jews in Jerusalem. It is always difficult to forgive people we know we have wronged. Thenceforth Jews and Muslims became the shadow-self of Christendom, the mirror image of everything that we hoped we were not - or feared that we were.
The fearful fantasies created by Europeans at this time endured for centuries and reveal a buried anxiety about Christian identity and behaviour. When the popes called for a Crusade to the Holy Land, Christians often persecuted the local Jewish communities: why march 3,000 miles to Palestine to liberate the tomb of Christ, and leave unscathed the people who had - or so the Crusaders mistakenly assumed - actually killed Jesus. Jews were believed to kill little children and mix their blood with the leavened bread of Passover: this “blood libel” regularly inspired pogroms in Europe, and the image of the Jew as the child slayer laid bare an almost Oedipal terror of the parent faith.
Jesus had told his followers to love their enemies, not to exterminate them. It was when the Christians of Europe were fighting brutal holy wars against Muslims in the Middle East that Islam first became known in the west as the religion of the sword. At this time, when the popes were trying to impose celibacy on the reluctant clergy, Muhammad was portrayed by the scholar monks of Europe as a lecher, and Islam condemned - with ill-concealed envy - as a faith that encouraged Muslims to indulge their basest sexual instincts. At a time when European social order was deeply hierarchical, despite the egalitarian message of the gospel, Islam was condemned for giving too much respect to women and other menials.
In a state of unhealthy denial, Christians were projecting subterranean disquiet about their activities on to the victims of the Crusades, creating fantastic enemies in their own image and likeness. This habit has persisted. The Muslims who have objected so vociferously to the Pope’s denigration of Islam have accused him of “hypocrisy”, pointing out that the Catholic church is ill-placed to condemn violent jihad when it has itself been guilty of unholy violence in crusades, persecutions and inquisitions and, under Pope Pius XII, tacitly condoned the Nazi Holocaust.
Pope Benedict delivered his controversial speech in Germany the day after the fifth anniversary of September 11. It is difficult to believe that his reference to an inherently violent strain in Islam was entirely accidental. He has, most unfortunately, withdrawn from the interfaith initiatives inaugurated by his predecessor, John Paul II, at a time when they are more desperately needed than ever. Coming on the heels of the Danish cartoon crisis, his remarks were extremely dangerous. They will convince more Muslims that the west is incurably Islamophobic and engaged in a new crusade.
We simply cannot afford this type of bigotry. The trouble is that too many people in the western world unconsciously share this prejudice, convinced that Islam and the Qur’an are addicted to violence. The 9/11 terrorists, who in fact violated essential Islamic principles, have confirmed this deep-rooted western perception and are seen as typical Muslims instead of the deviants they really were.
With disturbing regularity, this medieval conviction surfaces every time there is trouble in the Middle East. Yet until the 20th century, Islam was a far more tolerant and peaceful faith than Christianity. The Qur’an strictly forbids any coercion in religion and regards all rightly guided religion as coming from God; and despite the western belief to the contrary, Muslims did not impose their faith by the sword.
The early conquests in Persia and Byzantium after the Prophet’s death were inspired by political rather than religious aspirations. Until the middle of the eighth century, Jews and Christians in the Muslim empire were actively discouraged from conversion to Islam, as, according to Qur’anic teaching, they had received authentic revelations of their own. The extremism and intolerance that have surfaced in the Muslim world in our own day are a response to intractable political problems - oil, Palestine, the occupation of Muslim lands, the prevelance of authoritarian regimes in the Middle East, and the west’s perceived “double standards” - and not to an ingrained religious imperative.
But the old myth of Islam as a chronically violent faith persists, and surfaces at the most inappropriate moments. As one of the received ideas of the west, it seems well-nigh impossible to eradicate. Indeed, we may even be strengthening it by falling back into our old habits of projection. As we see the violence - in Iraq, Palestine, Lebanon - for which we bear a measure of responsibility, there is a temptation, perhaps, to blame it all on “Islam”. But if we are feeding our prejudice in this way, we do so at our peril.
Karen Armstrong is the author of Islam: A Short History
Woman who lost 8 relatives on 9/11 embraces Islam
Woman who lost 8 relatives on 9/11 embraces Islam
WASHINGTON, Sept 11: An American woman who lost eight relatives in the 9/11 attacks has embraced Islam. Elizabeth, now Safia Al Kasaby, 43, lives in Tampa, Florida. She is a former sergeant first class of the US Air Force National Guard. She lost one uncle and seven cousins in the attacks on the World Trade Center.
Her grandfather was a Jew and her grandmother was Catholic.
Safia said that in 1997, nearly destitute, she approached a synagogue in North Tampa for help. Officials at the shul wanted to know if she was a member. She was not. They asked her if she was really Jewish. She became disillusioned and for eight years she did not participate in organised religion.
She found Islam in 2005 on the third day of a Moroccan vacation.
At first, Safia's family didn't take her seriously and some colleagues at her banking job made fun of her new attire. She dared not pray at work.
Mostly, Safia kept her new faith at home, learning about her religion on web sites and Islamic chat rooms.
After a meeting with an imam at the Islamic Society of Tampa Bay Area in June, Safia felt more at ease with her new faith. But some in her family are reluctant to accept her new faith. Her eldest daughter, Sylvia, wants little to do with her. A Baptist and young military widow, Sylvia berated Safia when she showed up at her husband's funeral wearing a hijab.
At home, Safia raises two daughters. Ten-year-old Natalia says her mother's religion is cool.
Ada, 18, appreciates Safia's transformation and doesn't put up with people who make fun of Islam or stereotype Muslims. "I say, 'Wait a minute. My mom's a Muslim,'" Ada said. "She's not a terrorist."
Safia says she looks forward to the day when her religion is not an issue.
WASHINGTON, Sept 11: An American woman who lost eight relatives in the 9/11 attacks has embraced Islam. Elizabeth, now Safia Al Kasaby, 43, lives in Tampa, Florida. She is a former sergeant first class of the US Air Force National Guard. She lost one uncle and seven cousins in the attacks on the World Trade Center.
Her grandfather was a Jew and her grandmother was Catholic.
Safia said that in 1997, nearly destitute, she approached a synagogue in North Tampa for help. Officials at the shul wanted to know if she was a member. She was not. They asked her if she was really Jewish. She became disillusioned and for eight years she did not participate in organised religion.
She found Islam in 2005 on the third day of a Moroccan vacation.
At first, Safia's family didn't take her seriously and some colleagues at her banking job made fun of her new attire. She dared not pray at work.
Mostly, Safia kept her new faith at home, learning about her religion on web sites and Islamic chat rooms.
After a meeting with an imam at the Islamic Society of Tampa Bay Area in June, Safia felt more at ease with her new faith. But some in her family are reluctant to accept her new faith. Her eldest daughter, Sylvia, wants little to do with her. A Baptist and young military widow, Sylvia berated Safia when she showed up at her husband's funeral wearing a hijab.
At home, Safia raises two daughters. Ten-year-old Natalia says her mother's religion is cool.
Ada, 18, appreciates Safia's transformation and doesn't put up with people who make fun of Islam or stereotype Muslims. "I say, 'Wait a minute. My mom's a Muslim,'" Ada said. "She's not a terrorist."
Safia says she looks forward to the day when her religion is not an issue.
Woman who lost 8 relatives on 9/11 embraces Islam
Woman who lost 8 relatives on 9/11 embraces Islam
WASHINGTON, Sept 11: An American woman who lost eight relatives in the 9/11 attacks has embraced Islam. Elizabeth, now Safia Al Kasaby, 43, lives in Tampa, Florida. She is a former sergeant first class of the US Air Force National Guard. She lost one uncle and seven cousins in the attacks on the World Trade Center.
Her grandfather was a Jew and her grandmother was Catholic.
Safia said that in 1997, nearly destitute, she approached a synagogue in North Tampa for help. Officials at the shul wanted to know if she was a member. She was not. They asked her if she was really Jewish. She became disillusioned and for eight years she did not participate in organised religion.
She found Islam in 2005 on the third day of a Moroccan vacation.
At first, Safia's family didn't take her seriously and some colleagues at her banking job made fun of her new attire. She dared not pray at work.
Mostly, Safia kept her new faith at home, learning about her religion on web sites and Islamic chat rooms.
After a meeting with an imam at the Islamic Society of Tampa Bay Area in June, Safia felt more at ease with her new faith. But some in her family are reluctant to accept her new faith. Her eldest daughter, Sylvia, wants little to do with her. A Baptist and young military widow, Sylvia berated Safia when she showed up at her husband's funeral wearing a hijab.
At home, Safia raises two daughters. Ten-year-old Natalia says her mother's religion is cool.
Ada, 18, appreciates Safia's transformation and doesn't put up with people who make fun of Islam or stereotype Muslims. "I say, 'Wait a minute. My mom's a Muslim,'" Ada said. "She's not a terrorist."
Safia says she looks forward to the day when her religion is not an issue.
WASHINGTON, Sept 11: An American woman who lost eight relatives in the 9/11 attacks has embraced Islam. Elizabeth, now Safia Al Kasaby, 43, lives in Tampa, Florida. She is a former sergeant first class of the US Air Force National Guard. She lost one uncle and seven cousins in the attacks on the World Trade Center.
Her grandfather was a Jew and her grandmother was Catholic.
Safia said that in 1997, nearly destitute, she approached a synagogue in North Tampa for help. Officials at the shul wanted to know if she was a member. She was not. They asked her if she was really Jewish. She became disillusioned and for eight years she did not participate in organised religion.
She found Islam in 2005 on the third day of a Moroccan vacation.
At first, Safia's family didn't take her seriously and some colleagues at her banking job made fun of her new attire. She dared not pray at work.
Mostly, Safia kept her new faith at home, learning about her religion on web sites and Islamic chat rooms.
After a meeting with an imam at the Islamic Society of Tampa Bay Area in June, Safia felt more at ease with her new faith. But some in her family are reluctant to accept her new faith. Her eldest daughter, Sylvia, wants little to do with her. A Baptist and young military widow, Sylvia berated Safia when she showed up at her husband's funeral wearing a hijab.
At home, Safia raises two daughters. Ten-year-old Natalia says her mother's religion is cool.
Ada, 18, appreciates Safia's transformation and doesn't put up with people who make fun of Islam or stereotype Muslims. "I say, 'Wait a minute. My mom's a Muslim,'" Ada said. "She's not a terrorist."
Safia says she looks forward to the day when her religion is not an issue.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)