Holy Switch

This particular episode first aired two years ago, but Milady and I watched it tonight (a recording I made yesterday from the Australia Network). The two young women (click on the link below) lived for two weeks in the other's home and got to experience both the religious and cultural practices of their counterpart's families.

What I found rather interesting was how these two women reacted to their experiences. The Jewish woman was truly a fish out of water, and couldn't wait to drink a beer as soon as she could after leaving. (One wonders what happened to the English language translation of the Qur'an she was given as a parting gift.) The Muslim woman, on the other hand, realized that she felt the most comfortable with traditional, orthodox Islamic beliefs and practices. After her stay with the Jewish family, she felt she was a better Muslim for having gone through the experience.

Holy Switch - Episode 3

Banu Islam

“I am a Muslim. I exist only to serve Allah (swt) and His creation.”
On the whole, humanity is rather immature. We are born this way and it normally takes us at least two decades, if not more, to reach a level of cognitive and behavioral maturity that is acceptable to ourselves and society. This level of maturity is taught to us through many means, one of which is the institution of religion. Most religions, including Islam, seek to mature humanity. In Islam, we Muslims mature through our submission to Allah (swt) by conforming to His rules and legislation, which is presented to us in the form of shari'ah. The rules and legislation by which we mature aren't onerous, but they do take a significant level of discipline and determination in order to be carried out successfully and consistently.

This "discipline and determination" is known to us as jihad. It is the greater jihad, the jihad by which we seek to control and contain our nafs, our ego. Those of us who are parents (and I am the father to a five-year-old daughter) see the need to control the nafs daily through our children. "Abah, I want this! Ibu, I want that!" As children get older, their desires become more sophisticated, but their maturity levels also increase as well, insha'allah. People usually get to a point where their material needs are met, but their maturity levels have also plateaued.

The problem is that these maturity levels may or may not have reached their full potential. Have each of us met that full level of maturity? For example, consider three types of behavior: drinking alcohol, gambling and tattooing. All three behaviors are considered both legal (usually) and acceptable within modern non-Muslim society. But even while these behaviors may be acceptable in non-Muslim society, they are considered unacceptable among Muslims.

Engaging in these behaviors are signs of immaturity. An immature person wastes his or her money on alcoholic drinks that can cause numerous individual and societal problems (let alone being a poison to one's body). Through gambling, an immature person wastes his or her money in the unlikely possibility of winning a large payoff. Through tattooing, an immature person "decorates" his or her body with art that is often regretted (and sometimes removed) later in life. A Muslim avoids these immature behaviors altogether, thus bypassing the pain these behaviors may cause to themselves and to others.

Instead of engaging in immature behaviors, the Muslim engages in mature behaviors, especially that of salat (prayer), sawm (fasting), and zakat (and saudaqah, the giving of charity). Each of these behaviors are not only mandated as part of the Five Pillars of Islam, but are of supreme importance for increasing and maintaining the maturity level of Muslims individually and as a society. Salat is of primary importance. It not only restores our focus on Allah (swt) throughout the day, but also helps us to remember (through the various surahs we recite in the individual rakah) what we need to do for society as a whole.

Sawm is similar to salat except that, instead of being an intellectual reminder, sawm is visceral. We feel the hunger that the less-fortunate undergo so that we may acutely understand their needs and be motivated to help society. And, whereas salat and sawm are reminders for action, zakat and saudaqah are the actions themselves, the actual giving of charity to the poor, either directly to those in need, or indirectly, to agencies who will help us distribute the charity to others.

It should be noted that the giving of zakat and, especially, saudaqah goes not only to other Muslims in need, but also to non-Muslims as well. Muslims must act as khalifa, guardians of the community and the environment, to help in the process of maturing humanity, whether the individuals are Muslims or not. In that respect we try to be like the tide, lifting all boats together. We are lifting not only our community but that of the non-Muslim community as well.

Ideally, our goal should be to strive to bring everyone up to the minimum levels (myself included) that are expected of all Muslims in Islam. There are probably very few people who don't fail in one aspect of Islam or another. Are we only meeting what is expected of us with regard to the five pillars (especially that of salat, sawm, and zakat/saudaqah) but of the other aspects of a Muslim lifestyle as well? For example, do we behave with the proper adab? Do we eat halal food consistently, especially in those places where halal food and drink is not so easily available? Do we cover ourselves properly, both men and women, and lower our gaze appropriately, both men and women? Do we minimize our exposure to the negative aspects of our culture (especially as broadcast through the media and entertainment industries)? Do we minimize our exposure to the negative aspects of our economy, such as with regard to interest and casino capitalism as a whole? (I realize this last part is extremely difficult given the pervasiveness of the global interest-based economy. Still, does one try?) Islam addresses all of these issues and provides solutions for the maturation of humanity, but do we listen and implement these solutions into our lives?

Just as parents set limits on their children's behavior, Islam has set limits on our behaviors. Some, the immature, may whine and complain about those limits (with a few going into outright rebellion and/or apostasy because their egos cannot handle those limitations). However, the majority of us understand how we benefit from such self-restraint. One has only to look at the troubles plaguing the non-Muslim world, created by their indulgence in various vices, to see what we can and do avoid: the loss of wealth through gambling or the purchase of alcohol and/or drugs, the increased chance of illnesses through the consumption of alcohol, drugs or other haram products, the spread of sexually-transmitted diseases, especially through zina, the loss and heartbreak of families split apart after cases of adultery, and so on. Moreover, these limitations are lifelong. We do not "graduate" from the limitations once we reach a certain age. Most, if not all, of these limitations will remain with us until death.

What also makes matters difficult is that many of these limitations have little or no ability to be enforced externally; they must be enforced internally. For example, governments can and do enforce some Islamic limitations (even by secular governments) to one degree or another. The sale of alcohol might be restricted to certain hours or prohibited altogether; the sale of various drugs may be strictly regulated or prohibited, depending upon the substance, and so forth. But other Islamic limitations are not enforced by various governments except in certain select cases; for example, riba, zina and adultery. Thus, the individual is left to him- or herself to maintain the limitations. This is the reason for the greater jihad. Can we maintain our ability as individuals and as a society to reach our full potential?

I began to write this essay last December while vacationing in Japan and reading one of Frank Herbert's Dune novels. It is unfinished, from my perspective, and perhaps I will finish it in the future, insha'allah. A couple months ago, I came across another essay, Psychology, Islam & Self-Control, that says much of what I'm trying to say here. I recommend that you read that essay as well.

Bill Cosby: We Should Be More Like Muslims

This actually came out a couple weeks ago in the Rupert Murdoch-owned New York Post (no less).  Bill Cosby had written an op-ed that didn't seem to gather much notice (at least from what I could observe here in Singapore); however, Bill wrote two paragraphs near the very bottom of his essay that I thought were very interesting.  He wrote:

I’m a Christian. But Muslims are misunderstood. Intentionally misunderstood. We should all be more like them. They make sense, especially with their children. There is no other group like the Black Muslims, who put so much effort into teaching children the right things, they don’t smoke, they don’t drink or overindulge in alcohol, they protect their women, they command respect. And what do these other people do?

They complain about them, they criticize them. We’d be a better world if we emulated them. We don’t have to become black Muslims, but we can embrace the things that work.

Spot on, Bill!  (Although I do think it'd be better if more Americans embraced Islam anyway.)  But had more conservatives read these two paragraphs, I think we'd have seen more heads exploding. ;)

Islamic Manners

Some of the Lessons From the Qur'an That Apply to Our General Living:
1. Respect and honor all human beings irrespective of their religion, color, race, sex, language, status, property, birth, profession/job, and so on. [17:70]

2. Talk straight, to the point, without any ambiguity or deception. [33:70]

3. Choose best words to speak and say them in the best possible way. [17:53, 2:83]

4. Do not shout. Speak politely, keeping your voice low. [31:19]

5. Always speak the truth. Shun words that are deceitful and ostentatious. [22:30]

6. Do not confound truth with falsehood. [2:42]

7. Say with your mouth what is in your heart. [3:167]

8. Speak in a civilized manner in a language that is recognized by society and is commonly used. [4:5]

9. When you voice an opinion, be just, even if it is against a relative. [6:152]

10. Do not be a bragging boaster. [31:18]

11. Do not talk, listen or do anything vain. [23:3, 28:55]

12. Do not participate in any paltry. If you pass near a futile play, then pass by with dignity. [25:72]

13. If, unintentionally, any misconduct occurs by you, then correct yourself expeditiously. [3:134]

14. Do not be contemptuous or arrogant with people. [31:18]

15. Do not walk haughtily or with conceit. [17:37, 31:18]

16. Be moderate in thy pace. [31:19]

17. Walk with humility and sedateness. [25:63]

18. Keep your gazes lowered, devoid of any lecherous leers and salacious stares. [24:30-31, 40:19]

19. Do not backbite one another. [49:12]

20. Do not make mockery of others or ridicule others. [49:11]

21. Do not defame others. [49:11]

22. Do not insult others by nicknames. [49:11]

23. When you meet each other, offer good wishes and blessings for safety. One who conveys to you a message of safety and security and also when a courteous greeting is offered to you, meet it with a greeting still more courteous or (at least) of equal courtesy. [4:86]

-Mumtaz'

Note: I came across the above on Facebook and shared it on my wall, but have also decided to share it with a larger audience here. I've cleaned up the various typos, but have left everything else the same. I also did not check to see whether the Qur'anic ayat citations are correct. Otherwise... I hope you enjoyed this!

Camel Tracks

I had a recent discussion with an atheist, which has led to a new insight about the differences between atheists and Muslims (presumably this distinction could apply to a follower of any "Western" religion, but I'll approach this only from the perspective of Islam).

The difference is that an atheist is a literalist. They expect there to be proof of God's existence in such a way that there is no doubt in the atheist's mind. Ideally for them that proof would be tangible in nature and directly linked to God (as opposed to an indirect link, which would sow more confusion in their minds).

Muslims, on the other hand, tend to be more "metaphoralists," if there is such a word. The Qur'an, in and of itself, is a tangible, direct link to Allah (swt), which is proof enough for Muslims of His existence. But the Qur'an also has numerous verses that provide tangible evidence of His existence that are indirect; still, if one were to think more deeply upon these tangible proofs one might become convinced of His existence. The verses in question I refer to as the "nature verses," of which here are some:

It is He who sends down rain from the sky: from it ye drink, and out of it (grows) the vegetation on which ye feed your cattle. With it He produces for you corn, olives, date-palms, grapes and every kind of fruit: verily in this is a sign for those who give thought. He has made subject to you the Night and the Day; the sun and the moon; and the stars are in subjection by His Command: verily in this are Signs for men who are wise. And the things on this earth which He has multiplied in varying colors (and qualities): verily in this is a sign for men who celebrate the praises of Allah (in gratitude). It is He Who has made the sea subject, that ye may eat thereof flesh that is fresh and tender, and that ye may extract therefrom ornaments to wear; and thou seest the ships therein that plough the waves, that ye may seek (thus) of the bounty of Allah and that ye may be grateful. And He has set up on the earth mountains standing firm, lest it should shake with you; and rivers and roads; that ye may guide yourselves; And marks and sign-posts; and by the stars (men) guide themselves. Is then He Who creates like one that creates not? Will ye not receive admonition?
(16:10-17)

Behold! in the creation of the heavens and the earth, and the alternation of night and day,- there are indeed Signs for men of understanding,- Men who celebrate the praises of Allah, standing, sitting, and lying down on their sides, and contemplate the (wonders of) creation in the heavens and the earth, (With the thought): "Our Lord! not for naught Hast Thou created (all) this! Glory to Thee! Give us salvation from the penalty of the Fire."
(3:190-91)

The key points to take away are that:

1) Natural phenomena are signs of Allah (swt). They are indirect evidence, but evidence nonetheless, for the existence of God. They are more than just the natural world that we see every day and take for granted.

2) It takes a person with a flexible mind, a person who can think deeply, to make the connection between the natural world and God. Notice what the Qur'an says in several of the verses above, that these are signs "...for those who give thought," "...for men who are wise," "...for men of understanding." Rather than being a religion of blind faith, Islam is a religion that asks its followers to think and contemplate. This is where I think atheists stumble. They have lost the ability to reason for themselves. They expect proofs from others instead of thinking for themselves.

To put the matter another way, the signs of God are like camel tracks in the sand. It is enough for the Muslim to see the tracks to know of the camel's existence. The atheist expects to see the camel in order to be satisfied of the proof, and blames the believer when the camel is never seen. But the tracks are proof enough, if only the atheist could recognize the tracks for what they really are.

3) Finally, the Qur'an points out to men of understanding who recognize that natural phenomena are signs of God's existence, that they would (or at least should) be grateful to Allah (swt) for what He has provided. Everything, and I mean everything, comes from Him, including our lives. But are most people grateful? Do they give Him the praise He deserves?

Inside Islam: What a Billion Muslims Really Think

Youtube Link

NYT: Uncle Sam is No Imam

The following comes from the New York Times article, Uncle Sam is No Imam:

From a national security point of view, challenging ideas that underpin radical Islam makes sense. Counterterrorism is ultimately about ideas; why shouldn’t officials try to marginalize the theological teachings cited by violent terrorists?

The problem is that when American officials intervene in Islamic teachings — interpreting them to believers in a national-security context and saying which are or are not acceptable — they create tensions, both legal and strategic.

The strategic problem is easier to see: Is the government a credible authority on Islamic interpretation? Based on the results of comparable efforts in Britain, the answer is a resounding no. Simply put, young Muslim men in the thrall of radical teachings will not embrace a more pacific theology because the F.B.I. tells them to, any more than Catholic bishops would have yielded to Mr. Obama’s plan to mandate coverage of contraceptives at Catholic hospitals if he had invoked canon law to defend his position.

...

If I am right that the government is increasingly in danger of establishing an “official Islam,” a project that is at best ill-fated if not illegal...

For the most part I am in agreement with this article, but these two sections really stood out for me. Any attempt to create an "official Islam" as defined by a government is bound for failure. It's not just the idea of trying to soften the more radical teachings of Islam for young Muslims, Muslims of all ages will resist any attempt by non-Muslims, whether they are individuals or organizations, to reinterpret any aspect of Islam that is solely for the benefit of non-Muslim society.

The fact of the matter is that the vast majority of non-Muslims have little understanding about Islam and the Muslim world to begin with. Orthodox Muslims would look at these "interpretations" then ignore them. There are several key factors at play here. One, of course, is the interpretation itself; the interpretation must be grounded by the Qur'an and Sunnah of the Prophet (pbuh). The more an interpretation diverges from the general understanding of the Qur'an and Sunnah, the less likely that interpretation will be accepted. Extremes in interpretation, both "liberal" and "conservative," are ignored by the mainstream Muslim community (although fringe individuals or groups may accept these interpretations at the risk of being considered outside of pale of Islam; for example, the Nation of Islam and the Ahmadiyyah). As a result, minority interpretations in Islam count for very little within the Muslim world.

Another key factor is the credibility of the person or group issuing the interpretation. As the author pointed out, young Muslims will not accept the FBI's interpretation of Islam; the FBI has no credibility in Islam. Muslims, by and large, never accept a non-Muslim's interpretation of Islam; non-Muslims have no credibility.* Muslims, by and large, will also not accept the interpretations of other Muslims who present minority positions and have no evidence of being a Muslim scholar (this also applies to scholars in academia who happen to be Muslim). In essence, the only interpretations Muslims as a whole will accept are those made by Muslim scholars whose work is more-or-less orthodox in interpretation. This system may not be to the liking of non-Muslims and those Muslims who wish for rapid change, but the system works well for mainstream orthodox Muslims. As the Prophet (pbuh) said, My ummah will not agree upon an error." (Sunan At-Tirmidhi, #2320; see also Sunan Abu Dawud, #4255 and Sunan Ibn Majah, #4085)

So, what is to be done? The author had some good ideas:

Countering radical religious ideology is on much more solid constitutional — and strategic — footing if the heavy lifting is done not by the government but by grass-roots organizations that are grounded in civil society or in religious communities. The government must not be heavily and directly involved.

The relationship between the national security imperative and a great religious civilization is inevitably fraught. Reconciling the two won’t be achieved by allowing officials to become more active in espousing theological alternatives to radical Islam — or in training law-enforcement and intelligence professionals with hateful caricatures of Islam. The government’s efforts ought to be guided instead by the wisdom of the First Amendment and the values that it enshrines.

The real key, in my opinion, is that non-Muslim society must listen to orthodox Muslims. Really, it's gotten to the point where, if authorities want the help of the Muslim community, they must be willing to listen and respect what the orthodox Muslim community has to say. A good first step would be to reject what non-Muslims think about Islam and Muslim society. There are far too many shysters who prey upon the gullible non-Muslim public (including leaders) for information and advice about Islam and Muslims. If you want the backing of orthodox Muslims, you must listen to credible orthodox Muslims, even if this means not liking what those people have to say. That may be a bitter pill for some non-Muslims to take, but it's the best way to understand Islam and the Muslim community and to reduce tensions between the two sides.

-----------------
* Having said that, I have come across the works of a few non-Muslims whose understanding of Islam is very good; they do have some credibility among Muslims, although not enough to be able to present divergent interpretations that would be acceptable to Muslim society.

Debunking Myths About Islam and the Muslim World (Part 6)

This is the sixth and last post in a series commenting about The Debunking Handbook from the perspective of debunking the myths about Islam and the Muslim world.

Anatomy of an Effective Debunking

This last section of the Debunking Handbook is a summary of how an essay or article exposing a myth should be written, section by section. The graphic below is the example given in the handbook, using a myth regarding global warming.

Bringing all the different threads together, an effective debunking requires:
• Core facts—a refutation should emphasize the facts, not the myth. Present only key facts to avoid an Overkill Backfire Effect;
• Explicit warnings—before any mention of a myth, text or visual cues should warn that the upcoming information is false;
• Alternative explanation—any gaps left by the debunking need to be filled. This may be achieved by providing an alternative causal explanation for why the myth is wrong and, optionally, why the misinformers promoted the myth in the first place;
• Graphics – core facts should be displayed graphically if possible.

Debunking Myths About Islam and the Muslim World (Part 5)

This is the fifth post in a series commenting about The Debunking Handbook from the perspective of debunking the myths about Islam and the Muslim world.

Filling the Gap with an Alternative Explanation

The previous three posts focused on various backfire effects that may occur when trying to debunk misinformation. In this post, we look at how to provide the correct information to the misinformed.

When people hear misinformation, they build a mental model, with the myth providing an explanation. When the myth is debunked, a gap is left in their mental model. To deal with this dilemma, people prefer an incorrect model over an incomplete model. In the absence of a better explanation, they opt for the wrong explanation.

For many non-Muslims, this situation, opting for the wrong explanation, is not only all too commonplace, but is very frequently the preferred situation. Many non-Muslims want to believe the misinformation because to believe the correct information is too threatening, especially to their worldview.

The most effective way to reduce the effect of misinformation is to provide an alternative explanation for the events covered by the misinformation.

For the alternative to be accepted, it must be plausible and explain all observed features of the event. When you debunk a myth, you create a gap in the person’s mind. To be effective, your debunking must fill that gap.

From an Islamic perspective, what we must do is provide a new orientation to non-Muslims when discussing Islam and the Muslim world. We must cast a new light on these topics. With respect to discussions about the Qur’an and ahadith, we must explain this information with respect to the contexts that are most applicable, whether they be theological, historical or linguistic (in my experience, these are the three most important contexts to understanding Islam). With respect to the Islamic world, we must explain as best we can the cultural contexts that shape the Muslim world and the non-Muslim’s interpretation of our world. For example, back in December 2007, I wrote a post about a picture of an Afghan wedding.



At the time of this picture, the girl was eleven-years-old and the man was forty. Here’s what I wrote about this photo:

The problem I have with this photo in that, without context, the image may lead to wild conjecture. What is the man's motive for marrying this young girl? We don't know. I'm sure most Westerners would focus on the sexual aspect. I think this is what most Western men would first think of if they were given the chance to marry someone as young as this girl. That being what they would do, they ascribe this motive to the Afghan man.

But we don't know what's really in this man's heart, and his having sex with her may be years away. In a country where the average life expectancy (for both men and women) is less than 44 years (CIA World Factbook), the chances of him surviving much longer are not too good. Is she an orphan and he's providing a stable home for her? Does she come from a poor family and marrying her is a way for him to help provide for her now and later, after death, through an inheritance? Allahu alim.

Unfortunately, people often judge other cultures through their own cultural biases and, all too often, find the other culture wanting, even though they rarely have enough information to make an informed judgment. This is culture shock, no different than if a person went to Afghanistan and witnessed this scene him or herself.

We Muslims know there are alternative explanations that are perfectly logical and feasible to explain this type of situation; the thing we must do is make the explanation, to fill the “gap” in the non-Muslims’ minds.

One gap that may require filling is explaining why the myth is wrong. This can be achieved by exposing the rhetorical techniques used to misinform. … The techniques include cherry picking, conspiracy theories and fake experts.

We Muslim writers do this to a degree, especially when pointing out that various verses in the Qur’an either have been taken out of context or that they are only a partial answer provided by the Qur’an (meaning only part of the verse has been shown, or the following verse or verses have been conveniently ignored because they show the proper way in which the verses are to be understood; for example, verse 9:5, in which the second half of the verse is often ignored (…but if they repent, and establish regular prayers and practice regular charity, then open the way for them: for Allah is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful.)

Another alternative narrative might be to explain why the misinformer promoted the myth. Arousing suspicion of the source of misinformation has been shown to further reduce the influence of misinformation.

What we Muslims should work harder at is to expose the conspiracies and the fake experts (the two go hand-in-hand). Fortunately, much of the dirt on the fake experts has been gathered by others, such as the Southern Poverty Law Center and the Center for American Progress. Frauds like Brigitte Gabriel, Pam Geller and Robert Spencer need to be exposed to the general public again and again, showing that for them, Islamophobia is a get-rich-quick scheme. (Follow the money.)

Another key element to effective rebuttal is using an explicit warning (“watch out, you might be misled”) before mentioning the myth. Experimentation with different rebuttal structures found the most effective combination included an alternative explanation and an explicit warning.

Now this is something that I had not considered before, but I think the use of an “explicit warning” is great advice.

Graphics are also an important part of the debunker’s toolbox and are significantly more effective than text in reducing misconceptions. When people read a refutation that conflicts with their beliefs, they seize on ambiguities to construct an alternative interpretation. Graphics provide more clarity and less opportunity for misinterpretation. … If your content can be expressed visually, always opt for a graphic in your debunking.

I am not sure just how relevant this suggestion will be for Muslim writers. When we discuss Islam we are dealing primarily with concepts that may or may not be well-presented graphically. This may be easier to do with respect to the Muslim world, where we can deal with people and different aspects of culture, such as food or clothing. Once again, however, if you incorporate the technique into your writing, go for it.

Next: Anatomy of an Effective Debunking

Debunking Myths About Islam and the Muslim World (Part 4)

This is the fourth post in a series commenting about The Debunking Handbook from the perspective of debunking the myths about Islam and the Muslim world.

The Worldview Backfire Effect

The third and arguably most potent backfire effect occurs with topics that tie in with people’s worldviews and sense of cultural identity.

Of the three backfire effects mentioned in this handbook, I would consider the worldview backfire effect to be the most difficult for Muslims to overcome. Many non-Muslims treat Islam as a threat to their worldview on a number of different fronts: religiously, culturally, racially, linguistically, and so on.

One cognitive process that contributes to this effect is Confirmation Bias, where people selectively seek out information that bolsters their view. … The study found that even when people are presented with a balanced set of facts, they reinforce their pre-existing views by gravitating towards information they already agree with. The polarization was greatest among those with strongly held views.

This should not be surprising. We Muslims frequently see this reaction from non-Muslims, and Americans see this from a political perspective as well (liberals vs. conservative). It is the extremely rare – and brave – non-Muslim who is willing to research Islam from genuine Islamic resources and not just regurgitating the lies and half-truths presented by the Islamophobes.

What happens when you remove that element of choice and present someone with arguments that run counter to their worldview? In this case, the cognitive process that comes to the fore is Disconfirmation Bias, the flipside of Confirmation Bias. This is where people spend significantly more time and thought actively arguing against opposing arguments.

For non-Muslims this is par for the course. But I say this from the perspective that virtually all non-Muslims go through this stage at some point. The key difference is in the attitude they have toward Islam and the Muslim world. At one extreme are those people who hate Islam and argue constantly against Islam. Their minds are not open and they have no interest in learning about Islam; they argue for the sake of arguing. They are ignorant time-wasters and they are best left alone. (I have dealt with more than enough of these people myself.) At the other extreme are those people who have an open mind toward Islam and are willing to learn. They may never become a Muslim, but they tend to be respectful and ask questions in a positive way.

If facts cannot dissuade a person from their preexisting beliefs - and can sometimes make things worse - how can we possibly reduce the effect of misinformation? There are two sources of hope.

First, the Worldview Backfire Effect is strongest among those already fixed in their views. You therefore stand a greater chance of correcting misinformation among those not as firmly decided about hot-button issues. This suggests that outreaches should be directed towards the undecided majority rather than the unswayable minority.

It is keeping in mind these potential reverts to Islam, those who are genuinely interested in learning about Islam and the Muslim world that we Muslim writers need to focus our efforts on. The haters will continue to hate, and there is little if anything we can do about them. But we can present our message to everyone else, those whose minds are more open. So if you are not responding to a specific person (or people) in mind, make your target reader those people who are potential reverts. Make your essays dawah-oriented. In this way we will also be following the Qur’an’s advice:

Invite (all) to the Way of thy Lord with wisdom and beautiful preaching; and argue with them in ways that are best and most gracious: for thy Lord knoweth best, who have strayed from His Path, and who receive guidance. (16:125)

Second, messages can be presented in ways that reduce the usual psychological resistance. For example, when worldview-threatening messages are coupled with so-called self-affirmation, people become more balanced in considering pro and con information.
Self-affirmation can be achieved by asking people to write a few sentences about a time when they felt good about themselves because they acted on a value that was important to them. People then become more receptive to messages that otherwise might threaten their worldviews, compared to people who received no self-affirmation. Interestingly, the “self-affirmation effect” is strongest among those whose ideology was central to their sense of self-worth.

We Muslim writers are not going to be able to ask our readers to go through the self-affirmation exercise the authors of this handbook mention above. But what we can do is to focus our writings, when possible, on the common values we Muslims share with non-Muslims. Remember, we’re not focusing on countering the myths about Islam, but to present the facts. Non-Muslims share many of the same values Muslims have, but perhaps the non-Muslims don’t understand this as well as we would like them to. So stress the commonalities we have with other non-Muslims, regardless of whether they are of the People of the Book or not.

Another way in which information can be made more acceptable is by “framing” it in a way that is less threatening to a person’s worldview. For example, Republicans are far more likely to accept an otherwise identical charge as a “carbon offset” than as a “tax”, whereas the wording has little effect on Democrats or Independents—because their values are not challenged by the word “tax.”

This goes back to the idea of how we choose to write our essays, what terminology we use. In the simplified form, we may benefit from not using our terminology so as to increase understanding. The preconceived notions non-Muslims have about various words of ours (e.g., jihad, shari’ah, etc.) may distract the non-Muslims from understanding and accepting the message we wish to share with them.

Next: Filling the Gap with an Alternative Explanation

Debunking Myths About Islam and the Muslim World (Part 3)

This is the third post in a series commenting about The Debunking Handbook from the perspective of debunking the myths about Islam and the Muslim world.

The Overkill Backfire Effect

One principle that science communicators often fail to follow is making their content easy to process. That means easy to read, easy to understand and succinct. Information that is easy to process is more likely to be accepted as true. Merely enhancing the color contrast of a printed font so it is easier to read, for example, can increase people’s acceptance of the truth of a statement.

Muslim writers face similar problems in that we have our own jargon, often Arabic-based, that non-Muslims frequently do not comprehend. We use this jargon in part because we understand the nuances of meaning in the words we use, whereas, to non-Muslims, these same words may have other connotations that may be only partially correct or not correct at all. The classic example is the word jihad. I’m not saying that we Muslims should not use our terminology when explaining Islamic concepts to non-Muslims but that we may wish to simplify what we have to say so as to increase understanding. More on this will be discussed below.

The point about enhancing color contrast is a good one, and I’ve done this in my own blogging for a number of years. For example, I normally use black font on a white background. However, if I’m quoting something that I think is stupid or reprehensible, I will change the font color to red, while blue is used for points that I agree with and want to highlight. Qur’anic verses are printed in dark green font, and ahadith are printed in teal (i.e., blue-green). Use whatever system works best for you.

When it comes to refuting misinformation, less can be more. Debunks that offered three arguments, for example, are more successful in reducing the influence of misinformation, compared to debunks that offered twelve arguments which ended up reinforcing the myth.

The Overkill Backfire Effect occurs because processing many arguments takes more effort than just considering a few. A simple myth is more cognitively attractive than an over-complicated correction.

I don’t see this problem too often, at least among Muslim writers, although I do see it occasionally in political essays. Essays that just keep going on and on. Keep your essay short and sweet. Use three points at the most, and save the best for last. If you have more arguments you want to use, put them in a separate essay.

The solution is to keep your content lean, mean and easy to read. Making your content easy to process means using every tool available. Use simple language, short sentences, subheadings and paragraphs. Avoid dramatic language and derogatory comments that alienate people. Stick to the facts.

All very good suggestions. In particular, avoid ad hominem attacks. If you resort to ad hominems, you’ve lost the argument.

End on a strong and simple message that people will remember and tweet to their friends, such as “97 out of 100 climate scientists agree that humans are causing global warning”; or “Study shows that MMR vaccines are safe.” Use graphics wherever possible to illustrate your points.

This is a very good suggestion, in my opinion. Give your allies the hook they need to pass your message on through social media, Facebook and Twitter in particular. Doing so can work to your benefit, spreading your message to other people whom you might otherwise have never reached.

[T]oo much information can backfire. Adhere instead to the KISS principle: Keep It Simple, Stupid!

Sage advice, but all too frequently forgotten (myself included).

Writing at a simple level runs the risk of sacrificing the complexities and nuances of the concepts you wish to communicate. At Skeptical Science, we gain the best of both worlds by publishing rebuttals at several levels. Basic versions are written using short, plain English text and simplified graphics. More technical Intermediate and Advanced versions are also available with more technical language and detailed explanations. The icons used on ski runs are used as visual cues to denote the technical level of each rebuttal.

This is an interesting suggestion, but one that requires more time and effort in order to be successful. In essence, you are rewriting your message several times, in increasingly more complicated (or simplified) ways. Perhaps we might look at this in terms of the amount of Arabic-based terminology that we use. A simple version would be Arabic-free, the type of writing we would send to a non-Muslim relative or friend who doesn’t understand Islam at all. The advanced version, on the other hand is the one where we use all of the Arabic terminology that we normally include because it’s like writing to a fellow Muslim who would understand all the nuances we are using in the language.

The use of the ski run symbols is interesting, but I wonder just how effective these symbols would be for various readers. I personally am not familiar with these symbols; there aren’t a tremendous number of ski runs here in Singapore, you know. ;) Still, if it works for you, use it.

Next: The Worldview Backfire Effect

Debunking Myths About Islam and the Muslim World (Part 2)

This is the second post in a series commenting about The Debunking Handbook from the perspective of debunking the myths about Islam and the Muslim world.

The Familiarity Backfire Effect

The driving force is the fact that familiarity increases the chances of accepting information as true. Immediately after reading the flyer, people remembered the details that debunked the myth and successfully identified the myths. As time passed, however, the memory of the details faded and all people remembered was the myth without the “tag” that identified it as false. This effect is particularly strong in older adults because their memories are more vulnerable to forgetting of details.

This section referred to a psychological experiment in which people were asked to read a flyer that debunked common myths about flu vaccines. What the experiment showed was that, instead of helping to debunk the myths, as was intended, the way in which the flyer was written actually helped to reinforce the myths that the author intended to debunk. How we discuss Islam and the Muslim world to non-Muslims becomes critical, and most, if not all of us, are probably guilty (including myself) in terms of answering non-Muslims the wrong way.

How does one avoid causing the Familiarity Backfire Effect? Ideally, avoid mentioning the myth altogether while correcting it. When seeking to counter misinformation, the best approach is to focus on the facts you wish to communicate.

In other words, instead of trying to debunk the myth by stating the myth prominently in our essays, the best thing to do is to avoid mentioning the myth altogether. We continue to debunk the myth using our facts, but we avoid mentioning the myth if at all possible.

Not mentioning the myth is sometimes not a practical option. In this case, the emphasis of the debunking should be on the facts. The often-seen technique of headlining your debunking with the myth in big, bold letters is the last thing you want to do. Instead, communicate your core fact in the headline. Your debunking should begin with emphasis on the facts, not the myth. Your goal is to increase people’s familiarity with the facts.

Thus, if you have to mention the myth at all, bury it deep within the essay so that the focus is on your facts. The following is an example the authors provided of an essay debunking a climate myth; notice where the myth is discussed in the essay:

Sun and climate are going in opposite directions

Over the last few decades of global warming, the sun has shown a slight cooling trend. Sun and climate are going in opposite directions. This has led a number of scientists to independently conclude that the sun cannot be the cause of recent global warming.

One of the most common and persistent climate myths is that the sun is the cause of global warming.

This myth cherry picks the data - showing past periods when sun and climate move together but ignoring the last few decades when the two diverge.

The myth is not discussed until the third sentence, after the core facts being presented are brought up in both the title and first paragraph.

Next: The Overkill Backfire Effect

Debunking Myths About Islam and the Muslim World (Part 1)

I've come across a very short but interesting pdf file called The Debunking Handbook, written by two Australian professors, John Cook (University of Queensland) and Stephan Lewandowsky (University of Western Australia). This handbook is written in a general manner and the techniques discussed can be applied to any type of misinformation. The example presented in the handbook is with respect to climate change and those people who deny that climate change has come about from human activity; however, I think the techniques can be applied just as easily to Islam and the Muslim world. Thus, I hope to provide excerpts from the handbook and write some commentary so that we Muslims can better debunk the misinformation that people spread about our religion.


Introduction

Debunking myths is problematic. Unless great care is taken, any effort to debunk misinformation can inadvertently reinforce the very myths one seeks to correct. To avoid these “backfire effects”, an effective debunking requires three major elements.
First, the refutation must focus on core facts rather than the myth to avoid the misinformation becoming more familiar. Second, any mention of a myth should be preceded by explicit warnings to notify the reader that the upcoming information is false. Finally, the refutation should include an alternative explanation that accounts for important qualities in the original misinformation.

The three "backfire effects" discussed in the handbook will be discussed at length in future posts.


Debunking the first myth about debunking

First, let's be clear about what we mean by the label “misinformation” - we use it to refer to any information that people have acquired that turns out to be incorrect, irrespective of why and how that information was acquired in the first place.

I think this definition is fairly straightforward; I also think we Muslims have a very good grasp as to the types of misinformation we come across on a daily basis from a very hostile non-Muslim world.

The evidence indicates that no matter how vigorously and repeatedly we correct the misinformation, for example by repeating the correction over and over again, the influence remains detectable. The old saying got it right - mud sticks.

I also think this point is well known to us. This is the never-ending battle we Muslims face when dealing with both the Islamophobes who actively work to spread misinformation and an ignorant non-Muslim public who, while their intentions may be well-meaning, have little knowledge about Islam and the Muslim world that may cause them to be gullible about the misinformation produced by the haters.

Not only is misinformation difficult to remove, debunking a myth can actually strengthen it in people’s minds. Several different “backfire effects” have been observed, arising from making myths more familiar, from providing too many arguments, or from providing evidence that threatens one’s worldview.

What the authors provide are some very practical techniques that we Muslims can use to help debunk the misinformation that is aimed at Islam and the Muslim world. These techniques help to minimize the three "backfire effects" that are next discussed in the paper: the "Familiarity Backfire Effect," the "Overkill Backfire Effect," and the "Worldview Backfire Effect." I will discuss, insha'allah, each of these effects in separate posts.

Next: The Familiarity Backfire Effect

Footsteps in Heaven

It is related by Abu Hurayrah that the Prophet (s) once said to Bilal at the time of fajr: "Tell me about your act from which you expect the most in your Islam, for I have heard the sound of your footsteps in heaven."

"I have done nothing," replied Bilal, "which could give me hope, except that when I perform the wudu' in any part of the day or night I try to offer as much of salah with it as I can." (al-Bukhari)
-- from The Four Pillars of Islam by Abul Hasan Ali Nadwi

Cowardly Editors

What is Time magazine's American editors afraid of? Cowards!

H.T.: Crooks & Liars

Update: As was out on Izzy Mo's Facebook wall, this nonsense of cowardly editorship at Time is nothing new. Just within the past few months, Time has used different covers for the American edition than what it has used for the rest of the world. In both of these situations, the International covers deal with substantive issues that, apparently, Time's editors feel would hurt delicate American sensitivities. The issues in question are Travels Through Islam (August 8, 2011; American cover topic: "Chore Wars") and Why the U.S. Will Never Save Afghanistan (October 24, 2011; American cover topic: "The Return of the Silent Majority"). Now I will admit, the last topic there (Silent Majority) is about the Occupy Wall Street movement, which is worthy of being a cover story. But the other three Time covers for that week (on Afghanistan) is also very important for Americans to read, especially when they need to wake up to the fact that the Afghanistan War has cost them so much in terms of blood and treasure.

A Road to Mecca

From: Al-Jazeera World/Al-Jazeera English:

In A Road to Mecca, filmmaker George Misch sets out to explore the frontline between the Muslim world and the West. His guide for this journey is a man from the past - somebody who, 80 years earlier, crossed all boundaries between countries, cultures and religions.

Leopold Weiss was born a Jew on the edge of the former Austro-Hungarian Empire in 1900. But his story would unfold far away in the deserts of Arabia.

Feeling restless and unhappy in Europe, in 1922 Weiss accepted an uncle's invitation to join him in Jerusalem. But what began as a family visit soon turned into a life-changing journey.

Weiss enjoyed the hospitality of the Arabs he met in the Middle East and was enchanted by their lifestyle. With the passion of an explorer, he began to travel across the region.

His travels and encounters nurtured in him a sense that Zionism was causing a great injustice to the Palestinian Arabs. In Jerusalem, he got into heated arguments with the leaders of the Zionist movement and began to feel at a greater distance from the religion of his ancestors than ever before.

"Islam should be presented without any fanaticism. Without any stress on our having the only possible way and the others are lost. Moderation in all forms is a basic demand of Islam."

Muhammad Asad

As he discovered the Muslims of the Middle East, Weiss also discovered Islam - studying the Qur'an and finding not only the answer to the spiritual emptiness he had felt but also an alternative to the materialism of Europe's Roaring Twenties. In Saudi Arabia, Weiss felt truly at home, writing: "I am no longer a stranger."

In 1926, he converted to Islam and changed his name to Muhammad Asad. Full of enthusiasm, he embarked upon his first pilgrimage to Mecca.

Curious to get to know other Muslim communities, in 1932 Asad left Saudi Arabia - traveling to Turkistan, China and Indonesia. In India, he met poet and philosopher Muhammad Iqbal. Iqbal dreamed of creating a separate Islamic state as a solution to the bloodshed between Indian Muslims and Hindus. Iqbal's vision of Pakistan quickly became Asad's own dream.

Asad campaigned for the creation of Pakistan by writing books, giving public lectures and hosting radio programs. He also drafted the outline for an Islamic constitution in which equal rights for women were secured.

In 1951, Asad became Pakistan's envoy to the United Nations. But to his dismay he was forced out of the position after just one year. Deeply disappointed, he turned his back on politics, deciding instead to write his autobiography in the hope that it would promote better understanding between Muslims and the West. The Road to Mecca quickly became a bestseller.

By 1970, Asad had grown increasingly concerned that the Qur'an was being misinterpreted and misused for political goals. This motivated him to undertake his biggest challenge: a new translation of and commentary on the Qur'an. He settled in Morocco and estimated that it would take him four years to complete. Seventeen years later it was finished. He dedicated it to "people who think."

"Every age requires a new approach to the Qur'an for the simple reason that the Qur'an is made for all ages. It is our duty to look for deeper meanings in the Qur'an in order to increase our knowledge and experience. The Qur'an wants your intellect to be always active and trying to approach the message of God. God himself dedicated this book to people who think."

Muhammad Asad

Despite the fact that Asad today has a loyal following among those who share an interest in his writings and an intellectual affiliation with him, his translation was not embraced by all. Rumor has it that there were even book burnings of Asad's Qur'an.

Emotionally and financially exhausted, he withdrew to Europe - settling in Spain in 1987. He planned to revise his translation once more but old age and prolonged illness prevented him from completing it. On February 20, 1992, he died, alone and secluded.

Arranged Marriages

I came across this story earlier today about arranged marriages. I know a lot of Americans have a negative attitude toward arranged marriages, which I attribute largely to culture shock, having the idea that the only way one can marry is through love and any other reason is largely anathema. However, as the article points out, even Western cultures practiced arranged marriages up through about 200 years ago:

Worldwide, families of many religions have arranged marriages throughout history as a way to strengthen the community or join families for economic, political or social positioning.

Even in Western European society, arranged marriages were the norm until the late 1700s, when "personal choice of partners had replaced arranged marriages as a social ideal, and individuals were encouraged to marry for love," according to Stephanie Coontz, author of "Marriage, a History."

Personally, I don't have a problem with arranged marriages although I will admit that Milady and I didn't have our marriage arranged. Without getting into the details of how we met or why we married, I will say that it did take us some time to adjust to living with each other, which is an important key to the success of any marriage. Part of our problem, of course, was that we came from two very different cultures and lifestyles. It took us some time to work through our differences, but we have managed to make our marriage a happy one. Like the couple mentioned in the article (two children in 12 years of marriage), we have been married for over eight years now and have our wonderful daughter. (I will also add that what really helped our relationship is that we both have similar goals and values; for example, we both wanted to have children, and we both believed very strongly in living by and raising our child with Islamic values.)

One point the article made that I wasn't aware of is that Orthodox Jews also have similar attitudes with Muslims toward dating:

In Jewish Orthodox practice, dating in the Western sense is prohibited. Young couples are discouraged from being left alone before marriage.

"You don't go out to private places," said Rabbi Avi Finegold, a Chicago educator who describes himself as Orthodox but also acknowledges being skeptical about the success of arranged marriages.

The Orthodox community favors using hotel lobbies and New York's Times Square for public meetings between the sexes, he said. "You will see the guy dressed in his finest and the girl all prim and proper and they are not touching each other, and are in a public place," Finegold said.

The next time someone complains that Muslims don't date, we should point out to that person that Orthodox Jews follow the same practice.

The Red Scarf

A strange and interesting hadith about a red leather scarf and how that led a black girl to Islam:

Narrated 'Aisha: "There was a black slave girl belonging to an Arab tribe and they manumitted her but she remained with them. The slave girl said, 'Once one of their girls (of that tribe) came out wearing a red leather scarf decorated with precious stones. It fell from her or she placed it somewhere. A kite passed by that place, saw it lying there and mistaking it for a piece of meat, flew away with it. Those people searched for it but they did not find it. So they accused me of stealing it and started searching me and even searched my private parts.' The slave girl further said, 'By Allah! While I was standing (in that state) with those people, the same kite passed by them and dropped the red scarf and it fell amongst them. I told them, "This is what you accused me of and I was innocent and now this is it."' 'Aisha added: 'That slave girl came to Allah's Apostle and embraced Islam. She had a tent or a small room with a low roof in the mosque. Whenever she called on me, she had a talk with me and whenever she sat with me, she would recite the following: "The day of the scarf (band) was one of the wonders of our Lord, verily He rescued me from the disbelievers' town."' 'Aisha added: 'Once I asked her, "What is the matter with you? Whenever you sit with me, you always recite these poetic verses." On that she told me the whole story.'"
- Sahih Bukhari, Book 8, Number 430

Taqwa

Karmakin, on the About "magic underwear" diary, wrote:

A good example is our cultural use of "god-fearing" as meaning a upstanding individual. (Ugly term really if you think about it)...

Now my purpose in writing this essay is not to call Karmakin out, but to give my reasons as to why "God-fearing" is, at least to me, a beautiful term.

One of the problems with the English language is that, although it is an extremely flexible language, it occasionally suffers from a blurriness of expression. The classic example is that of "hot." For example, your friend is eating Mexican food and he or she says the food is "hot." "Hot hot or spicy hot?" you might ask. But if you spoke Bahasa Melayu, the Malay language, the friend would have originally said that the food was either panas (of a hot temperature) or padas (spicy hot). There would have been no linguistic confusion to begin with.

Arabic has a similar differentiation with regard to the word "fear." In Arabic, the word for what could be considered normal "fear," the "emotion caused by [an] actual or perceived danger or threat" (per Wiktionary), comes from the root خ و ف (khā wāw fā). The word for "fear" that comes from this root is "khawf." (The only other primary word that comes from this root that is used in the Qur'an is "threaten.") An example of a Qur'anic verse that uses "khawf" is 2:62:

Those who believe (in the Qur'an), and those who follow the Jewish (scriptures), and the Christians and the Sabians,- any who believe in God and the Last Day, and work righteousness, shall have their reward with their Lord; on them shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve.

The Muslims, Christians, Jews, Sabians and any others who meet the conditions listed in this verse would not fear the potential physical torment of hell because, insha'allah, they would be going to jannah (heaven) instead.

However, when the Qur'an talks about "fearing Allah (swt)," the root normally used is و ق ي (wāw qāf yā). The most prominent word that comes from this root is taqwa; however, the meaning of taqwa is somewhat more complex than simply "fear" in the sense of "extreme veneration or awe." According to the Quranic Arabic Corpus, a fantastic concordance of the Qur'an produced by the University of Leeds (UK), taqwa has a number of meanings, including "protect," "righteous" and "righteousness," "save," "piety," "God-conscious" and, of course, "fear."

But the word taqwa, even among Muslims, can be difficult to fully comprehend. A number of people over the centuries have tried to define or describe taqwa. Yusuf Ali (1872-1953), an Indian translator of the Qur'an into English, wrote that the fear with regard to the fear of Allah (swt) should be "the reverence which is akin to love, for it fears to do anything which is not pleasing to the object of love" (footnote 427 to verse 3:102).

Ali ibn Abi Talib (c. 598 - 661 CE), the fourth Caliph of the Muslim empire, defined taqwa as being "the fear of Jaleel (Allah), acting upon the tanzeel (Quran), being content with qaleel (little), and preparing for the day of raheel (journeying from this world)."

The Sufi Shaykh Hafiz Ghulam Habib (1904-1989) defined taqwa as "the shunning of everything and anything that causes a deficiency in one’s relationship with Allah."

However, the description I like the best comes from the following hadith:

Hadrat Umar ibn Khattab (R.A) once asked Hadrat Ibn Ka’ab (R.A) the definition of taqwa. In reply Hadrat Ibn Ka’ab asked, “Have you ever had to traverse a thorny path?” Hadrat Umar replied in the affirmative and Hadrat Ka’ab continued, “How do you do so?”

Hadrat Umar said that he would carefully walk through after first having collected all loose and flowing clothing in his hands so nothing gets caught in the thorns hence injuring him. Hadrat Ka’ab said, “This is the definition of taqwa, to protect oneself from sin through life’s dangerous journey so that one can successfully complete the journey unscathed by sin.”

So, for me, a God-fearing person is truly an upstanding individual. And there's nothing "ugly" about that.

Are Muslims Sexually Repressed?

The original question asked was:

Are American (or even non-Muslim Asian) cultures really more sexually repressed than Islamic cultures?

And I answered:

I'm not convinced that Islamic cultures (or, at the very least, Islamic culture here in SE Asia) are as sexually repressed as you might think. All these kids aren't delivered by stork, ya know! ;) However, Muslims generally believe that private matters between husband and wife stay within the family and are not discussed with others. And I think that this lack of discussion outside the family may be creating a perception among non-Muslims that Muslims are sexually repressed when we're not. (And the same reasoning may explain other groups, such as American conservative protestants who also have a perception of being sexually repressed.)

To which the followup question was:

How so -- isn't Islam pretty unequivocal about condemning homosexuality and sex outside of marriage?

Islam also requires a strict code of modest dress, and sex segregation is part of many Muslim cultures.

What definition of "sexual repression" are you using?

And my response is:

I don't view any of these things as being indicative of "sexual repression." Homosexuality and sex outside of marriage is forbidden especially so as to prevent the spread of various diseases; likewise, sex outside of marriage is forbidden so as to give any resulting child from any sexual activity the chance to grow up within a nuclear family, supported by both parents both emotionally and financially. As for gender segregation, this is done only to prevent improper behavior between the sexes.

The thing about "modest dress" and, indeed, the entire notion of "sexual repression" among Muslims is that what non-Muslims see is merely our public face, what we Muslims want you to see. What you don't see is the private face of Muslim life away from non-Muslims. The dress codes for both men and women are indeed about modesty, piety and avoiding improper behavior, but that has nothing to do with Muslim family life, when the hijab comes off. For me, sexual repression is about the fundamental attitudes people have toward sexual behavior: procreation only vs. procreation and pleasure vs. pleasure only. Islam definitely encourages the middle view: procreation and pleasure. We love to have sex for the pleasurable and loving experience, but we also love kids (and I think the demographic statistics bear that latter statement out; certainly the Christians are worried about Muslim birth rates).

So I would say, don't confuse what you see with reality. :) By this I mean, seek to understand the reasoning behind what the Qur'an and Sunnah command, whether that thing is allowed or forbidden. The biggest problem Islamophobes have in understanding Islam and Muslim culture is that they take almost everything at face value and react off of what they see. But they have little to no understanding of the deeper meanings or reasonings behind our concepts and behaviors. These people the Qur'an compares with the "lolling dog" (7:176) or cattle (7:179, 25:44, 47:12). The Qur'an really does expect Muslims to understand the deeper meanings, not just what lies on the surface.