Sunday, April 29, 2007

COMMENT: On practising certificates and degrees ...

Recently, the Sydney Morning Herald did an excellent series of articles on Islam in Australia. Among them was one by Deborah Snow on the work of the al-Ghazali Centre based in Sydney.

Ms Snow made the following observation ...

Ali's standing as a religious teacher is not fully accepted in some parts of Sydney's Islamic community. Some question his knowledge of Arabic, and the nature of the religious training he has received abroad.
I am among those who have expressed reservations. Some days ago, I received a lengthy comment on a previous entry of this blog from an anonymous person. I reproduce that comment below ...

Assalamu Alaikum,

I hope this doesn't get wiped out...


As a student of Al-Ghazzali centre and advocate of Sidi Afroz Ali, I am deeply offended by the claims of Irfan Yusuf. I will begin with the facts... Sidi Afroz has been studying Islam since the age of 7. He was a qualified Imam in Fiji in 1984. I've seen the certificate. The reason I've seen the certificate is because I approached him directly and didn't make my first port of call a public forum. Show a little humility and respect for those who are somewhat more knowledgeable than ourselves. I've also seen his Ijaza to teach Hanafi Fiqh. The purpose of an Ijaza is not to have it hanging on a wall in an office, it is not a law degree in a lawyers office or doctors practicing certificate. A teacher should not have to justify his position to his students rather the Ijaza serves the purpose of being proof to another teacher that one is qualified to study at the next level. For example you cannot attend university unless you have completed your Higher School Certificate. Similarly, you can only further your religious knowledge with another teacher if you have an Ijaza noting your completion or mastery of the preceding level of that particular subject, be it fiqh, aqeedah etc.. As a result of this, his other two Ijaza's in Shafii fiqh and aqeedah are kept Zaytuna Institute where they will be required as evidence from him by from his future teaches.

Sidi Afroz openly says that he STUDIED in Medina at the Medina University. He does NOT say that he has any degree from that institution, nor does he rely on the knowledge gained there. He mentions his time there so as not to be accused of hiding anything. This is why he can't show documentation saying that he completed his studies there, simply because he did not. If you require proof, ask Professor Abdul Saeed of Melbourne University and stop slandering. He has studied in Pakistan, Mauritania and later this year inshallah, at al-Azhar.

This by the way is not an attack Irfan Yusuf. It is a memo/note to the doubters.

Irfan, you mention the names of sheikhs and elders that you would like Sidi Afroz to display his credentials to. Have you asked any of these sheikhs whether or not they are interested in sighting his credentials? Have you asked any of them if they have any issues with Sidi Afroz? I know for a fact that you haven't asked at least two because I have. They are neither interested in seeing his credentials nor do they have any issues with any of his teachings. The reason for this is that neither of the two sheikhs have heard anything negative from anyone noteworthy in the community regarding Sidi Afroz. The simple formula is 'if it ain't broke, don't fix it.'

Regarding taking money for classes; Our community has to snap out the fantasy that everything should be free, mosques across the country are empty, community leaders holding onto ideas of yester year and being run by old boys clubs serving the interests of a select few and leaving the rest to fend for themselves. Al-Ghazzali centre does not charge you money to feed 400+ homeless every month, to do morning invocations, or to attend any of its classes (no one will be refused entry due to inability to pay) this does not apply to structured courses such as the Foundations Diploma or specialised workshops. For the money you do pay, you get undivided attention, all the time you want with the teacher, a quality product and at times as another brother succinctly noted an 'inconvenient truth'.

Please brothers and sisters, let us not cause fitna and spread bad words amongst ourselves about our teachers. Let us look at our own faults and diseases and if we have an issue, go to the source. Sidi Afroz is available at the Al-Ghazzali centre on Saturdays between 1pm and 3pm. If you would like to discuss anything that you have read, seen, heard, are unclear about, be a man and go ask the questions that I humbly confronted my teacher with.

Wassalam

P.S If this does not put to rest doubts, than go and see Afroz and have a chat. I urge you to do this and stop committing grave sins. May Allah purify all our hearts Inshallah.

My detailed response to this comment is reproduced below ...

“As a student of Al-Ghazzali centre and advocate of Sidi Afroz Ali,”

=> Are you claiming to be Afroz’s lawyer? In what sense are you an advocate?

“I am deeply offended by the claims of Irfan Yusuf. I will begin with the facts... Sidi Afroz has been studying Islam since the age of 7.”

=> I have been studying Islam since age 4 when I started learning the Arabic alphabet and memorising certain chapters of the Qur’an. So what?

“He was a qualified Imam in Fiji in 1984. I've seen the certificate.”

=> How does one qualify as an imam in Fiji? In what sense was he an imam? Did he lead prayers in a mosque? Does he lead the Friday service as I used to at Macquarie University for some years? Can I now claim to be an imam?

“The reason I've seen the certificate is because I approached him directly and didn't make my first port of call a public forum.”

=> Lucky you. I approached him directly as well, but never saw anything despite repeated promises. I’m not the only one to have approached him directly. Each time someone approaches him and seeks to view his qualifications, Afroz prevaricates and/or becomes abusive. Why? What can one say about someone who questions other people’s credentials, yet when asked about his own, becomes rude and abusive?

“I've also seen his Ijaza to teach Hanafi Fiqh.”

=> In which area/s of hanafi fiqh? Was it in the entirely of hanafi fiqh? Or in a selection of books? To claim to have ijaza in hanafi fiqh is a nonsense. Hanafi law is the broadest and most comprehensive of the four Sunni schools of law, covering a range of areas.

“The purpose of an Ijaza is not to have it hanging on a wall in an office, it is not a law degree in a lawyers office or doctors practicing certificate.”

=> You clearly don’t have much of an idea about the purpose of ijazas or university degrees. Both are means of accreditation. Standardised accreditation. You only get the accreditation if you go through a process which is standardised and which ou can only get if you go through a structured learning process and you pass certain assessment procedures. If you don’t have the accreditation, fools can still go to you for professional advice. If you claim to have accreditation but are reluctant to show it, one can infer that you are being less than completely honest.

“A teacher should not have to justify his position to his students rather the Ijaza serves the purpose of being proof to another teacher that one is qualified to study at the next level.”

=> Afroz is not my teacher. I have every right to ask him to prove his claims and qualifications.

=> My teachers at school had teaching qualifications. Had they not had any qualifications, they would not have been employed.

=> If people are happy to learn intricate and specialised areas of Islamic jurisprudence from a man who hides his qualifications, that is their choice. I choose not to do so. I also choose to warn others from doing so.

“For example you cannot attend university unless you have completed your Higher School Certificate. Similarly, you can only further your religious knowledge with another teacher if you have an Ijaza noting your completion or mastery of the preceding level of that particular subject, be it fiqh, aqeedah etc.. As a result of this, his other two Ijaza's in Shafii fiqh and aqeedah are kept Zaytuna Institute where they will be required as evidence from him by from his future teaches.”

=> This is the first time I have heard this claim. I will write to the Zaytuna Institute and confirm if this is in fact the case.

“Sidi Afroz openly says that he STUDIED in Medina at the Medina University. He does NOT say that he has any degree from that institution, nor does he rely on the knowledge gained there.”

=> Absolute rubbish. Afroz Ali has repeatedly claimed to have a degree in sharia law from Madina Islamic University. He has made this claim at an Affinity conference on September 11. He made this claim during a seminar organised by the University of Western Sydney. He has also made this claim during a series of lectures he delivered in New Zealand.

=> Further, the claim to holding degrees from Madina has been made in his presence or in promotional material. He knew full well this erroneous and false representation was being made about him, yet he at no stage corrected those making the claim. He was quite happy for those sponsoring his appearances to make this claim about him, yet never did he once correct it.

"He mentions his time there so as not to be accused of hiding anything. This is why he can't show documentation saying that he completed his studies there, simply because he did not."

=> So what did he do at Madina University? Did he complete even one single course? Did he do a summer course? Did he complete a non-award subject? Did he sell man’oush at the canteen? If he completed no systematic study there, why mention it?

=> I have been to Darul Uloom Korangi and Darul Uloom Binuri Town in Karachi. I’ve sat with some shuyukh there. I even gave a bayan in Korangi which was heard by a teacher from the Darul Uloom and whose contents he approved of. So?

"If you require proof, ask Professor Abdul Saeed of Melbourne University and stop slandering."

=> I did. Professor Abdullah Saeed says he doesn’t recall ever studying alongside a student named Afroz Ali. I guess you will say Professor Saeed is lying and slandering.

"He has studied in Pakistan, Mauritania and later this year inshallah, at Al Azhar."

=> A few years ago, he was claiming that his courses were receiving accreditation from al-Azhar. Now it seems he hasn’t even studied there.

=> I also studied in Pakistan. So what? I spent 9 months at the Madressa of the Masjid al-Falah in Karachi.

"Irfan, you mention the names of sheikhs and elders that you would like Sidi Afroz to display his credentials to. Have you asked any of these sheikhs whether or not they are interested in sighting his credentials?"

=> Yes, I have. One of them is a senior imam who was Mufti of an entire province in Turkey and has a Masters Degree from Madina Islamic University.

“Have you asked any of them if they have any issues with Sidi Afroz?”

=> Yes I have. Yes they do.

“I know for a fact that you haven't asked at least two because I have.”

=> I have no way of verifying this because you choose to remain anonymous. For all I know, you could be Afroz Ali yourself.

“They are neither interested in seeing his credentials nor do they have any issues with any of his teachings.”

=> Well, one of them has had his own spot of bothers of late, not to mention frequent overseas travel. Another has expressed serious reservations to me, as have a number of his students. A third has invited Afroz to teach at his sharia college on the proviso that he show his credentials and qualifications.

“If this does not put to rest doubts, than go and see Afroz and have a chat. I urge you to do this and stop committing grave sins.”

=> The best way for the doubts to be alleviated is for Afroz to be up front and open. Personally, I have no problems with the activities of the Ghazali centre in relation to its work with Just Enough Faith or other groups. I have no problem with its inter-faith or other works. I have no problems with its retreats. Even after I brought up these issues with Afroz personally and then publicly, I still participated in and supported certain Ghazali centre programs with no hesitation. My issue is with his attacks on others who express views contrary to his own. Let me give you an example. I once made a comment to the effect that I do not recognise Sheik Hilaly as my Mufti. Afroz Ali thereupon remarked that my refusal to regard Sheik Hilaly as my Mufti affected my aqida. When I asked him for proof of this, he made some reference to Tahawi and then proceeded to claim he had an ijaza in aqida. Despite repreated requests, I have not yet sighted his ijaza in aqida. Yet I am expected to take such an obviously wrong statement for granted on the bases that I must trust Sidi Afroz.

=> I have had other persons send messages to this blog concerning matters which I believe severely compromise Afroz’s credibility. I have deliberately not posted them because they appear to concern private family matters. However, there are issues beyond mere dishonesty concerning qualifications. If you are not Afroz, please feel free to inform Afroz and I will be happy to forward him these unmoderated posts.

=> I realise some will not believe this, but I seriously have no personal issues with Afroz. My concern is that the good work he does will suffer if he does not provide consistent explanations about the issues I have raised. We have already seen the damage done to our community by people making false claims. There are many young people who look upto Afroz as an elder and as a teacher. He owes it to them to be transparent and honest.

Words © 2007 Irfan Yusuf

Stumble Upon Toolbar

Thursday, April 05, 2007

CRIKEY: In search of consistency: How Kevin Andrews applies his ministerial discretion ...


Immigration Minister Kevin Andrews has a residual discretion to refuse a visa to anyone, an authority he describes succinctly as follows:

It's unrelated to religion, it's related to whether there is a risk to our national security, whether there is a risk to vilification of segments of the Australian community, inciting discord, these are the sorts of criteria which are looked at under these provisions.


But for the discretion to make any sense, it must be exercised consistently. The Government looks a little stupid banning Wahhabi speaker Bilal Phillips as a security threat whilst allowing in Alex Vella, the head of a violent bikie gang with a criminal record.

And why has Andrews (or his predecessor) not banned speakers who engage in "vilification of a segment of the Australian community"? Or does Andrews think it's OK for Mark Steyn and Raphael Israeli to generate hatred toward 360,000 Australians of a certain faith? Does Andrews believe that some Australians are more deserving of vilification than others? Is this really unrelated to religion?

I'm no fan of the theology of a fringe Muslim sect founded in the Arabian peninsular by one Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab, or of its promoters like Dr Bilal Phillips. Bilal Phillips featured prominently on the UK Channel 4 documentary Undercover Mosque. He's visited Australia before on at least one previous occasion. But is he a national security threat?

The Hun got its Muslim sects confused, claiming yesterday that Phillips "holds to a radical form of the religion", unlike another invited scholar (Sheik Jafar Idris) who "espouses the radical form of Islam known as Wahhabism". Nonsense. They're both Wahhabis.

The tabloid further claims Phillips promotes certain criminal sanctions on Fridays. But is defending elements of Saudi criminal law the same as calling for its implementation in Australia?

Phillips isn't the first Wahhabist scholar to be banned. Abdur-Raheem Greene, a UK-born Wahhabist, copped a similar ban in August 2005, despite delivering a number of speeches across the Tasman.

DIAC-heads last year delayed issuing a visa to Malek Triki, Al-Jazeera's London correspondent, who was keynote speaker at a conference organised by UTS and Macquarie University. On that occasion, it's believed DIAC-heads thought Triki looked and sounded a little too much like Saddam Hussein's surname of Tikriti.

Yep, those Muslims certainly are a triki bunch!

First published in the Crikey daily alert for 5 April 2007.

© Irfan Yusuf 2007


Stumble Upon Toolbar

Tuesday, April 03, 2007

On Paul Sheehan, Fred Nile and the grand Muslim conspiracy ...

Some of you may have seen the news the other day of Unionist leader Ian Paisley sitting next to Sin Fein leader Gerry Adams and agreeing to share power for the seek of furthering peace in Northern Ireland.

Of course, we all know that 12 months ago, this would have seemed impossible. 10 years ago, Paisley would have happily handed Adams over to British police if he had the chance. And Catholics and Protestants weren’t exactly getting along.

Still, some mad-capped Islamist sitting in a cave and inspired by hatred and paranoia would have just said: “Nope, their all nasty European Western Crusading Christians! We must wage jihad against the lot of them!!”

I’m not sure which cave Paul Sheehan was seated in when he wrote his column yesterday. I guess he must think that Sunnis and Shias are involved in a similar conspiracy to the one that has enabled the unified crusaders of Northern Ireland to invade the lands of Islam. Read this and try not to laugh …

The absolutist worldview of “Islam versus blasphemy” has proved seductive to millions of young Muslims on both sides of the Shiite-Sunni divide, as the governments of France, Britain, Germany, Holland, Spain and Denmark - home to 15 million Muslims - have discovered to their cost.


Right on, Paul! Who gives a rat’s not-so-halal backside if Shia and Sunni Muslims are cutting each other’s throats in Iraq? Who cares if Shia holy days in Pakistan coincide with sectarian violence? Who cares if Shia and Sunni Islamists have completely different perspectives on how their theocratic utopias would work. Who cares if Iranian Sunnis aren’t able to establish mosques in Iran ?

Sheehan’s obvious expertise in Middle Eastern, Central Asian and Islamist politics leads him to the obvious conclusion - those blasted Muslims are all in it together. And they’ve got another 15 million European Muslims ready to join the united forces of Usama bin Khomeini. Or was that Ayatollah bin Ladin?

Sheehan somehow links the 1979 Iran Revolution to the 1996 Taliban takeover of Afghanistan . Iran supported Shia militias which fought with the Northern Alliance . The Taliban waged war against the northern Alliance and massacred Shia Muslims from the Tajik and Hazara tribes.

See? They’re all linked. Sheehan’s right. Fred Nile was right also. They’re all damned Muslims!

© Irfan Yusuf 2007

Stumble Upon Toolbar

Sunday, April 01, 2007

COMMENT: Indonesian Muslims Caught Between Loud-Mouthed Feminism & Playboy?

It’s so hard being an Indonesian (or indeed any) Muslim these days. You get so many conflicting messages from the neo-Cons. I mean, consider these.

First …

You get hammered for allegedly treating your women in a manner unsuited to the feminism of Pamela Bone. As if ageing Western feminists marching in the streets are really going to help Muslim women activists struggling to achieve basic rights from patriarchal societies inspired less by religion than by ancient entrenched cultures. Loudmouths like Taslima Nasrin don’t go down too well with Muslim feminists in Bangladesh.

But then …

When you wake up and do decide to adopt some feminism, you get hammered by Indian journos for wearing a nasty skullcap and for not allowing them to see your women’s private parts.

The debate over Indonesian Playboy had already started when I was there back in January last year. Yes, there were a fair number of mullahs opposed to pornography. But there were also some respected NGO’s we visited, including women’s groups like Rifka Annisa in Yogyakarta.

As in Australia, so in Indonesia you don’t find too many feminists jumping up and down supporting pornography. Yet if you believe journalists like Sasanand Dhume, you’d think that Indonesia is being overrun by nasty religious zealots wearing skullcaps.

(Amazing how skullcaps figure so frequently. It makes you wonder if there’s more in common between 21st century Islamophobia and mid-20th century anti-Semitism than meets the eye …)
And what sophisticated argument can be found in this analysis? Cop this …

American popular culture ought to be celebrated rather than derided. In its crass commercialism and blithe disregard for Islamist sensibilities lie the greatest hopes of bringing Muslim societies to terms with modernity.

Will Mr Dhume be giving the same advice to Hindu extremists who oppose the celebration of Valentine’s Day? Don't hold your breath ...

© Irfan Yusuf 2007

Delicious
Bookmark this on Delicious

Digg!

Get Flocked

Stumble Upon Toolbar