WHAT IS WRONG ABOUT ISLAM?

PART ONE: INTRODUCTION

This narrative will first look at the West and her Media’s misunderstanding about Islam and try to explain where it has gone wrong . This paper aim to distinguish and give a clear understanding of what Islam is as a religion in relation to being a Muslim. I shall give a much more significance and broad definition to Islam and certain terms in presenting my argument to give a strong view in opposition to what the Western Misunderstandings are about Islam as a religion and Muslims as followers.

In this work, the word “Islam” will be define to means peace and submission to Allah. ‘Peace’ means to be at peace with yourself and your surroundings. ‘Submission’ means to submit to the Will of Allah. A broader meaning of the word “Islam,” is to achieve peace by submitting to the Will of Allah. ‘The Will of Allah’ under this context refers to what is instructed in the glorious Quran(also Koran) and demonstrated by His righteous prophets and followed by other pious Muslim servants. The words ‘Islam’ and Muslim are two different things. Islam as it is stated above is a religion, and the word Muslim is the person who strictly follows the rules and the regulations of Islam and therefor they cannot be substituted in for each other. What I aim pointing out here is that when a Muslim misact it is not because Islam is wrong and should not also be generalize as something condone in Islam or something done by all Muslims.

In the second part of the paper I also endeavoured to clarify some of the most common misconceptions in the Western Media. After every issue which I considered to be a misconception, a brief and clear argument is given for the purpose of this paper. ‘Misunderstandings’ is used here to mean to understand incorrectly, while thinking one has understood correctly. In this paper, misunderstanding and misconception are seen to mean exactly the same and thus are continuously used to substitute each other. ‘Media’ in this work is used to mean any communication channels through which news, entertainment, education, data, or promotional messages are disseminated. Media in this case includes every broadcasting and narrowcasting medium such as newspapers, magazines, TV, radio, billboards, direct mail, telephone, fax, and internet. The ‘West’ in this context refers to Europe, as well as many countries of European colonial origin with substantial European ancestral populations in the Americas and Oceania. The Western Media is seen here as a very powerful tool of propaganda against Islam and thus, at some levels of my narration I interchanged it with the West or used them both together. In this thesis, the word propaganda only referrers to those dishonest messages against Islam. Because the Western Media and the West are undisputedly powerful I argued needs reformations to take a new look to enhance piousness toward Islam in creating a tranquil and democratic society.

My deliberations are defended and correct and up to date. However the regulations or Islam per se which I try to explain, I am but just a subject to them, and I am proud that being a Muslim, is an obligation upon me to play my quota in propagating Islam especially in clarifying misconceptions. The following responses are based on actual questions asked to me by various non-Muslims with whom I have had contact, others however, I tried attempting them from demonstrations and manipulations I continue to live through by the Western media. The answers are based on my experiences and researches I underwent at the college as a specialist student on Islamic Religious Knowledge and at the university when we gave a broad scope look at the world of Islam also I underwent a heavy research using this recent research and writing skills. Facts in this work are supported by the Koran, Sunnah and other glorious scholars. If there are unintentional errors or mistakes, they are mine and did not belong to the perfect Islam and should be either further research or totally rejected. I am not an authority here.

The third and the last part of the paper concluded the argument with a summary and recommendation.

The text is deliberately structured for a debate and leaves the reader to make a choice.

PART ONE: THE WESTERN WORLD AND HER MEDIA’S NOTION ABOUT ISLAM

It is always far from easy speaking on Islam not because it is perceived complex but because the ‘Muslim world’ is under a great ‘threat’ not least because of their being Muslims but also because of their fastest influence and transformation that could not allow their opposites calm. Because they could not do this, each time they converge over their drawing boards was to criticize Islam. But that would have been very okay in creating a democratic society , but what was not fair is fabricating stories to propaganda and facilitate instability against Islam or the ‘Muslim world’.

The pluralistic society we are living changing from being a “melting pot” to a “salad bowl” in which all ingredients are encouraged to preserve and display their distinct individual taste and flavour should also allow Islam her qualities. Transformations, developments, wars, relationships , democracies all continue to create more questions about Islam. However, even though Islam is a major religion with over I billion followers worldwide and nearly 6 million in the U.S.A. alone, some Americans still think it is a cult, some believe all Muslims are terrorists, criminals, unfaithful and a lot more negative adjectives that the non-Muslims use in defining Muslims.[1] Not allowing the exercise of Islamic cultures and traditions in countries like France where Muslim women cannot veil in public shows how unfair our society is treating the Muslims.[2]The Western Media has portrayed this as an attempt in creating security and fail to mentioned the right to practice religion. The denial by the British government the entry of Muslim scholars like Dr. Zakir Naik and Dr.Bilal Philips to visit England for public talks and quranic recitation on Islam respectively were plain denial to his rights. [3] Yet the media fail to acknowledged that and suggested that it was a measure to prevent terrorist movements. Islam is associated to terrorism in the West.

Our daily affairs in which the relationship between the Western and Muslim World and between Muslims and non-Muslims in Europe and North America is a central issue when combined with various publications on this topic show that the relationship between the groups concerned is a tense one. Mutual contacts are based mainly on stereotypes and prejudice, which are clearly observable in the various reports in the media in which Muslims are described as fanatics, irrational, primitive, belligerent, and dangerous. Such generalizations and simplifications indicate that where expertise is lacking, fantasy surges ahead and where knowledge is faulty, emotion plays a central role in the regulation of the course of mutual relationships[4]. Dating back to the eighties up to the present day, the media frequently refer to the alleged danger of Islam. The bombing on 9/11 was describe by America, The BBC, The CNN and other Western counter parts as an Islamic movement and that Islam was close to terrorism if not in fact a terrorist religion. [5]When the BBC covers the recent attacks by the Bokou Haram movement in Nigeria, The Al-shabab movement in Somalia they cannot see them as independent movement under an agenda unjustifiable to be Islamic but rather interested in reporting one-sidedly against Islam by describing them to be Islamist and Muslim Jihadist. I argued that this move by the Western Media is deliberate to a great extent.

In the other way around warning against the threat of the Muslim enemy is not new in the Western world.[6] Since decades ago the West and her Media have being promoting such warnings uninterruptedly without presenting any substantial evidence to back up their claims.[7] Concerns and Western propaganda on such are yet unstoppable as Charlie Hebdo continues with his caricaturing of Islam. However this western attitude is at fault for not only been undemocratic but to an extent Inhuman. Due to this propaganda and fabrications against Islam by the powerful West and her Media many people have become moved about the stand of West against Islam[8].

“There are no Islamic threats to the West…”[9] As I agreed with these authors again I argue that the fake Islamic threats the west shows via propaganda should be considered a myth for a number of reasons[10]. To begin with, Muslims have never carried out any significant militant action in the West. On the other hand, Muslims instead have become more and more frequently fallen victim to terrorist actions[11]. Terrorism according to the Oxford standard dictionary means someone who causes terror, thus, in the light of the above meaning, Muslims have now become symbols of terror by the wrong notion of the West and her Media and thus feel very scared in the society. Therefore, in the case, the West Media is Waging terror on the Muslim population and Islam as a religion because they are viewed to be ‘terrorists’, ‘fundamentalist’ and ‘extremist’. Until now, the willful allegations that Islamic and Western culture are not compatible and that Muslims cannot fit into European societies are generated by an unfounded prejudice towards Islam and its followers. This is a great mistake by the West whether by a deliberate move or otherwise. The heated debates in the European Union per se on such issues as polygamy, veiling school girls, the circumcision of Muslim girls, and the influence of Islamic religious education were viewed to be undemocratic, bad and could not be tolerated in the West is but false and unfounded. Thus such practices cannot be done in the West and are punishable severely when followed by Muslims. This effort against Islam has allowed the West to make laws unapt for Islam just like the French law ban of veil in 2010 that was upheld by the European Court of Human Right. This general stand of the European Court of Human Right justifies the wrong notion of the West on Islam.

“The ‘Long War’ against Islam has already begun. Western powers may have started it how thwy willed, but it has also long been ut of their control. Failure is written all over it.” The question that we need to ask ourselves is that is it all okay to define a whole using a part like it is common in the West defining Islam negative because of the actions of a set of ‘Muslims’’? Whether this is answered in the affirmative or not the West is clearly seen to have an intention deliberate and sometimes clandestine waged against Islam but will always failed.[12]

The ‘anti-Muslimism’ of the West which I will define as the opposition towards Islam and Muslims which encompasses racist, xenophobic, and stereotypical elements to name just a few continuous to be viewed natural in the Western Society and the Western media helps to add to it. The latest issue of Charlie Hebdo, a satirical French magazine, spotlights Michel Houellebecq, author of a new novel that imagines the Islamisation of France and then the European Union but critics had denounced Mr Houellebecq’s book which depicts a near future in which Islamists win France’s presidency and compromise its freedoms, as Islamophobic scaremongering[13]. In this regard, the West is having a very wrong notion about Islam.[14]

Claiming Islam as a powerful evil threat to freedom and democracy as demonstrated above is but unfounded. Shadid and Van Koningsveld (1995) puts it “Not only does a unified Islamic World not exist, even were such a World to exist, it would fall for short of the economic and military power to compete with, let alone risk confrontation with the West”. The constructions of an ‘Islamic World’ by the media is not only false but shows also that they claims are counterattacking. They sees the hostility towards Muslims as a group and not Islam as such which sounds foolish and unfounded because Muslims are not at all independent of Islam. So the attempt of the West to create an ‘Islamic World’ could hold a lot of interpretation, however, for the purpose of this thesis, the West did not only missed out the real content of what an ‘Islamic World’ will be per se but also failed in their descriptions of Islam and Muslims. Meanwhile for the purposes of emphasis, if we should agree with the West that there exist an Islamic World, where is it and what are the treats it is alarming to the West? This question if answered justly could be rewarding and will serve to clear many wrong notions of the West.

On the misconceptions in the West about Islam, the methodology used by Western experts to analyze developments in the ‘Muslim World’ can be characterized by these misleading tendencies. First of all there is the persistent inclination to assume that Western norms and values are the sole points of reference in any analysis and to regard these as incompatible with those of Islam. Such an approach focuses mainly on analyzing points of conflicts between Islam and Western culture, simultaneously ignoring all existing similarities between the two cultures. To throw some light on this, since Islam is independent of Western Democracy, and could analyze and approve their social and political matters without seeking the consent and approval of the West and her Media, Islamic analysis and social and political processes were regarded not only bias but also unfit and underdeveloped and inferior to the Western approaches. In such moves the West clearly defined Sharia(Islamic Law) not only barbaric but also inhumane and must be condemned. They fail to realize the religious scriptures of Islam nor do they with her piratical approaches especially when it comes to the implementation of Islamic law. [15]They labeled it as the religion of cutting of hands, stoning, beating and killing. This is remarkably unfair.

As remarkably and clearly stated in ‘The Cambridge Companion to Comparative Law, page 194 by Mauro Bussani and Ugo Mattei, “Despite the contextual and historical contingencies that constitute the complex reality of Islamic law, rather paradoxically the Islamic legal legacy has been the subject of widespread and stubbornly persistent stereotypes and over-simplifications, and is highly contested and grossly understudied at the same time”. The search for points of conflict is not carried out in order to understand the behavior of Muslims but mainly in order to stress differences and distinctiveness, implicitly emphasizing the superiority of Western culture. In this regard are of the opinion that pure as it is any such thoughts and continuous use of fallacies as an approach is mainly used by those who want to maintain the hostile image of Islam in the West. They do not compare similarities, Christianity with Islam, or the realities of Europe with those of Africa or in the Middle East. So what they simply subject themselves to as a rule is comparing the religion Islam with the west. And if you ask the wrong questions you do not get the right answers.

The other misleading tendency concerns approaching all developments in the Muslim World as signals of extreme religiosity. In this regard I will still state that, for example the Iranian revolution has been characterised in the Western historical imagination only as a fanatical expression of religious fervour, ignoring all the social, political, and economic factors which gave rise to the revolutionary movement.[16] Also the origins of the Boko Haram Movement in the Delta Region and the Northern Part of Nigeria is also a good example here whose origin was never look upon as a social revolutionary movement claiming justice in The Delta Region of Nigeria but instead is continued to be seen as just an extremist, fundamentalist and terrorist Islamic Movement[17]. These and other such ideas easily lead to the deduction that there are various sources which contribute to the negative image of Islam and to the myth of the Islamic threat to the Western World. With this in mind, I voice of anti-Islamism as a ‘collage’ where every actor involve acts and is motivated by his or her own personal interest. Where are the democratic views of the West in their approaches towards Islam? Thus at this level, I claim that the West’s misconception is to a level a ‘deliberate move’.

Needless to say, presenting Islam as a threat to the Western World will instigate negative effects in the intercultural relations between the groups concerned. For these reasons such attitudes are based mainly on stereotypes and prejudice, thereby sharpening the differentiation between the ‘we’ and the ‘them’, leading to a vicious circle in the relationship between the Western and Muslim World and between Muslims and non-Muslims in general. It is well known that stereotypes and prejudice function as filters for the observation and interpretation of the behaviour of others and at the same time create a self-fulfilling prophecies. In other words, because of the prejudice towards others, people see in their behaviour what they expect to see on the basis of their prejudice, with the result that they inevitably will make wrong predictions concerning the behaviour of members of the other group. The western notion about is increasing causing social vices and must be corrected before it is too late.

PART TWO: SOME MORE QUESTIONS AND RESPONSES ON THE WESTERN MISCONCEPTION OF ISLAM

WHAT IS ISLAM-

The word “Islam” means peace and submission to Allah. Peace means to be at peace with yourself and your surroundings. Submission means to submit to the Will of Allah. A broader meaning of the word “Islam,” is to achieve peace by submitting to the Will of Allah. Philosophers might argue this but in Islam peace could only be achieved by being peaceful to yourself and to surroundings. Anything contrary to this is not Islam and must not be attributed to it even if committed by a person who claims to belong to Islam. Fundamentals cannot be ignored in Islam. Peace is thus fundamental in Islam and simply there cannot be any Islam without peace. Those who are not at peace with themselves or with their surroundings cannot be classify as Muslims. This did not also signify that Muslims who live in war torn areas are not Muslims. No. And I did not as well aim saying Muslims must not fight for their life. These are completely too different and complicated matters which are not deliberately my aim under discussion but however, it must be stated clear that Muslims are permitted by Allah to fight to defend their lives. However, when and where is a broader discussion. Muslims are only Muslims if they submit be to the will of Islam which is the will of Allah.

This is a unique religion with a name which signifies a moral attitude and a way of life. Judaism takes its name from the tribe of Judah, Christianity from Jesus Christ, Buddhism from Gautama Buddha and Hinduism from the Indus River to name but a few. However, Muslims derive their identity from the message of Islam[Allah] rather than the person of Muhammad, Araham, Issa, Musa, Nuah etc and this is simply why Muslims do not carry the names of prophets to worship because the prophets themselves were worshipers and were just showing the right path. This is also why there is universality in its uniqueness in the ‘Muslim world’. Allah, the Omnipotent gave us Islam and rules over it and cannot be changed. That is guaranteed till the end of time. Allah is the proprietor of the religion and no prophet, Iman or any other person, group etc is in fact an associate to Allah in ownership of the religion.[18] He will on the day of judgment judge over every man, jin, and angel and this is why no true Muslim should do evil.[19]

WHO CAN BE CLASSIFY A MUSLIM?

The word “Muslim” means one who submits to the will of God. This is done by declaring, SHADAH means that “There is no god but Allah and that Muhammad [may the peace and blessings of Allah be Upon Him] is the last Messenger of God.” In a broader sense, anyone who willingly submits to the Will of God is a Muslim. Thus, all the prophets preceding the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) were Muslims. The Quran specifically mentions Abraham, who lived long before Moses and Christ, saying, “He was not a Jew or a Christian, but a Muslim,” because he had submitted to the Will of Allah. Thus, there are Muslims who are not submitting at all to the Will of Allah and there are Muslims who are doing their best to live an Islamic life. One cannot judge Islam by looking at those individuals who have a Muslim name, but in their actions to judge for certain whether they are living are behaving as Muslims. The over generalization of terrorism or criminalization of Islam by the West because of the free will actions of a person, group or a society that claims to be Muslims does not represent Islam and not in fact the majority. The state of being a Muslim can be according to the degree to which one submits to the Will of Allah in his or her beliefs and actions. We most desist from classifying certain dishonest attributes of some so-called Muslims to the general Muslim community. It cannot be impartial. In fact this is normal in any other religion in the sense that there are pious and dishonest ones. Is like after tasting a bad orange fruit and because you had a bad taste you acclaim that all oranges are bad. This conclusion is definitely wrong. The one you have tested is bad which might be because of a lot of factors; lack of water, infested with diseases, polluted and so on. Should such an individual be interested in finding out how other oranges taste, here is not the stoppage and must go and go and go until he or she discover the true taste of all other oranges to know what it really means to be an orange. Muslims are not the same and must not even be assumed. However, what exist is that a true Muslim is a true Muslim anywhere and everywhere. They are at peace with themselves and others because they strictly follow the commandments of Allah and are always at peace with themselves and with their surroundings.[20]

THE DRESS CODE FOR MUSLIMS: Why most women wear veil and cover themselves ?

Islam emphasizes modesty. No person should be perceived as a sex object. There are certain guidelines both for men and women that their dress should neither be too thin nor too tight to reveal the form of the body. For men, they must at lease cover the area from the knee to the navel. Women’s dress should cover all areas except the hands and face. The prophet advice Muslim men to watch below and guide their modesty and ordered the Muslim women to take hijab and avoid temptations. Both sex has been ordered on lines when followed many of the societal conflicts like rape, sex in the open would not occur. The Islamic dress code is perfect and conserve modesty and serve as a form of protection and not to subjugate as conveyed by the West and it is equally commanding on both sexes in Islam.[21]

WHAT IS JIHAD IN ISLAM?

The word “jihad” means struggle or, to be specific, striving in the cause of God. Any struggle done in day-to-day life to please God can be considered jihad. One of the highest levels of jihad is to stand up to a tyrant and speak a word of truth. Control of the self from wrongdoing is also a great jihad. One of the forms of jihad is to take up arms in defense of Islam or a Muslim country when Islam is attacked and to save ones own life. This kind of jihad has to be declared by the religious leadership or by a Muslim head of state who is following the Quran and the sunnah. Jihad is a complex term and has not been defined as just a holy war neither by the Quran nor by the sunnah as the western propagandas are doing. Any war, fight, struggle or dispute not according to Islamic principles is null and void and does not represent Islam. There has never been in the history of Islam a war to force or revert people into Islam.[22]

DOES ISLAM PROMOTE VIOLENCE AND TERRORISM?

No. Islam is a religion of peace and submission and stresses the sanctity of human life. A verse in The Quran says, “Anyone who saves one life, it is as if he has saved the whole of mankind and anyone who has killed another person except in case of murder or mischief on earth, it is as if he has killed the whole of mankind” [23]. Islam condemns all the violence which happened in the Crusades, in Spain, in WW 11, or by acts of people like the Rev. Jim Jones, David Koresh, Dr. Baruch Goldstein, or the atrocities committed in Bosnia by Christian Serbs. Anyone who is doing violence is not practicing his religion. However, sometimes violence is the human response of an oppressed people as is the case in Palestine. These people have been displaced from their homeland, been put in refugee camps, and watched their relatives being killed and no one listens to their plight unless they do something to get the attention of the media. Although this is wrong, they think of this as a way to get attention. There is a lot of terrorism and violence in areas where there is no Muslim presence. For example, in Ireland, South Africa, Latin America, and Sri Lanka. Sometimes violence is due to a struggle between those who have with those who do not have or between those who are oppressed with those who are oppressors. We need to find out why people become terrorists. Unfortunately, the Palestinians who are doing violence are called terrorists, but not the armed Israeli settlers when they do the same. At this juncture we must be very careful not to underrate the powers of the Media especially the western media. The media could change black to white and vice versa. Should we recalled a little back at the apartheid era in South Africa, the British did define Nelson Mandela as terrorist number one just because he stood against them for the independence of his people but when the apartheid was over, Mr. Nelson Mandela was given the Nobel Peace Prize and became the first president of south Africa. Emerging terrorist number one becoming a Nobel Prize Winner from the same people who labelled him so. During the American Revolution in 1775 the British named George Washington as terrorist number one because of his struggles for the liberation of his people but after the independence of America he became the first president and the godfather of all American presidents including George W. Bush. Think about a terrorist number one becoming the first US president. The media is misconstruing against Islam and not because Islam is so. According to the Quran, “There is no compulsion in religion” [24]Thus, no one can be forced to become a Muslim. While it is true that in many places where Muslim armies went to liberate people or the land, they did carry the sword because that was the weapon used at that time. However, Islam was not spread by the word because in many places where there are Muslims now, in the Far East like Indonesia, in China and many parts of Africa, there are no records of any Muslim armies going there. To say that Islam was spread by the sword would be to say that Christianity was spread by guns, F-16's and atomic bombs, etc. which is not true. Christianity was spread by the missionary work of Christians. Ten per cent of all Arabs are Christians. The “Sword of Islam” could not convert all the non-Muslim minorities in Muslim countries. In India, where Muslims ruled for 700 years, they are still a minority. In the US, Islam is the fastest growing religion and has six million followers without any swords used.

There is no concept of “fundamentalism” in Islam. The western media has coined this term to break those Muslims who wish to return to the basic fundamental principles of Islam and mould their lives accordingly. Islam is a religion of moderation and a practicing Muslim can neither be a fanatic nor an extremist. Fundamentalism as in Islam means someone who follows the principles of Islam. Therefore, a Muslim fundamentalist is someone knows, learn, follows and practise the fundamentals of Islam. For one to be a good Muslim he/she must know, learn, follow and practise the fundamentals of Islam. Just as for a medical doctor to be a good and recommended one, he must chose to know, learn, follow and practise the fundamentals of science especially in his field, for a student to be a mathematician he or she must know, learn, follow and practise all the fundamentals of his mathematics. Examples abound. Thus a fundamentalist Muslim is one who practise all the principles of Islam which are innocuous. Of course a fundamentalist could be bad depending on which field one studies. A cheat could be a fundamentalist but a bad societal element thus we cannot use one brush to paint all fundamentalist to be good or bad. Historically, the Webster’s Dictionary define a fundamentalist American Coptic Christians who protested against the church and say that not only that the message the bible is from God but also every single word and latter. This was the origin of the word fundamentalism. The Oxford dictionary defined a fundamentalist as a person who strictly adheres to the ancient scriptures of any religion but in the revised edition defined it a person who strictly adheres to the ancient scriptures of any religion especially Islam. Now Islam is been added in the new edition for this reason, anytime one hears a fundamentalist one straight forward think about a Muslim and thought them as well to be terrorist and extremist. In so far as I am concern I am a fundamentalist because I know there are no single fundamental of Islam against Islam. I am an extremist Muslim because I am extremely good, I am extremely just and I am extremely sociable. So depending on how the western media carries information dictates a lot things and carries a lot of ambiguity.

IS ISLAM OUT TO PROMOTE POLOGAMY?

No. Polygamy in Islam is to limit the number of wives. Historically, all the prophets except Jesus, who never married, had more than one wife. For Muslim men to have more than one wife is a permission which is given to them in the Quran, not to satisfy lust, but for the welfare of the widows and the orphans of war. It is not an injunction. In pre-Islamic times, men used to have many wives. One person had eleven wives and when he became a Muslim, he asked Prophet Muhammad (PBUH), “What should I do with so many wives?” The Prophet said, “Divorce all except four.” The Quran says, “You can marry two or three or four women if you can be equally just with each of them”.[25]Since it is very difficult to be equally just with all wives, in practice, most Muslim men do not have more than one wife. Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) himself was married to only one woman, Khadija, from the age of twenty-five to fifty three. In western society, some men who have one wife have many extramarital affairs. A survey published in USA TODAY(April 4, 1988, section D) asked 4,700 mistresses what they would like their status to be. They said that they preferred being a second wife rather than ‘the other woman,’ because they did not have any legal rights nor did they have the financial equality of the legally married wives and it appeared that they were being used by these men. To prevent this lust and unhealthy relationships, Islam permitted limited polygamy for men. Also scientifically speaking, the foetus of a female is stronger than a male foetus and this is why we have more male dying during pregnancy than do the female and thus we have more female population mostly anywhere in the world. Should polygamy be prohibited how many women will be left as a ‘state property’ without a man to marry them. Every Islamic fundamental has a good societal purpose that we must first understand before we condemned it.

ARE WOMEN OPPRESSED IN ISLAM?

No. On the contrary, Islam elevated the status of women 1,400 years ago by giving them the right to divorce, the right to have financial independence and support and the right to be identified as dignified women (wearing the modest dress) when in the rest of the world, including Europe, women had no such rights. Women are equal to men in all acts of piety [26]. Islam allows women to keep their maiden name after marriage. Whatever they earn belongs to them alone and they can spend it as they wish. It also asks men to be their protector as women are easily molested. Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) told Muslim men, “The best among you is the one who is best to his family.” Not Islam, but some Muslim men do oppress women today. This is because of their cultural habits or their ignorance about their religion.

IS ISLAM A TOLERANT RELIGION?

Islam recognizes the rights of the minority. To ensure their welfare and safety, Muslim rulers initiated a tax (jaziya) on them. Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) forbade Muslim armies to destroy churches and synagogues. Caliph Umar did not even allow them to pray inside a church. Jews were welcomed and flourished in Muslim Span when they were persecuted in the rest of Europe. They consider that part of their history as the Golden Era. In Muslim countries, Christians live in prosperity, hold government positions and attend their church. Christian missionaries are allowed to establish and operate their schools and hospitals. However, the same religious tolerance is not always available to Muslim minorities as seen in the past during the Spanish inquisition and the Crusades or as seen now by the events in former Yugoslavia, Israel and India. Muslims do recognize that sometimes the actions of a ruler do not reflect the teachings of his religion.

PART THREE: THE CONCLUTION AND RECCOMMENDATION

Much, however, not to their fault but to their ignorance about Islam. Thus, these delusions, misconstructions, misconceptions , fallacies and sometimes willful misinterpretations about Islam continue because of the lack of accurate info about the rudimentary teachings of Islam that continue to shape uncountable number of social evils that retrogress our society and sometimes because they just condemned Islam. Islam is the most peaceful religion in the world that can never be rejected and in fact has never fought a war of injustice. No true Muslim is a terrorist or a criminal. These are not of the teachings of Islam. There is no western fundamentalism, terrorism or extremism in Islam and neither those Islam recognize western fanatics. Throughout the history of Islam backed by the Holy Quran, Sunnah and the four faithful Caliphers who all live the life of Islam and left behind them faithful scholars who do not seek injustice and keep Islam in its purest way demonstrate how fenced the religion of Islam is and cannot be protected by making wars. Thus the western claim that Islam was propagated through the use of sword is without any foundation and this should demonstrated to the West that people who claim to fight with sword in propagating Islam are not real Muslims. Islam shall ever be pure and protected is said in the Koran in various chapters as mentioned above.

The on- going crisis in the Muslim world and the misrepresentation of Islam sometimes by the Western media challenges us to answer questions from our non-Muslim friends about our way of life in a simple and concise language. I have listen to many lectures from non-Muslim scholars and college and university students, church audiences, inter-faith gatherings, and have appeared on radio and TV talk shows but were always demonstrative of their lack of understanding of Islam and also some times because they hate her unstoppable progresses. I have before putting pen on paper endeavoured for an easy text that will clarify instead of adding to the growing misconceptions which are sometimes deliberate but sometimes complicated to one who knows not, I had to be grounded myself before I to send a message of Allah for which I shall be accountable.

However, what becomes more unfair and amazing is that social scientist are not putting interest in rectifying to show the right way and create a balance society but also what is most embarrassing is that Islamic Scholars are not also at best playing their quota. I strongly believe in the roles of the two groups mentioned above in their usage of the Koran, the Sunnah and their unbiased views much would have gone well by now.

The majority of the questions that most of the non-Muslims and enemies of Islam continue to construct are due to their unwillingness to accept the truth and follow the rulings of Allah and not because Islam is projected bias and unjust. Meanwhile, other questioners are on their way to finding the truth which I endeavour to portray here in my argument.

I believe that if toleration in the Western World is given to Islam either by allowing its full practice or studying it without prejudice these misconceptions will be cleared. I will recommend the West to wear fair glasses any time they are crowed over their drawing board about Islam.

In order to improve the image of Islam in the West, Western politicians, scientists, and the media have to acquire more adequate knowledge of Islam in general and on modern developments in the Muslim World in particular. Preserving tense relationships based on assumptions such as the clash of civilisations, the incompatibility of Islam and democracy, and the a priori rejection of Islamic political movements does not bode well for the realisation of good international understanding between both parts of the world an between Muslims and non-Muslims in general. A general strategy for the realisation of mutual understanding andacceptance between the Muslim and the Western world is presented by Al-182 W. Shadid & P.S. van Koningsveld Jabri . He suggests using the axiomatic method of Ibn Rushd’s (Averroes), the Euro-Arabic (Andalusian) philosopher, who applied this method in order to bridge the gap between religious leaders and philosophers created by their different interpretations of both religious and secular matters. The first principle implies the recognition of the ‘other’ within its own system.

For example, he based his argument on Salamé ‘ opinion and argued that Western states should ought to recognise that democracy is not necessarily built upon a one-person, one vote system. He said that Individualism is not a universal thing, nor a morally superiority, or philosophy; but he insisted that communitarianism is still valid as a shield against authoritarianism and arbitrary rule, hence, the protection of minorities must be part of any approach to the Middle East. Islam has historically provided formulas for maintaining several bodies of legislation within the same polity that apply to individuals on the basis of their religious affiliation. If Muslims are to be ruled according to the sharia, non-Muslims need the right to be ruled according to their own legislation and customs. Returning to those unique forms of legal and social plurality is easier, and possibly more urgent, than creating Western-style pluralism. This argument is a very strong one for clearing misconceptions about Islam and also a good procedure and a study into finding more and better solutions to our not only western misconception about Islam but also a unified society without stereotypes.