Moon 2.0

Another X-prize. Yay! For those of you who don't know, I was studying aerospace engineering until a few years ago, and the concept of flight inside and most especially outside the atmosphere has fascinated and intrigued me for a long time.

Several years ago, the X Prize foundation proposed a project to encourage private sector aerospace research. Most aerospace development hitherto has been predominantly government funded--often related to Defense programs. The goal was to build and successfully launch a spaceship--a reusable manned aircraft capable of reaching an altitude of about 62 miles, the "border" of space, so to speak, the edge of the atmosphere. No government funding allowed. The prize was $10 million, and was awarded in 2004 for SpaceShipOne, which some of you may have heard about. It became known as the Ansari X-Prize though, thanks to a donation from the Ansari family. (Recall Anousheh Ansari--the first Muslim woman in space!)

There have been a couple other boring X-prizes... for cleaner automobiles and a human genome project, but now there is another space race--to the moon. The goal is to send a robot to the moon which will go for a drive and send some pictures back home. Developing a space program has to begin a certain way... starting with achieving a particular altitude, then orbit. Launching to the moon has, in the past, been a two-phase trip which goes to orbit and then launches from orbit to the moon. This X-Prize is being funded by... Google! So now it's called the Google Lunar X-Prize.

Anyway, here's hoping that this X-prize sparks new development in the aerospace industry--more than super-maneuverable jets and missiles.

Learning the Hard Way

I had originally planned this post a few weeks ago and never fleshed it out. I was thinking about a recent lesson I had learned (the hard way) that ultimately made me even more grateful to Allah and aware of His mercy. But in fact, compared to an even more recent lesson that hit me just today, it pales in comparison. So I will be writing about the more profound and more recent of the two.

You see, I have hurt someone, someone that I care about very much. Not for any good reason either, and not because I was hurt, but just out of careless arrogance. You know that nobody will enter Paradise who has an atom's weight of arrogance in his heart? Anyway, I suppose if anyone acts rudely towards others, as I have on many occasions, it doesn't make an impact to hurt a stranger's feelings. But that same behavior directed towards a closer friend? And when that friend points out the gross wickedness inherent in that behavior, the problem seems ever so much more acute.

And that happened. I suppose one conclusion someone might draw, looking from the outside in, is that I didn't care for that person's feelings anyway, respect his opinion, or in fact even respect him. But that's not the case, for this is someone who I respect over everyone else.

And my very poor behavior revealed a much deeper problem--the filth on my heart. There is an organ in the body which, if it is sound and pure, the entire body will be pure, but if it is corrupted, then the body becomes corrupted as well. And that organ of course, is the heart.

So what was the lesson? That my heart, far from being pure, was corrupted, sullying my intentions and my deeds. That is a hard lesson to learn. It is easy to think about how someone else might be corrupted, how someone else might have the wrong intention... so much harder to point our fingers at ourselves and ask, "What is wrong with me?" And even if you can ask, it's still not easy to believe the answer.

But for me, there is no escaping it. And as if the lesson weren't brutal enough, the consequences of it are severe, costing me the truest friendship I've known. Hard times can bring us closer to Allah, and I am grateful for that as I beg and plead to the Turner of the Hearts, to the Forgiver, to turn my heart towards His deen, towards obedience to Him, and to forgive me and have mercy on me.

A Poison called Anger

It's deadly. It makes you weak. It burns in your veins until you let it erupt--spewing evil on everyone around you. I'm not angry... but I wonder why I get angry sometimes. The Prophet (saws) said that a strong man was one who could control his anger. So it must not be easy--must take real nerve and determination to keep it in check and maintain patience.

My inspiration for this post comes from a lecture set I've been listening to. I'm going through it the second time--this time taking notes so it sinks in better. It's a Muhammad Alshareef class, Fiqh Ad-Da'wah, subtitled Guiding to Allah By the Book. In fact, I'm so full of "inspiration" right now I could probably write for days. Alhamdulillah.

I thought that the lectures would be how-to of da'wah, dos and don'ts of talking about Islam. There is some of that... but the more I listen to it, the more the real magnitude of the message strikes me. The instructor gives many examples, and analogies, to help explain the points he make. In fact, if you're not paying attention it might seem that it's only just examples and analogies. One story he tells really hit me today--I guess I heard it at just the right time.

He talks about how he was in this Hajj Group when he lived in Saudi Arabia (he studied at the University of Medina, btw) for taking Americans on Hajj. And he explained some 'IBM' thing that maybe my readers in KSA might understand. Basically, that when you go somewhere to have something done you often here "inshaaAllah bukrah ma'lesh" (sorry if I mutilated it!) And that apparently means something like "come back tomorrow" and "forgive us." And he said after getting used to that, it takes a long stretch of hearing "inshaaAllah bukrah" to really get angry.

But he noticed that the Americans in this Hajj group were always so angry. For example, when someone would come and sit in their tent, and they would want to fight for their tent so it wasn't overtaken, to fight for their space, while he would just be inclined to go find somewhere else to sit. And then described how he'd have to hide almost, afraid that the guy would be so angry at him for not helping defend the tent.

And someone remarked about how calm he was, and not getting angry (and also, the person who was helping him, another student in Saudi I presume). A few years later, he moves to Maryland, and then goes back on Hajj after being there for a year. And while making tawaf he says someone pushed him, and he says he became so angry about people pushing in the Haram and having to teach them and will they ever learn, etc. And he described it like a poison.

Basically he said that the anger had just accumulated in him over that year, finally coming out at that trigger. And he referred to it as "snap anger" and "trigger anger," like it has just built up to a point where just pushing a button (metaphorically) causes the person to erupt in anger.

Now, I don't know what it is about America that might cause this to happen. Something about the way of life that slowly poisons us. If any of you have seen the Princess Bride, you might recall how Westley has to overcome this Vizzini person who is supposedly a genius (though we have good reason to doubt this.) And in their duel of wits, Westley places poison into a glass of wine and his opponent has to discover which. It turns out that Westley poisons both--as he has spent several years acquiring a tolerance to the poison. Which is kind of the opposite of what I'm talking about. But here's what I was thinking... I want to be more patient. How can I develop more patience? Practice by little bits? That is the antidote.

So just like Westley would probably take small doses of the poison over a period of several years, his body would develop a resistance to the small amounts. So when it had to handle the larger dose, it was ready. Here is a thought, then. The solution is not to just avoid things that make us angry, really, because in reality there will always be something which comes to us to spark that fire. The answer is to be patient with the small things--keep anger in check when it is very low. Acknowledge it, control it. And then, when faced with even greater calamities, instead of getting angry, we will have practiced being patient, so patience will come more naturally to us than anger.

Just like when the brother was in Saudi Arabia, and kept hearing "inshaaAllah bukrah," he was developing his patience, and tolerance, and things which caused his American brothers to erupt just bounced off him.

I ask Allah to give me patience, increase me in patience, and give me strength to control my anger.

Sacrifice for Islam? (pt 1)

This past weekend I was asked to prepare a talk about sacrifice. I was also asked to write an article for a monthly newspaper on a topic of my choice. Since school is a burden and on top of that I'm spending a lot of time working for the da'wah committee at the masjid, I have decided to simplify my life somewhat by writing the article about sacrifice as well, so I can put the same things into it.

The idea behind the topic, I think, stems from the fact I have converted to Islam, embraced a new religion and in so doing have given up or sacrificed some features of my old way of life. To help me gather my thoughts I'm going to try inshaaAllah to make notes on my blog--notes on sacrifice, to help me write the article and the speech inshaaAllah.

I have thought of making a list of actual things I've had to give up, but everything seems to fit into another category. I mean, I could say I've had to give up bacon or pepperoni, but that is not nearly as weighty as the rift in my family, and giving up my work breaks for prayer is rewarding enough to not seem to be a sacrifice. And in fact, it's hard to look back at my life and say it was better. So I don't feel like I've sacrificed much at all, because the quality of my life overall has improved. The things that I did give up just seem so petty and irrelevant, and many things that I wouldn't wish back even if I could.

And then I think about the muhajireen--they had to give up everything they had in leaving Mecca, a far greater sacrifice than I've made.

So I'm still not sure where to begin exactly with this idea of sacrifice... anyone else have any ideas?

Playing with the Boys

When I was growing up, I played mostly with my little brother. My sisters were much older and not interesting in playing really, when I was little. When I was 8 or 9, I remember we (family) got a fussball table. And so I played fussball probably more than an average kid might (unless he had one too). Last week I went to dinner at one sister's house with some friends, and the hostess had two children. A girl, 6, and boy, 5. The TV was on most of the time and the girl would watch it fairly intently. The boy would run around some then sit and watch, then run around some more... very hyper.

For one reason or another, I just thought this kid was hilarious. And so, somehow I ended up playing fussball with him on a little miniature fussball table during the prayer (I wasn't praying...). And we were nearly evenly matched... but he would take away my points if I scored too many times in a row. That wasn't "fair" apparently. Anyway, it was probably more fun for me to play fussball with him than to talk to the other sisters.

This isn't the first time that's happened... in fact, I went to a wedding last summer and spent a large portion of the "dancing" time (where the sisters were taking off scarves and dancing around to loud obnoxious music) in another room, playing fussball with a 10-yr old. He hadn't ever played before so it wasn't really a fair contest. But still--was I being anti-social, to prefer to play with a little boy instead of talking (or dancing) with women my age?

I remember one time playing Lego's with my nephew on the kitchen floor, tickle-fighting with my other nephew. I used to play with my nieces, now they're 8 and preoccupied with trying to act 16. But even then, one would play with her Barbie dolls. Sorry but I got pretty bored with that... but I could play with Lego's for hours

This doesn't bother me that much, to forego the conversations of my family or friends (which for the most part tend to be pretty shallow anyway) to even more simple talk ("Do you have a red one?") with the kids. And this is odd, because for a long time I wouldn't have described myself as someone who gets along well with kids or who even like kids. That's because as soon as they start crying... I'm gone.

At any rate, I start thinking about how I actually do like doing these things, and it makes me want some kids of my own. Scary, huh?

How to Become a Believer - Shahaadatayn

The Arabic I learned from Bayyinah, bayyinah.org, tells me that Shahaadatayn is the dual form of the word Shahaadah. In other words, it means "Two Shahadahs" as we might say in English. This is to say

1. Ashhadu anlaa ilaaha illa Allah,
2. wa ashhadu anna Muhammadan 'abduhu wa rasooluh.

In English, this means

1. I bear witness that there is no god except Allah
2 and I bear witness that Muhammad is His slave and messenger.

When a person says this, understanding what it means, and believing it in their heart, they are for all practical purposes a believer. Yes, yes, this is "the shahaadah" that people say to convert to Islam... but when somebody says this, we are at that moment obligated to treat them as a Muslim. A serious sentence, then!

Belief begins with this simple statement. We do not need to have full knowledge and belief about all Allah's attributes, angels, prophets, scripture, the last day or divine decree. Just understanding that Allah is our Lord and our God (and only Allah) and that Muhammad is His messenger and accept that.

And in fact we have examples from some Sahaba, that the Prophet Muhammad saws spoke to them, explained that there is no god except Allah and that he, Muhammad, had been given revelation. After this, and some recitation from the Qur'an, Abu Bakr (ra) embraced Islam.

In my class on aqeedah, this was something nice and simple to talk about--how easy it is to become a Muslim. To become a believer takes only these things. (I should mention that to negate them in any way, or to negate other pillars of faith, to reject the pillars of Islam, that would be an act of kufr...) But we don't have to be experts at theology to be Muslim. We don't have to take courses and classes and such to learn enough Islam to believe in it. Only this small bit.

And if we can convey that to people, perhaps the simplicity of it might be attractive? Not sure, but I liked learning it.

From Yasmin's Blog

The Stumbling Block--Why some Christians can't embrace Islam (yet)

She believes there is only one god--Allah.
She believes that Muhammad was Allah's Messenger.
She believes the Qur'an is Allah's word, revealed to Muhammad.
She accepts the pillars of Islam as worship for Muslims.
She has started wearing hijaab even around non-Muslim friends and family.

And yet, she is not a Muslim. Why?

She cannot relinquish the idea that Jesus died for her sins.

Her story is not exceptional, and I think that many Muslims might not understand her position--in fact, I'm not sure I understand, though I might have been in her shoes myself. Until recently I didn't know how many women actually wear the hijaab before converting--in my case it was a while after, that I was ready to do so. But after talking to a number of women who have converted to Islam, I see that this belief of Christians, ingrained since birth, holds many back for a while before they overcome it.

Some of them can even logically refute it--but why does it hold such sway, such influence that it prevents them from embracing Islam? How does someone hold the idea that Muhammad is a Messenger of Allah (saws) and still believe that Jesus is their savior?

Allah says:

O Mankind! The Messenger hath come to you in truth from Allah: believe in him: It is best for you. But if ye reject Faith, to Allah belong all things in the heavens and on earth: And Allah is All-knowing, All-wise. (An-Nisaa 170)

O Mankind--Yaa Ayyuha An-Naas!! The Messenger has come to you. Not just to Arabs, not just to Muslims, not just to Gentiles, not just to non-Christians, but to all of mankind. He has come from Allah.

And then Allah says:

O People of the Scripture! Do not exaggerate in your religion nor utter aught concerning Allah save the truth. The Messiah, Jesus son of Mary, was only a messenger of Allah, and His word which He conveyed unto Mary, and a spirit from Him. So believe in Allah and His messengers, and say not "Three" - Cease! (it is) better for you! - Allah is only One Allah. Far is it removed from His Transcendent Majesty that He should have a son. His is all that is in the heavens and all that is in the earth. And Allah is sufficient as Defender. (An-Nisaa 171)

To the "Christians" and the Jews, Allah says to avoid extremes, exaggerations, excesses in their religion, in their deen. And only say about Allah what is true. And then we see the extreme, the lie which has been uttered against Allah, and the correction of it. Christians are to say, we see here, what Jesus, Al-Maseeh, the Messiah, Jesus Christ, was, and no more. Not divine, not a savior. And what about a Trinity? Allah says to not say it: laa taqooloo thalaathatun. Why? Because Allah is only one (waahid) ilaah. Why would Allah say that? Because saying "three" violates tawheed, doesn't it? Isn't this the most major sin in Islam?

So as long as Shaytaan can convince people that they should not reject this teaching regarding Jesus that his death saves them from sin, then he is keeping people from accepting the oneness of Allah. He makes them afraid to deny Jesus, but what does Allah say?

The Messiah does by no means disdain that he should be a servant of Allah, nor do the angels who are near to Him, and whoever disdains His service and is proud, He will gather them all together to Himself. (An-Nisaa 172)

I think it's fascinating to refer to Jesus in this ayah exclusively as Al-Maseeh, the Messiah, as Christ. This is his title of course, the words being similar in Arabic, Aramaic, and Hebrew (Maseeh, Messiah, Meshiach, respectively). Christians use this title thinking it means that Jesus is divine, or a redeemer, the son of God (which Allah corrects in the previous ayah), and other things--they use the title to afford Jesus a status higher than is fitting, so Allah bestows honor here on servitude, or maybe "honor" isn't the right word. We are all to be slaves of Allah, servants, and to do so we must obey. The righteous attributes here are submission and obedience, and humility. But pride and arrogance, as Allah explains in the following ayah, are deserving punishment. Anyway, Allah describes Jesus, the Messiah, as being a willing, submitting, obedient servant to Allah. And then Allah reminds:

But to those who believe and do deeds of righteousness, He will give their (due) rewards,- and more, out of His bounty: But those who are disdainful and arrogant, He will punish with a grievous penalty; Nor will they find, besides Allah, any to protect or help them. (An-Nisaa 173)

Allaah will forgive and reward those who believe (in Allah and His Messengers, as mentioned in the ayah 171: fa'aaminoo billaahi warusulihi) and work righteousness. The Christian believes that forgiveness is for those who believe in the redemptive sacrifice of Jesus washing away sins, which Allah corrects here. And in the last phrase of the ayah--other than Allah there is no protector, or defender--also refutes the idea entertained by Christians that their salvation depends on Jesus.

The passage here is concluded with two more ayaat:

O mankind! verily there hath come to you a convincing proof from your Lord: For We have sent unto you a light (that is) manifest. (An-Nisaaa 174)

Then those who believe in Allah, and hold fast to Him,- soon will He admit them to mercy and grace from Himself, and guide them to Himself by a straight way. (An-Nisaa 175)

We see here that all of mankind is again being addressed, right? That there is proof, a light sent down... the Qur'an. (Tafsir Ibn Kathir for more on that.) But more importantly, all proof has come from Allah so there is no excuse for not accepting what one reads in the previous ayaat. What more proof is needed that the Christian claims about Jesus are wrong? Holding fast to Allah here is also holding to the Qur'an.

So not only is the claim of Christians refuted here, and the belief about Jesus which tends to block people from fully embracing Islam. But also, Allah is saying how to overcome it--that's what the last ayah is saying, isn't it? That people should believe in Allah and His proofs, and hold on to that. And doing so will result in mercy and grace from Allah, and says that Allah will guide these people to Him on a straight path. That's what we pray for in salaat, in Surat al-Fatihah, Ihdinaa as-Siraat al-Mustaqeem. Guide us to the straight path. So guidance results from believing and "holding fast" and this is guidance from Allah, guidance on a straight path, one without deviation. A path of Islam, a path that can lead the person to Paradise.

Any (and all) mistakes are from myself--please correct any errors you might find.

Propaganda, Rhetoric, and Wasted Votes

Lately I've been kind of a junkie when it comes to politics... a junkie who OD'd maybe. I had to take a break. But now everyone else seems to get more interested so I feel like I should at least keep up with major developments. Who do I support? If you look way back in my archives you'll see... Mike Gravel! And... most of you probably don't even know who that is. Some people still don't know who Ron Paul is. Dennis Kucinich dropped out yesterday I think, and while I'm sure most people know who it is, they wouldn't've voted for him. The really crazy thing is I always thought I leaned Republican! And I really don't trust Democrats any more than Republicans.

But my basic take on politics is thus: If I'm going to have to pay exorbitant taxes (as I do) then I would much rather my taxes pay for health care for poor little me (I can't afford insurance) than to buy guns, bombs, tanks, airplanes, etc., for killing people who don't even have access to water, much less health care.

It's pretty clear from watching debates that the candidates are all a bunch of liars who say one thing to one crowd, and another thing to another crowd. Lain padang lain belalang (Malay proverb literally meaning 'different field has different grasshopper'). The shift of rhetoric between New Hampshire and South Carolina among Republicans really caught me off guard. Suddenly they were all (excepting Ron Paul) trying to prove how much like Reagan they were. I think all these candidates would pretty much run the Constitution into the dirt if they could, and wouldn't think twice about using nuclear weapons if given the opportunity.

Although each candidate has his own special brand of evil, it's nice to know that Fred Thompson has dropped out. (And now Giuliani and Huckabee need to follow!) In case you missed it, you can probably watch this on youtube, but in the SC Republican debate hosted by Faux news, the moderator asked the candidates about recent "tension" in the Strait of Hormuz. He asked specifically if the candidates agreed with the ship's captain or commander, to not engage in hostilities. I can't really read minds of course but I feel like I could on this question.

You see, in South Carolina you have a lot of pro-military types. So the candidates had to say they agreed with the commander because it was his ship and who are they to tell him what to do? See, if I were a commander I wouldn't want some second-rate governor or senator trying to second-guess what I did. And so they said as much, that he made the right decision. But then... they went on to suggest all sorts of sinister outcomes and take a very hostile warmongering stance and it sounded like they wanted nothing other than an opportunity for all out war! It was really absurd what they were saying. Huckabee gave the Iranians a warning, "Be prepared, first, to put your sights on the American vessel. And then be prepared that the next thing you see will be the gates of Hell!" And Thompson chimed in, "I think one more step, and they would have been introduced to those virgins that they're looking forward to seeing." That's right folks, these men are running for president. Well, one is. Thompson has dropped out at least.

Unfortunately South Carolinians liked Thompson... just not enough to vote for him. And here I think is the myth of a wasted vote. In the primaries, there is no excuse for voting for someone you don't like. I don't get it. People tell me "Ron Paul doesn't have a chance," and the only way that is true is if people don't vote for him... because they think he doesn't have a chance. Ron Paul pretty much sucked at that debate. You know, when responding to the same question mentioned above, he mentioned how these other candidates were ready to start WW3 and Brit Hume made fun of him, which made me angry. Technically they all said they supported the do-nothing decision. I guess after working for Foxnews so long, the moderator wasn't able to pick up about how eager all the candidates were to talk about blasting Iran to smithereens--like Ron Paul said, ready to start WW3!!!

On the Democratic side there is a whole other kind of drama--it's just ugly. I want to know who is circulating the bogus email that Obama is a Muslim. Seriously, Fox and CNN covered the middle name mystery a year ago (it's on youtube if you don't believe me) and proved that 1) the "madrasa" he attended in Indonesia was actually quite progressive (and "not Wahhabi" as if they know what that even means) and 2) he's attended the same church for many years, proudly a Christian. And yet you have billboards in South Carolina saying Obama is a Muslim.

And by the way--they are using that as an insult. Should I be offended? If you want to talk about a country going to hell in a handbasket... so much for freedom of religion, right?

There is also the extremely pro-Israeli note he allegedly sent to Ambassador to the UN Khalilzad a few days ago--I'll credit Naeem for that, since I found out about it from him. I'm of the opinion that it is also a fake, especially how it bizarrely appeared on Haaretz and JTA and nowhere else (um, where did they get it?) in the midst of an Israeli discussion about whether or not Obama would be good for Jews. Suspicious. My friend who is going to be a lawyer inshaaAllah really thought it was fake just based on the informal and unprofessional style of the letter. And I've known he was fairly pro-Israel from his AIPAC speech last year, but this is just a little bit... obtuse.

I guess I'm done writing now.

Who cares about a Big Mac?

I take pride in the fact that I've never in my life eaten a "Big Mac." Not once. Nor do I have any intention to. Nor do I even know what comes on it! And I don't care. But the primary religious code as it were of this country is the 10 Commandments. I did grow up learning about religion and even though I'm not a Christian anymore (and have never been Jewish), I do think it's relevant to know the 10 Commandments and I do know them.

But I remember watching some news channel recently polling people on the street to see if they knew these--and overwhelmingly the Big Mac won. In fact, most people couldn't even name 4 or 5 of the commandments while they were able to name all 7 ingredients of the Big Mac. There was a survey done of about 1000 Americans prompting the street poll... the street poll which confirmed the results of the survey really.

But what's interesting is that even among people who claimed to attend church weekly couldn't even name them. (I say claimed because they seemed to not remember that prohibition of lying was one of them...) They would say "There's a lot of thou shalt not" (they grew up with the KJV I presume) and "Uh... don't kill?" This was several months ago and if you google "Big Mac 10 Commandments" you'll probably find plenty of stories on it.

I brought it up a few weeks ago to my dad while he was trying to convert me back to Christianity. He put himself in the category of people who know the Big Mac but not the 10 Commandments. I found that strange... very strange... I know my dad doesn't go to church often but he does read his Bible and is very strongly Christian, so I was surprised.

As I recall, many "conservatives" were in quite an uproar about having the Ten Commandments pulled from a judicial building not long ago. Why the fuss? Clearly they aren't important to Americans... not important enough to even know them!

Last night I was watching Bill Maher and poking fun at the Bible was a happy topic of his. He was saying first that many Christians don't even seem to know these (and if you don't know them how can you follow them I wonder?) and then saying that some of them were "stupid."

According to him, not making idols and swearing are "stupid" rules while only things like "don't murder" are important. Someone else mentioned to me recently that he wasn't sure why shirk was such a grievous sin in Islam but because he understood the reward for monotheism, he just accepted it. That made me think about the rights Allah has over us--it seems natural to me alhamdulillah.

And Allah has brought you out from the wombs of your mothers while you know nothing. And He gave you hearing, sight and hearts that you might give thanks (to Allah)." [16:78]

We ask not of you a provision. We provide it for you. And the good end is for the Muttaqeen (the ones who fear Allah)." [20:132]

Allah created us and sustains us--the greatest blessing, really. He forgives us when we mess up and has such mercy on us that we can never repay, and from that perspective I start to understand the magnitude of denying Allah. Shirk is to associate something with Allah--something else that created us perhaps, or something else that sustains us. Imagine a child saying to his mother while suckling at the breast, "I feed myself and do not need you to hold me and nourish me." Of course it wouldn't happen but just think about the image... the mother could just let go, but she doesn't. Allah nourishes us and sustains us. Those first two commandments sort of sum it up--violating them would be associating something with Allah, denying His right over us.

May Allah protect us from shirk and make us among the muttaqeen.