Interesting article in Canada’s Globe and Mail Newspaper about the first Muslim woman elected to the Canadian Federal Parliament. Only problem is that she is an Ismaili Muslim – and both traditional Muslim organizations and the Canadian media have gone ahead and completely ignored this momentous achievement in democracy and pluralisim in Canada. Sheesh. Here are some choice quotes by the author:
One can perhaps understand the media not covering this development. Maybe it was simply an innocent oversight. How do we explain the reaction of traditional Muslim organizations that refused to acknowledge Ms. Ratansi’s accomplishment?
From the Canadian Islamic Congress to CAIR-Canada, from MuslimVote.ca to Radio Islam, there was not a word, either prior to, or after June 29, about the campaign of Ms. Ratansi.
I believe that both the media and the traditional Muslim organizations are guilty of seeing Canada’s Muslim community through the prism of social conservatism.
The search for the authentic Muslim has forced reporters and editors to look for women in head covers and men in beards. When a Muslim does not fit that stereotype, he or she is simply discarded as not a genuine Muslim.
Traditional Muslim organizations are particularly guilty of creating and sustaining this stereotype. Just because Ms. Ratansi does not cover her head, she did not fit their criteria for a good Muslim woman, and was therefore not on their list of Muslim candidates.
However, the story does not end here. There is a strong sectarian streak in how these traditional Muslim organizations determine who qualifies to be a Muslim and who does not.
In the weeks leading up to the election, many Muslim organizations published a list of Muslim candidates running for Parliament. Conspicuous by their absence on these lists were the names of Liberal Yasmin Ratansi and sitting Conservative MP Rahim Jaffer. They were ignored because they belong to the Ismaili sect of Islam and thus are not considered worthy of the label Muslim.
I am always amazed about the narrow mindedness of Muslim organizations. It seems that the Saudi money has made them really corrupt and now if you don’t wear a beard, don’t have a hijab and don’t follow Wahab’s twisted path – you are not considered a Muslim.
Who decides who is a Muslim and who is not?
I think it’s quite unfortunate that this lack of acknowledgement has occurred, though unfortunately it might have been expected. Still, I don’t think it’s quite fair to talk about how “Wahhabism” has caused this. The mutual lack of regard for various interpretations is quite long-standing and common to the Muslim world, through and through. Whilst in Pakistan, I marveled at the achievements of the Aga Khan’s businesses, charities and foundations — except, of course, at his hospital and university in Karachi, Ismaili employees are paid multiples of what other employees are paid, such that long-time staff members who happen to be Sunni or Ja’afari Shi’a feel quite alienated and unwanted.
The deeper problem is simply a lack of regard for our achievements and a lack of scope, a lack of understanding how Muslims can achieve something if they understand how achievements are realized: Not “overnight,” and not in the way, shape or form that only one group wants…
Surprisingly for being 14 hours ahead of EST I feel like I’m always behind. I was getting ready to post this Globe and Mail article and saw I was beaten to it by Who You?. My take was going to be a little different, like Haroon, I don’t see this as a Wahhabi influence, but as an ingrained reaction to differences in schools of thought.
The Nizari Ismailis – I don’t wish to speak for the Mustali Ismailis (Bohras) – are criticized for following as their leader a descendant of the Prophet (PBUH). In many circles that is considered un-Islamic because of the majority idea that the Prophet left no successor, and there should only be a direct relationship between a Muslim and God. The irony of course is that on one hand many of these groups decry Ismaili belief in having someone interpret the faith for them, based on the Ismaili belief that the Prophet and his family are masum (infallible), because they don’t believe that is the correct interpretation of Islam. This is a theme I keep coming back to, the inherent hypocrisy in exclusivist interpretations of Islam.
“It seems that the Saudi money has made them really corrupt and now if you don’t wear a beard, don’t have a hijab and don’t follow Wahab’s twisted path – you are not considered a Muslim.”
Saudi- or “Wahhabi”- bashing is no different from blaming the US or Israel every five minutes. The “narrow mindedness” of Muslims is hardly restricted to the “Wahhabis”. Some people talk of “Saudi money” as others talk of the “Jewish media”; some clandestine, all-controlling, all-powerful entity, which people are, apparently, powerless to stop. It is plain silly. “Saudi money” helped to open a mosque near my house which has nursery and daycare facilities; training courses in a variety of subjects for _women_; as well other activities for young children. I doubt this will make headline news.
Issues of difference are hardly restricted to he much-maligned Wahhabis; just try wiping your sock during wudhu, or saying ‘ameen’ loudly, or praying without a topee in a “traditionalist” Hanafi (“tolerant”, “liberal”) mosque in Pakistan…
I doubt that the “traditionalist” Muslim organisations rejected the female MP because she doesn’t wear a headscarf. The article is probably more accurate to highlight sectarianism. Yasmin Alibhani-Brown, a columinist for the London _Independent_, for example, is often attacked by certain Muslims because she is an Ismaili.
Mea Culpa!
I agree that perhaps I was too reactionary in blaming SaudiMoney (TM). However we can’t ignore the race to the bottom that has been prompted by the presence of Saudi Money in building Mosques and hiring “doctrinaly correct” Mullahs and Imams in the West. So even if SaudiMoney is not directly linked to these organizations – the trend towards extreme conservatisim has been accelerated by the presence of other organizations that have drunk from the poisoned chalice. Hmmm I sense a doctroal dissertation here!
But also nobody answered my question – who decides who is a Muslim? Sectarinism is rabid in most religons – but do Catholics call Protestants non-Christians and vice versa? I don’t know – maybe all the European Wars were over that – but it seems to me that some Muslim Leaders (all types) have made calling other Muslims into non-Muslims a high art and there is no subsequent rejection of that dogma from us.
So again – who decides who is a Muslim?
“but do Catholics call Protestants non-Christians and vice versa?”
Some (many) Protestant and Catholics do, in fact, call members of the other group “non-Christians.” In southwest Michigan (a very Protestant area) school children regularly espouse the idea that Catholics are non-Christian. An idea they picked up from their parents and their church.
Allah knows best. Only Allah can say who is or isn’t a Muslim. It’s in the heart, not in a name. Just my two cents.
ismailis are not Muslim because a Muslim submits their wills to Allah and believe the Quran is the word of God for all time…while Ismailis believe the Aga Khan is the “walking-talking” Quran.
Fozia,
What is Koran? A “good Book” IMO. Just as the Bible,Torah, Bhagwad Geetha etc. Feel for the fellow human and stop pointing the finger. Me Muslim rest of you “infidel” mentality! Yes there is a ton of Saudi Money floating in N. America namely in Canada and until the crime of 9/11, in USA. Saudis did and still do run a lot of Wahabhi show in the region with its money. Namely in the US prisons. ITS REPUGNANT! Democracy bells must ring in the Middle East! End of tyranny from the likes of Sauds and the Caliph wanna be Saddams, Asads, Mubaraks and the rest of the Sheikhs in the Middle east must end and SOON!
GENERALLY TALKING ABOUT ISLAM, THE WESTERN WORLD AND OTHER RELIGIONS HARDLY UNDERSTAND THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN EACH SECT OF ISLAM. HAVING BEARD OR WEARING HIJAB IS NOT A SYMBOL OF BEING A MEMBER WHO IS A VERY RELIGIOUS PERSON. IT CAN BE BUT NOT ALWAYS. YOU CAN FIND SOME PEOPLE IN ISLAMIC COUNTRIES LIKE IRAN, AFGHANISTAN, PAKISTAN, SUDAN AND ESPECIALLY SAUDI ARABIA, WHO ARE FROM TOP TO BOTTOM UNDER HIJAB ACCORDING TO ISLAMIC SHARIAH. BUT WHAT SOME OF THEM DO UNDER HIJAB IS AN INSULT TO THE NAME OF ISLAM. OR TAKE SOME MEN WHO WEAR BEARDS AND PRAY FIVE TIMES ADAY, CONSIDERING THEMSELVES TOUGH MEMBERS OF THEIR RELIGION WHILE THEY DO THINGS WHICH BRINGS ONLY SHAME AND IMSULT TO ALL. to be continued…….
A Muslim is one who submits to God’s Will. But what is God’s will and when do you know you are not submitting to it? These are extremely tough questions to answer. Does someone have the authority to tell you what God’s will is? Certainly the Prophet did, but does anyone after the Prophet also carry this authority? The answer to this question often defines the Sunni/Shia split. However, in the case of Ismailis there are other doctrines that cloud the issue.. such as ascribing divinity to those in authority (Hadhrat Ali and by implication the Aga Khan being made of the same “Noor” that God is made of), or stories of Hadhrat Ali beheading people and then bringing them back to life, or of the Prophet being an incarnation of Lord Brahma etc. The conflation of Islam and pre-Islamic philosophies is more prevalent in Ismailism than in many other sects (although there is quite a bit of it in Shia and Sunni thought also). Sorry this post may be a bit off topic but defining the term “Muslim” is not easy. Perhaps a better definition is one that the Progressive Muslims take, a Muslim is simply someone who identifies himself as a Muslim?
i just had a convo with a non-ismaili and he was raving about how ismailis are non-muslim.he was 20 years old from pakistan and had no sort of knowledge about our faith and automatically assumed that we as modern muslims were not relli muslim especially because we followed the guidance of the Aga Khan…i was very disturbed by this persons comment and felt that he required some more knowledge on us ismailis as we do follow the quaran as well as the guidance of prophet muhammed (SAHM)..what people dont know..is we change with the times..that doesn;t mean we shuld be considered non-muslim
Any Innovation is rejected
is nikkah between an ismaili girl and a sunni guy allowed in islam?
Ismailis are NOT Muslim. They insist that they don’t pray TO the Aga Khan, they just pray THROUGH him.
Thats exactly what the Jahiliya of Mecca told the Prophet (SAW): we dont pray to these idols of stone and wood, we pray to one God, but these idols help us get get closer to God.
Nothings changed there are still people who refuse to believe and submit to the Creator and will go to great lengths to make excuses and justify themselves.
To answer the question. A Sunni can not marry an Ismaili. and why would you want to marry a mushriq? Ismailis religion is money and they will justify anything for it. Ismailism was created by the Imperialistic and Ismailis still bow down to their colonial man-god.
Ismailis are NOT Muslim. They insist that they don’t pray TO the Aga Khan, they just pray THROUGH him.
Thats exactly what the Jahiliya of Mecca told the Prophet (SAW): we dont pray to these idols of stone and wood, we pray to one God, but these idols help us get get closer to God.
Nothings changed there are still people who refuse to believe and submit to the Creator and will go to great lengths to make excuses and justify themselves.
To answer the question. A Sunni can not marry an Ismaili. and why would you want to marry a mushriq? Ismailis religion is money and they will justify anything for it. Ismailism was created by the Imperialistic and Ismailis still bow down to their colonial man-god.
can an ismaili guy marry a sunni girl?
I too often hear Ismailis calling themselves “mordern” muslims rather than a “cult” led by their supreme living lord. They should be ashamed of calling themselves such. They are not mordern if they follow a pre=islamic path of praying through someone rather than praying directly to God. What is modern about that?
Another thing about Ismailis is that they do not follow a real Quran. Instead they have an interpretation of the Quran which they paddle around in the west as the Quran. So when they say the Koran says this or the Koran says that, they actually mean “Our twisted dumb interpretation is this… or that”
Very sad people. Without the light of the Quran. Only the shadow of a con-artist.