Bismillah

Bismillah is something we all say numerous times a day, we say it in Salaah, when our children fall down, or when we pick them up or put them down, before we start something, before we eat, but how much importance do we actually give to this word? Is it only out of habit that we say it?

Pakistan – A Country In Need of CHANGE

Pakistan – A country in need of change

We all know change is needed in Pakistan, we need a break in the corrupt regimes. In order to do this we need to first understand the mistakes of the past, so that we don’t repeat them.

Pakistan has been a state which has tried to implement democracy, but has this worked?

History

Pakistan’s current system is a continuation of the British Raj occupation that abolished Muslim Mughal rule in the Indian Subcontinent.
-Pakistan was established using the slogan of Islam, but it was the British Parliament that created Pakistan’s initial legislation under its Indian Independence Act of 1947.
-Islam was never established in Pakistan, its constitution wasn’t based around Islam.
-Pakistan produced its first constitution in 1956, this and every subsequent constitution, including the present 1973 constitution, has been framed around secular British law.

Pakistan’s political history has been dominated by the potential threats of:
- India after partition,
- the Soviet expansion into the region in the 1980′s,
- America’s continued attempts to dominate the region today.

Successive regimes in the country merely implemented different policies in line with these regional developments.

All have been corrupt
All were American puppets which pushed American agendas such as the War on Terror.

 

Imran Khan

US Ambassador to Pakistan Cameron Munter, when asked by the BBC regarding the possibility of an anti-US government in Pakistan in case Nawaz Sharif or Imran Khan get elected in 2013 elections, said that he has met both the leaders who have assured a pro-US government.
Imran Khan has also been using Islamic sentiments to win votes.

This election

Police and staff of election comission were used for vote rigging. Violence at polling stations. Bomb attacks. Intimidation.
Just as Islam was used as a slogan during partition, Islam is being used as a slogan to gain support by parties such as jammat I Islamia today.

What does this tell us?

-Pakistan is not an independent nation, but rather a puppet of the US.
-The political system in Pakistan is dominated by dynastic families, feudal landlords and opportunist groups, individuals and politicians.
-Their sole aim is to get to power and enrich themselves irrespective of the consequences. -When in power they legislate in a way to protect and maintain their own interests.

- Elections enable this system by giving legitimacy to such rulers, even though vote fixing and ballot fraud is common knowledge.
-The capitalist democratic system doesn’t work. this is the reason why even a sincere individual will be unable to bring change.

Prophet Muhammad SAW said

“The believer is not bitten from the same hole twice (Sahih Bukhari and Muslim)*”

So why do we keep getting bitten?
If we carry on in this system things will never change!

What is Democracy?

The ideology of the western nations based on separation of religion and state based on the ancient Greek system;

“ Render on to Caesar what is Caesars and unto God what is God’s”

Based on this it is man who is in charge of law making and the system.

-The rule of the people for the people
-People have the right to legislate, and implement laws
- as they cannot do this by themselves they appoint representatives who act on their behalf
- can make and change laws
-People are sovereign, the source of power.

Freedoms

The foundation of democracy is Freedom of:
Speech
Belief
Ownership
Personal freedom – this means freedom of the individual rather then benefit to society. Therefore individuals right to consume alcohol over rules detriment to society of alcohol.
-The Values of individualism and materialism add to problems the world is facing. People do not fear the punishments, which allows corrupt governments, dictators and tyrants to prosper.

What does Islam say?

Last week we said
Al-Iman is:
1) Belief:
Iman is a belief in our hearts. It is to have a firm belief of “la illah illallah” in our hearts and all the thing that it brings. Every thing that we find from Quran and Sunnah, we must have a sincere and firm belief on that without having any doubts.
2)Statement:
Iman is a statement by our tongue. We must state “la illaha illallah” by our tongues.

3) Actions:
Iman is to carry out our believes and our statements by our bodily limbs. After believing in “la illaha illallah” and stating it, we must imply it in our actions. And the way we imply “la illaha illallah” in our actions is by modifying our every action and deed according to the Quran and Sunnah of Rasul and our pious predecessors
We all know that Islam is a way of life. Muslims are not like those who are secular and believe religion should be a private thing that you do at home and not part of your day to day life. All of our actions should be governed by Islam.

Allah says “We have sent down to thee the book explaining all things, a guide, a mercy, and glad tidings to Muslims” [Qur’an 16:89].

The Islamic shari’ah governs all of the actions of those who are obligated (to it). There is no act or occurrence which exists without a corresponding ruling from one of the five shari’ah rulings (fardh wajib, makruh,)
.
What is Shariah?

The Shariah is a complete system of life and not only confined to a set of rules or punishments. The Shariah is composed of:

i. values – taqwa, morals, collective responsibility
ii. rules – forbid the values which lead to crime and the ways to do crime i.e. criminalising alcohol
iii. Punishments – severe punishment based on irrefutable evidence, to act as a deterrent

All three elements combine to bring peace and stability in society and so cannot be separated

 

The conflict

In Islam we do not share the same freedoms as within modern democracy.

We do not have freedom of speech; backbiting, accusations without witnesses, blasphemy are forbidden

We do not have freedom of Belief; a shariah punishment for apostasy exists.

We do not have freedom of ownership; we cannot own what is not ours, it is forbidden to own by riba, to inherit what is forbidden for us and so on.

We do not have personal freedom; we are not free to do what we want to our own bodies and lives, such as zina, eating haram, free mixing etc as the wider effect on society is recognised.

The democratic system is made by man whereas Allah says;

“The Rule is for none but Allah SWT (12:40)”

One of Allah’s names is Al Hakim – the legislator, to bestow this attribute on anyone apart from Allah is shirk, as part of tahweed is believing that Allah’s attributes are His.

Therefore to rule by anything apart from shariah, and to support a system other than the Islamic system is going against Allah’s commandments.

Al-Malik - the sovereign is another one of the attributes of Allah, Democracy involves attributing sovereignty to the people, to bestow this on anyone apart from Allah is also a disbelief and a kufr.
This means to call for democracy/elections/man made rule is haram as we are commanded to perform our actions according to Islam.

The Qur’an and the Sunnah have provided evidence for the comprehensiveness of Islam.

“and We have sent down to thee the book explaining all things, a guide, a mercy, and glad tidings to Muslims” [Qur’an 16:89].

 “It is not an invented story, but confirms that which went before it, and explains all things, and a guide and a mercy for people who believe” [Qur’an 12:111].

Islam is the message for all of life, for all men, for all the world, and for all time.

We cannot pick and choose what parts we want to follow and what parts we don’t according to our nafs

“Then is it only a part of the Book that ye believe in, and do ye reject the rest? but what is the reward for those among you who behave like this but disgrace in this life?- and on the Day of Judgment they shall be consigned to the most grievous penalty. For Allah is not unmindful of what ye do” [Qur’an 2:85].

Allah has given the Ummah the right of rule and Shariah specifies how this should be implemented. Instead of calling for democracy, we should be calling to implement shariah.

Non-Muslim governments and their agents who rule the Muslim countries, as well as all those who call for democracy who are counted from among the Muslims, whether they are individuals or movements, realise that the basis for democracy is the rejection of the law of Allah and putting man in the place of the Creator. For this reason, they do not present democracy from this perspective, but instead claim that democracy means people ruling themselves by themselves, with equality and justice prevailing among the people, and the accountability of the ruler guaranteed. Although democracy explicitly implies the rejection of the laws of Allah and following the law of His creation, the advocates of democracy intentionally avoid addressing the issue of rejecting the law of Allah.

If the whole ummah decides to allow what Allah has prohibited, such as riba, we wouldn’t listen. So why do we listen in this case?

Allah also says

“So judge between them by that which Allah hath revealed, and follow not their desires, but beware of them lest they seduce thee from some part of that which Allah hath revealed unto thee” [Qur’an 5:49].

Here Allah warns His Messenger against the non-Muslims, that they may not turn him away from some of the rulings of Islam, and this is addressed to everyone who will lead the people after him.
The truth is that the teachings and rulings of Islam in doctrine, in the shari’ah, in morals, in acts of worship, and in social dealings–they do not bear their fruit unless they are taken in whole, for they need each other. It is similar to a medical prescription, with a complete (regimen) consisting of a full array of foods, various types of medicines, dieting and abstaining from some things, and some exercise. In order for the prescription to achieve its goal, it must be executed fully. If a part of it is left out, the entire end-result may be affected.

And this is why the Muslims are facing the problems they face today.

 

The Change Needed In Pakistan!

Come and join us this Wednesday 1.30-3pm at Unit 4 Church Rd Studios, for our discussion on the Pakistani election results at our fortnightly “I am Muslimah” Circles.

- What is democracy?

- What is Shariah?

- Why did the votes not bring change?

- How can we bring about real change?

Come and let us know your views, amongst supportive sisters, in a relaxed environment!

Unit 4 Church Rd Studios

56 Church Rd

E12 6AF

Convert for Marriage? – Reverts’ identity.

 

In May’s edition of Sisters Mag, Anisah Jameel-Hardy talks about turning to Allah for the first time, and having her duas answered in her article “Guidance through the stable door“. The imagery of a sister at rock bottom looking to the stars and realising the proof of the Creator, seeing the signs all around, is a profound one, reminiscent of the story of Ibrahim alayhi salaam as a child (this is one of my children’s favourite bed time stories). As such it has a deeper significance to Muslims.

However what really touched me about her article, is the involvement of her husband in her reversion story.

So many of us reverts knew our husbands before marriage, and feel our husbands were instrumental in leading us to the deen. We feel that we learnt and grew in our Islam together, and both came to an understanding that for the sake of akhirah and to please Allah nikkah was the best way.

But we are also ashamed.

Sometimes we can feel as if our reversion is somehow seen as fake by others, and our reasons for coming to Islam doubted. People often just ask if you knew your husband before marriage. They are not interested in the intricacies, they are not interested in the time you were apart as you knew zina was haram. They just make assumptions, judgments  based on a person that you no longer are.

Then we sometimes stop telling our reversion story. Or leave out and gloss over our husbands’ involvement in it, emphasize the break in our relationships. It is almost as we feel the need to defend or justify ourselves.

Comments such as “what sort of reverts did they show on that tv programme, they all reverted for marriage, not proper reverts, I reverted not having met a single Muslim” are thrown about on facebook and on forums.

Well that’s great for you. However Allah guides who He wills in the ways which He wills. Sometimes haram relationships are the cause of both parties coming to Islam.

Of course you cannot make the halal haram. But there is a difference between trying to do this, and repenting, renewing your intention, and nikkah for the sake of Allah.

So my feelings are that sister Anisah was very brave in telling the world her story. In admitting she wasn’t a saint in jahiliyya. In letting people know she did wrong, and understands she did wrong, but Allah was on her side and answered her duas, and showed her undeniable proof of Islam.

I went through stages in my reversion. First I would tell everyone everything about me, as that was the only identity I knew, and so much of my self was based on jahil things. Then I denied everything about before I was Muslim, pretended it didn’t exist. Alhamdulillah, know I have come to the realisation that although I cannot understand or identify with the girl I was before, although I do not recognise her, she is still me, her experiences still shaped the person who I am now. I will not pretend I was an angel, but I will not rely on her for my identity either.

I guess after 8 years, I have finally found my own identity. Not as a mother or wife, but as me. After not knowing who me was for so long now I know who I am and what I stand for. Alhamdulillah.

InshaAllah due to sister Anisah sharing her story, others will feel more comfortable with their own.

May Allah unite the Ummah and keep us all on the straight path.

Beauty is Skin Deep

Come along for a night of relaxation, indulgence and enjoyment!!

Parenting, work, and values

Reblogged from Tyler Bickford:

tl;dr: read this, this, this and this in combination with this

Recently New York Magazine published a long piece about what it identifies as a trend of wealthy women who identify as feminists choosing not to work and instead to care for their children full-time. I've had a version this post sitting in my drafts folder since last spring, when some of these same issues popped up partly in response to the publication of Elisabeth Badinter's book…

Read more… 1,780 more words

An excellent article, showing hoe the Islamic values of mothering and caring women fit in with modern expressions of feminism.

The fruit of fitnah

Laid out
In front of you glittering gold
You can almost touch it,
Taste it,
Who’s in control?

Let your mind wander,
Senses taken over,
dripping honey,
Sickly sweet,
Tummy rumbling,
You’ve got to eat.

Salivating,
Anticipating,
Breathing,
in excited air.
No doubt you want it,
And It’s so near.

Beguile,
Tempt,
Dazzle your mind.
Imagine,
Ponder,
The sweetness
you will find.

Reach out and take it
Don’t let it go cold.
grab the glitter,
Who is in control?

Witness the shine fade,
The light drift away,
Terror,
Shame,
Guilt,
The bloods already spilt.

Days filled with darkness,
Tears that can’t be consoled.
Didn’t you know that,
Shaytaan was in control?

Frankie Boyle donates £50,000 to a prisoner in Guantanamo to sue MI6

Reblogged from Orwellwasright's Weblog:

Frankie Boyle is fast becoming a comedian to match Bill Hicks when it comes to "speaking truth to power".

Via The Independent:

He’s the television comedian best known for controversial jokes about swimmer Rebecca Adlington, The Queen and people with Down’s syndrome.

But Frankie Boyle is now using his fame, and wealth, for more serious ends, by donating tens of thousands of pounds of his money to help Britain’s last inmate at Guantanamo Bay to sue the MI6.

Read more… 452 more words

Political identity and Religious Tension in a Zionist State.

The fostering of political identity allows groups to exploit symbols, narratives, and ideologies, such as religion, in order to validate rules and institutions. Castell (Herbert 2004 p273) identifies two types of political identity, “resisting” and “legitimizing” within the conflict in Palestine, which are used by sections to justify their stance.

The identity of being Zionist is inherently political as it refers to supporting the establishment of a Jewish homeland within Palestine. This is a “legitimizing” political identity as it infers support of institutions and policies which enable this to occur.

Zionism can be seen as a reaction to the dispersion of Jews, and an attempt to re-establish Jewish identities. The Zionist movement has utilised Jewish theology to legitimise their vision of a secular Jewish state even though exile is traditionally seen as the normal condition for the Jews, which can only be brought to an end by divine, not human, intervention.

The main Orthodox Jewish party, backed by the Orthodox rabbinate, was convinced in to giving practical support to a Zionist state in return for the promise that tenants of Judaism, such as keeping the Sabbath and kashrut in public institutions would be promoted. This was significant as Judaism was the common identity for Jews who had been dispersed across the globe, and therefore was the only basis for the formation of shared identities in a cohesive Zionist society.

Jewish symbols, the continuity of Orthodox institutions such as religious courts, public Jewish festivals and practices, and rituals of remembrance such as Holocaust day promoted civil religion within Israel. Such activities work to continuously reinforce Jewish identity and political support of a Zionist state.

Without Judaism a Zionist political identity would be impossible; if there is no sense of being Jewish, then it makes no sense to have a Jewish homeland. In order to sustain a sense of “Jewishness” haredi yeshiva, religious students are supported by the state, financially as well as practically through exemption from military service. This allows liberal, conservative and a minority of Orthodox Jews to Jewish theology to form a legitimising political identity.  Traditional Judaism provides no narrative of a Jewish state, and no solutions to the practicalities of running a nation. Issues arose between Judaism and the Secular Zionist state, such as how to respect the Sabbath when hospitals and the like needed to be functional. The religious Zionist position was that Jewish prophecies would be fulfilled when Jews returned to traditions; therefore they aim to implement Jewish law in its entirety within a Jewish homeland which is supposed to be secular. Tension therefore can be detected between the ideals of those who whose identity is “legitimizing” and who validate the Zionist state, and the ideals of Israel.

Central to the Palestinian/Israel dispute is the issue of land. The Hamas charter states “giving up any part of Palestine is tantamount to giving up part of its religion” (The Charter of Hamas p122) and the Palestinian National Council Declaration similarly uses religious imagery to convey the sense of Palestinian identity being indistinguishable from Palestinian land. Israel’s declaration of independence states “The land of Israel was the birth place of the Jewish people. Here their spiritual, religious and national identity was formed” (Wasserstein 2008 p86). Both Zionists and Palestinians substantiate their claim to the land using religion and employ narratives relating to the land to form a cohesive identity.

The concept of “pioneering” settlements and ideals of the “noble savage” based on narratives of Jewish history acted as the basis for political military action. This is as Zionist institutions used imagery of a biblical farmer defending their homeland from intruders. Laws developed in 1948 supported the forced expulsion of Palestinians from their homes, so that they could be settled by Jews. This shows how a legitimising political identity can be influenced by religious concepts, and impact on law-making. This also has a strategic political outcome as Jewish settlements provide a means to restrict the movement and economic abilities of Palestinians, and constrain the movements of Palestinians.

Over time the influence religion has had on political identities has changed. The original secular ideals of Israel shifted as victories in 1967 were viewed as God given. This confidence created increased support for expansion, based on the religious boundaries. The Gush Emunim movement, founded in 1974 was one of the groups providing religious justification for the states objective of expansion. The state accepts the Gush as representing Zionist interests, which can be demonstrated by the Gush only military units of the IDF, the approval of their ideologies and activities implied by state sponsorship of Gush institutions and state provided defence for illegal Gush settlements and settlers.  Gush’s political identity is driven by their religious beliefs that that a Jewish homeland should be under the most expansive borders identified in the Hebrew bible. They also have formed part of a continued Jewish narrative based on the idealism of pioneers which have become part of Israeli civil religion. As well as this they endorse that which is seen sacred in Zionist society, such as the military, and the fundamental right of Jewish people to the land of Palestine. These ideals demonstrate a legitimising identity. Gush are against the concept of a secular state, and support Israel to the extent that it represents their interests and is critical of the government, so they can also be seen as having a “resistance” identity.

 

Christian Palestinians were also affected by Zionist policies, and their political identity shaped by their religious ideals. “We have always fought by the law and by Christian principles”. In the same manner that Hamas used the concept in the Quran of fighting back against those who fight you to legitimise their resistance, Christian Palestinians used the concepts of nonviolence within the bible to legitimise their form of resistance. However using Zionist institutions implies recognition of them as valid and can be seen as legitimising.

Christian Palestinians describe Jewish school Children viewing the ruins of their village which was destroyed by Zionist military (Dairymple 2008 p107). It was described to them as an ancient Roman ruin, with a synagogue at its centre. This was only partially true. This misinformation by institutions of religious education ensures children grow up believing in the Jewish historical claim to Palestinian lands and villages, thus shaping a legitimising political identity.

Tensions between religious and secular objectives within Israel have been referred to earlier. Another way this manifests itself is in relation to the fundamental question “Who is a Jew?” Who is Israel a homeland for? Secular and religious answers to this question have differed. In Jewish tradition one who is born to a Jewess or converts to Judaism is considered Jewish. In a modern secular democracy, citizenship is based on active consent, birth, or lineage. Lineage being the most fragile link. The law of return promises citizenship to every Jew who wants it.

Tensions occurred regarding how to uphold the secular, democratic ideals of the state, and its legitimisation through the concept of a dispersed Jewish nation. Secular definitions of concepts customarily defined by religious authority had to be developed, and the definitions were often opposing.

This can be seen in the case of a Christian priest who tried to claim citizenship on the basis of lineage and was declined. Religious authorities would have considered him part of the dispersed Jewish nation, however secular authorities did not. There are also cases in which people have claimed citizenship based on the religion of their father and were granted it, however religious authorities would not have considered them Jewish.

Also Arab citizenship to Israel has to be considered. As stated secular laws usually grant citizenship to those born within its borders. Within Israel this does not seem to be the case. Palestinians were initially required to go through a complex procedure to claim citizenship in the land of their birth and their lives. Those within the occupied territories were not granted Israeli citizenship, despite the fact Israel is in occupation of the West Bank and Gaza Strip and does not recognise Palestine as a separate state. Again this could be interpreted as down to the conflict between religious and secular law. If Palestinians were easily granted citizenship, as they would ordinarily under secular laws, it could be seen as a threat to the ideal of a Jewish homeland, as non-Jews would soon outnumber Jews within Israel, having a major impact on politics and representation in government. It would no longer be guaranteed that a government that prioritised Jewish interests would be elected.

The Palestinian political party Hamas was formed in 1987 as a reaction to its opposition to the PLO negotiating with oppressive Israel. It identifies itself as standing up against oppression and the illegal conquest of Palestinian and Arab lands. It uses the narrative of Islamic history and previous conquests of Jerusalem to validate their categorical position against a Zionist state, and provide a Palestinian shared sense of experience. It also uses concepts from Islam, such as;

 “Allah forbiddeth you only those who warred against you on account of religion and have driven you out from your homes and helped to drive you out, that ye make friends of them. Whosoever maketh friends of them – (All) such are wrong-doers.” (Quran 60.9 Pickthall)

to support their unrelenting stance. As well as this they use the concept of dar ul harb, or the abode of war to justify suicide attacks on civilians.  Hamas demonstrates a “resistance identity” which opposes the state of Israel. However Hamas is now part of the democratically elected government of Palestine, therefore its stance can be seen as a legitimising identity in relation to the “production and maintenance of organizations and institutions that support the dominant interest within society” (Herbert 2004 p273) where the dominant interests are seen as being those of the Palestinian people.

 

 

There are differences in the role religion plays in the formation of identities that legitimise the Jewish state in comparison to Palestinian resistance identities. The Hamas Charter shows their dedication to Islam and supports their position using Quranic ayat. They clearly refer to the state of Israel as “evil” (The Charter of Hamas) and state that fighting against their oppressors is an individual obligation for every Muslim. It uses historical narratives of successful Muslims defending against conquests, such as Salah ud Din, to form a continuous identity with Palestinian Muslims of the past.  Hamas also aspires to proliferate Islamic ideals within Palestinian society. It does this through education, welfare and medical assistance. Its legitimacy comes from following Islam in its entirety; this does not only refer to its relation to Israel and territorial disputes, but also to actions within its society.

The Israeli Declaration of independence similarly refers to shared historical claims and implied biblical references, however it paradoxically asserts, while its existence is to benefit Jews, the aims of the state are secular and for the wellbeing of all inhabitants of Palestine. It does not use imagery of war to defend its position, rather placations of peace. Zionism can be seen as considering religion seems as a vaguely defined concept based more on ethnicity then a precisely defined way of life defined by individual actions and religious traditions. The exception to this is the afore mentioned religious Zionists.

Israelis and Palestinians have succinct separate identities. Their concepts that bind them together as a society are conflicting. Their historical narratives and sense of shared history often sees them on opposing sides. At the centre of these concepts is religious ideologies used to justify stances. Without religion followers of both sides lose their identities and their legitimacy. Zionists have worked hard to combine their secular intentions with the concept of Jewishness. However when the intention is a Jewish state, and they state supports groups who believe that non Jews are not human and have no souls, they can never be truly secular or democratic.

Inspirational women

Who inspires me?

There are many sisters who inspire me.

They are not movie stars, or acadmics,

they are not famous or acclaimed.

They are ordinary women living their every day lives.

They see nothing special or praiseworthy in their achievements.

But the things they do, the strength they have, is something that inspires me.

Their selflessness and dedication, their desire to please Allah.

They are the woman who take care of their elderly inlaws, for no praise, despite being constantly admonished.

They do it for the sake of Allah not the sake of people.

Even when the whole family blames them for accidents and illness despite the fact they were not there for the parent only she was..

These sisters do not say “no more” they carry on steadfast in their duties.

SubhanAllah I couldn’t do it.

There is the sister who despite being abused by her mother in law still massages her and goes to her in the night to ease her pain.

And now her mother in law has thrown her out and her husband stands by doing nothing, but even when seeking help and removing herself from oppression she will not backbite her mother in law, and makes excuses;

“It is her pain, her illness, she is old….”

There is the sister whose husband was removed from her side while she was pregnant, whose house was constantly searched,

yet she travelled with her two kids every week to her husbands new city and help him start dawah in that place.

There is the sister who manages her house, her children, looking after her mother in law and helps her husband run a charity for Orphans.

There is the sister who stuck by her husband in the bad times, despite what people said, and now has raised five beautiful children. She said she trusted Allah, she knew it was her test.

There is the sister who sold ice at the side of the road, in the heat, with her kids, who worked in a shop while pregnant and gave birth in the store room,

the many sisters we pass every day who have fled war, and lived with their children in refugee camps.

The sister whose brother has died, and years later her mum still cries every day, she makes sure she is always available for her mum, even while looking after her kids, her husband and her home.

These are sisters you wouldn’t know, you would pass them in the street, they don’t look particularly pious, or exceptional, or hardworking,

they are normal women living their every day lives,

but to me they are inspirational.

Inshallah I can learn from them.

May Allah grant me the strength, sabr and imaan of these sisters.

Motivated mindset in marriage

Sayeda Habib’s article on Synergistic living in the April edition of Sisters Mag really got me thinking. She asked readers to consider four questions;

How do I view human beings and the world in general?

Do I go out of my way to ensure I have a positive effect of others?

How much do I notice the effect I have on others?

And

What are three things I can do right now to have a better relationship with people and the world?

lately I have been thinking about motivated mindsets mainly due to a Facebook page called Adnan Inspired. At first I didn’t get it. I even commented on one of his status
“just saying it doesn’t make it true”.
Alhamdulillah he didn’t get offended but replied with hikmah
“these quotes are meant to create a motivated mindset”.
So what is a motivated mindset? how can it effect our lives? And what has it got to do with synergystic living?

Sometimes we let our thoughts run away from us. We let our minds be cloudy or unsettled. We react irrationally or emotionally to things we shouldn’t. But our minds are not us. Our minds are not our essence, they are another part of us, like a limb. Our minds don’t control us, we can control our minds. We can create new synapses and pathways in our brain. Programme it to respond in different ways to events and experiences.

This is the essence of a positive mindset. Basically “fake it ’till you make it!”

When it comes to our relationships, with our spouses, our parents, our children, our in laws, we tend to already have preset reactions to differing types of situation. If our husbands are grumpy, you will deal with it based on your knowledge and experiences of the past times he was grumpy. If your children are upset you will react the way you have learnt calms them down the quickest. But sometimes this may be doing our relationships a disfavour. By being reliant on the past we may make it difficult to move on. Obviously we learn from experience and have to keep that in mind. But we also have to recognise and acknowledge change and effort.

Sometimes children change. For example they become practicing, yet parents still treat them and think of them the same way they did a year ago. In doing so they make the journey their child is going through harder. Instead of supporting them, it may seem like they feel it is only a phase and are just waiting for them to fail and go back to their old lifestyle.

Of course some of this reaction is a safety mechanism. Some of it is a preset reaction to situations based on the person you were before, instead of the person you are trying to be now. To the child it just seems like their parents are against them and don’t believe In them or support them.

We can also do the same thing to our spouses. We know they have good intentions, and are trying to change, but we are on autopilot and just fall in to learnt responses and reactions. As busy mothers and wives there is hardly time for more in depth consideration of our behaviour. But maybe sometimes we are acting on what we think we know, and not what is really happening.

So how can we prevent this?

By going back to the four questions.

How do I view my husband and my life in general?

Take a moment to consider this. Then consider if it is fair. If the actions he has done lately match up to the way you consider him, or if maybe you are viewing him based on the way he acted last year, last month, or when you were newly weds!

Also think of your life. Do you feel generally positive or negative? Can you pinpoint what makes you feel down? What would you like to be different, in your homelife, your worship, your work? Are you proud of your achievements? Do you take enough credit? How often do you allow yourself a pat on the back, and tell yourself you have done well? All these things will help create a healthy positive mindset and a healthy relationship. Never berate yourself too harshly or beat yourself up.

Do I go out of my way to have a positive effect on my husband?

Do you motivate him? Are you appreciative enough of what he tries to do? Could your reactions and behaviour towards him be more positive? Again think of small things you could do. Maybe make more cups of tea! Notice when he is trying, even if he is making a big deal,out of it or breaking the dishes while washing them, or burning a boiled egg, you can still try and have a positive effect on him. Acknowledge his intentions. Encourage him.

How much do I notice the effect I have on my husband?

You are not in control of others behaviour. But you are in control of your own mind and your own behaviour. You can change the way you act, and it is likely if you change the way you act that will have an effect on your interactions with those around you. They may change their responses. So try and notice if you can see any patterns. If you act in a certain way what effect does that have on your husband? If you change that action does it have a better outcome? My dad used to tell me “smile and the whole world will smile with you”. Try it! It is scientifically proven if you are sad and you force yourself to smile your mood improves! When the sun shines it brightens up the day of everyone it shines on! Cheesy I know, but aim to be the sun!

What three things can I do to have a better relationship?

Now you have thought about quite a lot in the first three questions, it may have taken some time. Maybe a few days to learn to notice the effect you have, and to fully contemplate and reflect on your behaviours and mindset. Now it is time to make a change. Now don’t give yourself too much. Think of three small simple things that you could do. Maybe force yourself to smile In the mornings! Maybe put on make up once a week. Maybe count to ten before you speak whe. You are feeling emotional, or saying thank you and jazakallah khayr to your husband more often. And remember don’t beat yourself up. If you find it hard and slip up, it only natural, you are human not superwoman! And old habits die hard! So just tell yourself you will try and do better next time. Focus on successes, not failures, and Inshallah you will soon see your positive mindset Make a difference!