My name is Sueda, but I’m also Sue.

I speak English, Turkish, French, and Arabic.

My blood is Turkish, my accent is American, but my heart? Undecided.

In a world where names and ages attempt to define individuals,

I find myself struggling not to be confined within the limitations of a few pages.

My story runs deeper than the surface; it is an intricate tapestry woven across three distinct countries, shaped by unseen battles and quiet transformations.

I was often looked at as a fool for believing my dual identity could be free, but we live in a world where, if they can’t place you in a box, they simply label you as “other.”

Born in Turkey, my childhood carried the scent of distant lands long before I understood what longing was. The world pulled me into new places, new skies, new songs…

and with every move, I found myself both losing and finding pieces of who I was meant to be.

Change did not ask for permission; it swept through my life like a storm, teaching me that home is not always a place; sometimes it’s a memory, a voice, a feeling tucked deep within the soul.

I grew up learning that survival often meant adaptation, and that in trying to belong everywhere, I sometimes felt like I belonged nowhere at all. In my attempt to mold myself into something “acceptable,” I let parts of myself blur the vibrant colors of my identity muted in exchange for a quieter, safer existence.

It took years stretching years to understand that belonging was never about fitting in. It was about standing firm in the soil of who I truly am.

My path has gifted me wisdom that no classroom or map ever could. If you asked me to name myself with a single word, I would hesitate, because I am too many things to be reduced to just one word.

Still, if I had to choose, I would say: unique.

Because my identity is not static. It is alive growing, stretching, breaking, healing

a testament to the resilience born of a life lived between borders and beyond definitions.

I grew up understanding that home isn’t always a place. Sometimes it’s a memory.

Sometimes it’s a wound.

Trying to belong became a silent war inside me. I bent myself into shapes that weren’t mine.

I softened parts of myself that were never meant to be dulled.

And somewhere along the way,

I lost so many pieces of me, shattered them against the cold walls of acceptance, left them behind on the altar of belonging.

But now I see it, those pieces were never meant for this world to understand.

They were fragments of something eternal. I’ve realized that I don’t belong to a city, a nation, or a label.

I belong to Heaven.

My soul was never meant to fit in a place built by human hands. It was crafted for something far beyond.

As I continue down the winding path of self-discovery, I know now that my essence cannot be confined by a few words, or tucked neatly into a nationality, or captured by a language.

I belong to every place I loved,

I belong to every culture that has shaped me,

I belong to every language that has found its way to my tongue.

I am from three countries, not one.

I am from three cultures and four languages.

I am from Turkey, Africa, from every silent prayer and every loud dream. I am not fighting my duality anymore — I am embracing it.

My name is Sueda, but I’m also Sue.

I speak English, Turkish, French, and Arabic.

My blood is Turkish, my accent is American, but my heart?

Generally accepted as a Christian country, Australia became exposed to Christianity along with Judaism and Islam little more than 200 years ago, due to the arrival of the British settlers and scattered landings of Muslim Indonesian sailors on the northern shores (Stephenson, 2007). Evidence has shown that it is inaccurate to claim that Indonesian Muslims were the first to discover Australia. The earliest reliable evidence dates their presence in Australia to the mid-1700s, whereas it is known the Dutch had discovered it by 1606 (Ganter, 2008). Since the arrival of the first fleet in 1788, Australia has been subject to a regular influx of refugees and immigrants. As a direct result, integration of cultures has become an integral part of Australian society. Over the last 60 years, the population of Australia has become one of the most ethnically diverse in the world (Kurti, 2013). It is clear that today’s Australia is a multicultural and religiously diverse society. According to the 2011 Australian Census, over a quarter (26% or 5.3 million) of Australia’s population was born overseas and a further one-fifth (20% or 4.1 million) had at least one parent born overseas (Ozdowski, 2012). Since the 1970s, federal and local governments, NGOs, and various intercultural and interfaith organizations have worked incessantly to make Australia everyone’s home. The primary aim of this was to overcome misconceptions and to promote community cohesion through principles of respect, acceptance, tolerance, and collaboration.

Many cultures, including Australian (and by implication Western European cultures), view anything or anyone who comes across as different in regard to customs, appearance, dress or language, in a mistrustful way which can invoke a variety of emotions, ranging from mild loathing to extreme fear. Such views are further affected by constant media exposure of adverse events, including minor misdemeanors carried out by minority groups from particular ethnic and religious backgrounds. Controversial news travels faster and attracts more attention than noncontroversial news, so it is unsurprising that print and electronic media release unfavorable news almost exclusively on a daily basis. Furthermore, the overwhelming influence of visual and print media has on people’s perceptions and views, intentionally or otherwise, results in a one dimensional view of events. This type of news, informed by biased information, tends to shape responses to events in our lives in a way that creates serious prejudices.

Australia can be proud of its record when it comes to amicable and respectful inter-cultural community relations. This, along with its inclusive view of the religious beliefs of others, is founded on mutual respect and the forbearance of alternative points of view. In recent times, however, small but concerning components of insularity and corresponding multi-racial indifference has emerged, threatening the otherwise harmonious levels of co-existence. Much of the early success of colonial expansionism was due to the respect and tolerance of cultural differences by the British colonialists, especially in the Indian-sub continent. A notable exception, however, was the early treatment of the native Aboriginal people in Australia by European settlers (Reynolds, 1987). The initially negative treatment of native people by the white settlers evolved over time and led to a general shift in attitudes towards accepting each other’s views, cultures, and traditions.

In today’s world, one would have to be either intellectually myopic or simply deeply misinformed to have formed the view that ‘all is well’ in the world of human relations, with naked violence, in its worst possible forms, paraded in front of us daily in the international and local media. Those who profess naivety would appear to accept no responsibility for what is all too often a one-sided view of events. At a personal level, our relationships are strengthened by an open minded approach to the beliefs of others without feeling the need to force others with differing views to believe what we believe and perceive. However, they can also be affected by a sense of profound disquiet that comes in the wake of the often quite virulent proselytizing of those who cannot, or will not, acknowledge the rights of others to believe in their own version of the “truth.”

Few will argue that prejudice ‘feeds’ on ignorance, possibly the worst form of ignorance being one that is “fed” by innuendo, half truths, and downright slander. Australia, as a country with a historically Christian tradition, can be quite proud of its generally open-minded and fair approach towards fellow Australians who choose to follow other religious or cultural beliefs and traditions. According to (Koleth, 2010-11; 3-41) in Australia: “Multiculturalism has served a variety of goals over the years, including, the pursuit of social justice, the recognition of identities and appreciation of diversity, the integration of migrants, nation building, and attempts to achieve and maintain social cohesion.” This has become one of many reasons why our immigration policies, which have led to an enhanced acceptance of “multiculturalism,” now enjoy high levels of success and positive acclaim within the international community (Ozdowski, 2012).

One of the achievements of our immigration policy has been the acceptance of those who are refugees on humanitarian grounds, providing the bounty of many skills and practical abilities that migrants bring to our country. This has become vital to engender notions of acceptance and understanding in all people. In Australia, communities come from diverse political, cultural, and religious persuasions. Thus, the focus should be on a deeper level of unconditional acceptance, understanding, and affection between people who may not necessarily be well acquainted at a personal level. A good example of this is contained in a biblical utterance from Paul of Tarsus in his letter to the Corinthians: “And if I have the gift of prophecy, and know all mysteries and all knowledge; and if I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but have not love, I am nothing” (Corinthians 13:2). As this quote highlights, love forms the foundation of social acceptance and cohesion. It is, therefore, not too fanciful or naive to suggest that this type of love offers the best possibility for peaceful and harmonious co-existence between peoples of widely differing cultural and religious backgrounds.

Similar to the Christian teachings, Islam and its proponents promote tolerance at all levels: between family members, husband and wife, parent and child, as well as between groups and nations. The Qur’an says, ”O Mankind! We have created you male and female, and have made you nations and tribes so that you might [affectionately] come to know one another. Surely, the most honored among you, in the sight of God, is the most righteous of you. Indeed, God is Knowing and Acquainted” (49:13). To this end, the Qur’an commonly advocates tolerance, respect, and goodwill towards the People of the Book (Christians and Jews). For example, the Qur’an declares: “God does not forbid you, as regards those who do not make war against you on account of your Religion, nor drive you away from your home, to be kindly to them, and act towards them with equity. God surely loves the scrupulously equitable” (60:8).

Thus, in a spirit of tolerance, acceptance and understanding, Australia seems to fit well within this ideal paradigm. In Australia, immigrants of all nationalities and religious beliefs are well integrated by international standards. However, there still exists a pressing need for interfaith and intercultural dialogue between all members and from all strata of society. Currently, there are government organizations and NGOs promoting dialogue through various events and programs. Affinity Intercultural Foundation, the Australian Intercultural Society, the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, the Victoria Multicultural Commission, and the Community Relations Commission for a multicultural NSW are some of the organizations who are genuinely exerting creditable efforts toward the goal of dialogue. The high degree of diversity in Australia could quite naturally lead to social segregation. Fortunately, the commonsense and basically fair-minded attitudes that prevail in Australia have prevented this from happening to the same extent as in Europe (Ozdowski, 2012). At the beginning of white settlement in Australia, by a combination of free and convict settlers, there existed a degree of European based xenophobia towards anyone who either looked or dressed differently; but familiarity, liberal values, and a broadly democratic view of life have tempered misconceptions.

Australia is proud of its strong and unshakable friendships with people of varying religious beliefs, including those encompassed by the large monotheistic religions Christianity, Islam, and Judaism. It needs to be acknowledged after all, that if we can believe in one single external power in our lives, it is possible to accept that we are all children from the same source. Many philosophers have suggested that ultimately ‘all is perception’; however, if that perception of our fellow human beings is one of ‘difference’ in terms of language, culture, dress, and beliefs, then we are presented with the challenge to ensure that these differences do not create the sort of divisions that lead to a ‘ghetto’ response that is sadly all too often one of the consequences of such differences.

There is beauty in diversity and diversity in beauty. This beauty is further enhanced in the human experience if all people in the world agree to differ amicably with a sense of respect for different views, or more simply put, “agree to disagree.” What a beautiful world that would be to live in. Finally, it may be said that the achievement of cultural and interfaith harmony begins with the necessary education that enables us to recognize that whatever differences there are, these must not cause divisions and unfounded suspicions. Differences are something to be embraced rather than feared; they give life a special richness that would be absent if everyone was the same. Above all, along with viewing love as a bond between people, we are bound to recognize love as an ingredient for human tolerance and harmony.

References

• Ganter, R. 2008. Muslim Australians: The Deep Histories of Contact. Journal of Australian Studies, 32(4), 482–483.
• Koleth, E. 2010-11. Multiculturalism: a review of Australian policy statements and recent debates in Australia and overseas, Parliament of Australia, Research Paper No.6, pp. 3-41.
• Kurti, P. 2013. Multiculturalism and the Fetish of Diversity. CIS policy monographs 138: Centre for Independent Studies (Australia)
• Ozdowski, S. 2012. “Australian Multiculturalism: the roots of its success.” Third International Conference on Human Rights Education: Promoting Change in Times of Transition and Crisis, The Jagiellonian University: Krakow, Poland.
• Reynolds, H. 1987. Frontier: Aborigines, settlers and land. Sydney: Allen – Unwin.
• Stephenson, P. 2007. The outsiders within: Telling Australia’s indigenous-Asian story. Sydney, Australia: University of New South Wales Press Ltd

God burdens no soul except within its capacity… (Al-Baqarah, 2:286)

This verse is not strange to any Muslim. God has promised that He will never burden a person with difficulties beyond his or her capacity. This is supported by other verses in Surah Al-Inshirah (94:5–6), where it is said that with every hardship, comes relief and this divine statement is repeated twice in the same chapter. This clearly shows how God knows the limits of the human being’s capacity to endure challenges in life.

However, despite these beautiful statements God has made in the Qur’an, we still hear many people complaining about how tough life is, about how they cannot bear their problems anymore and asking why God gives them certain challenges other people do not have to bear. The worst thing is when suicide is contemplated as a reaction to what God has given to His servant.

These complaints, at first glance, appear to contradict these verses, since surely the people so afflicted should know their own capacity to endure tough problems. At second glance, however, it becomes clear that this is not so. Does God really test someone beyond his capacity?

In talking about the endurance of an individual, we cannot avoid the subject of coping skills. Generally, coping skills are divided into two categories, namely avoidance coping skills and approach coping skills (Soderstorm, et.al., 2000).

Avoidance coping skills are basically unhealthy ways of dealing with problems. These coping skills delay the process of recovery and emotional stability. An example of a coping skill of this type is substance abuse, where many people turn to coffee, drugs, cigarettes and other substances when they are in distress.

Another avoidance coping skill is denial, where the person refuses to believe what has happened. In some really bad cases, people go on with their lives, refusing to believe the problem they face and allowing the situation to deteriorate. Some other examples are self-harming, minimization and cognitive avoidance. These mechanisms of coping do not just delay the process of recovery, but also exacerbate the situation.

On the other hand, approach coping mechanisms promote the mental and physical well being of an individual. These mechanisms foster positive thinking and motivate problem-solving behaviors. One of the skills in this category is action taking. Rather than sitting and waiting for something to happen, a person who adopts approach coping mechanisms will plan the strategies and actions required to solve or ease the problem.

Another approach coping skill is acceptance. However, acceptance here means to admit that there is a problem and not resent to the occurrence of the problem. Acceptance which means giving up is not the same as acceptance as an approach coping skills. Positive acceptance is the opposite of denial. Therefore, acceptance is an important beginning of acting to solve or ease a problem.

Humor can also be an approach coping mechanism. By making appropriate fun of the problem, distress can be reduced, and thus more mental stability can be achieved. For example, a mother who has just experienced the loss of her child might say to herself, “At least he is enjoying as much candy as he wants in paradise.” By using appropriate humor like this, the mother can broaden her perspective, allowing her to see the brighter side of the loss she has experienced.

Religious coping is another strategy among approach coping skills. In psychological research, more and more studies suggest ways that spirituality and religiosity help in dealing with life’s problems. One of these studies (Meisenhelder and Chandler 2002) stressed that faith as the concept of spirituality was more applicable than religiosity. One of the variables investigated by these researchers, which was religious coping, correlated positively with mental health. This study is only one out of many to show a strong relation between spirituality and mental and physical well being.

Soderstorm et.al. (2000) also suggested some gender differences in coping strategies. They asserted that men tend to adopt task-oriented coping strategies or approach type and women tend to use the contrary, avoidance coping strategies. However, some other studies have suggested that women are more likely to use task-oriented coping strategies or that there are no gender differences (Holahan & Moos, 1985 as cited in Soderstorm et.al. 2000). Nevertheless, more and more researchers have found a tendency for men to focus on a problem and start taking action to overcome it.

The relation between the verse in Surah al-Baqarah at the beginning of this discussion and coping skills is clear. The question then arises: if it is true that God would never burden a soul beyond its capacity, why do some people complain of being unable to deal with a certain problem they face? If they think that God is unfair, or that they are now unable to cope, or are thinking of committing suicide, it is simply that they have adopted the wrong kind of coping strategy for their individual circumstances, or they may have adopted unhealthy avoidance coping strategies in dealing with problems.

Abi-Hashem (2007) describes how unhealthy coping skills can have negative impacts on people who live in a country with ongoing war, as in the Middle East. Such circumstances, where violence, cruelty, and harshness are an unavoidable part of life make things seem hopeless, and nothing can be done to break away from the situation. The author suggests that at this point, the best coping strategy to be employed is action taking, because worsening mental paralysis can happen to an individual in a country with war who takes no positive action. So, if a person feels as if the challenge God has given them is beyond what they can bear, they should ponder any action they have taken to adjust to the problem. They may have missed some points where, if action is taken, a great deal of worry and stress can be reduced or allayed.

Another way of looking at this is that religious coping skill correlates with mental well being. But sadly not many people realize the importance of religious coping skills in managing life’s problems. In many verses in the Qur’an (e.g. Al-An’am 6:102; Hud 11:123), God reminds us to depend on Him in all affairs, to put our trust in Him and make Him the basis of our decision making. This reflects all research findings, which tell us repeatedly of the advantages and positive outcomes of religious coping. Perhaps this is because we know that there is something we can rely on in hard times, which makes it easier for us to deal with life’s problems. Some practical ways to cope religiously are the performance of greater numbers of recommended prayers, more frequent remembrance of God, and contemplating the creation of the universe.

Sometimes we believe too much in the power of our own selves, feeling too confident that it is we who make the changes, who solve the problems. But we all know the power of togetherness. Support from other people can significantly increase the effectiveness of our coping style. We can reduce our stress by sharing what is bothering us and perhaps getting wiser advice from another person on handling the problems we are facing.

It is important to reflect on ourselves in times of stress. Do we just listen to ourselves? Do we turn to substances when we are distressed by something? Are we brave enough to accept the problem which is afflicting us? Most importantly, do we trust God enough to help us with our problems? These questions can only be answered by each individual for himself or herself.

Taufik Mohammad, PhD, is a senior lecturer in Universiti Sains Malaysia.

References

• Abi-Hashem, N. (2007). The agony, silent grief, and deep frustration of many communities in the Middle East: Challenges for coping and survival. In P. T. P. Wong and C. J. Wong (Eds.), Handbook of Multicultural Perspectives on Stress and Coping, US: Springer US, pp. 457–486.
• Meisenhelder, J. B. & Chandler, E. N. (2002). Spirituality and health outcomes in the elderly. Journal of Religion and Health, 41, 243–252.
• Soderstrom, M., Dolbier, C., Leiferman, J. & Seinhardt, M. (2000). The relationship of hardiness, coping strategies, and perceived stress to symptoms of illness. Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 23, 321–328.

In a dialogue, it is as if the meaning flows in separate rivers running beside one another in their own channel. This stream has a dynamic nature; it changes and grows. At times these rivers join together in a reservoir with a communal semantic or a lake of reconciliation.

The aim of a dialogue, in spite of differences of opinion and conviction, is to gain understanding and acceptance. The word “dialogue” is therefore distinct from the word discussion. Those who engage in dialogue do not seek to defeat or silence the other person, nor do they adopt a defensive attitude at the outset. They seek to find out, to learn and to understand collectively.

Dialogue implies being amenable to another person’s point of view. It requires that one pay attention and listen to another individual so that the heart and the mind might “open.” This mutual acceptance makes it possible to understand each other, learn together, and make a collective contribution. A wise person once stated, this process causes an endless deepening of meaning like two mirrors that reflect each other.

Dialogue is also one of the most effective means in the struggle against negative conditioning, prejudice, and fanaticism.

Certain qualities are essential if a dialogue is to be effective, and these qualities are: sincerity, humility, and epistemic curiosity.

Sincerity

Goodwill engenders trust. Mutual trust is the most important condition for the expression of deeper thought and feelings. Openhearted people do not fear communication with or the influence of others.

Humility

One of the greatest virtues is being able to set aside oneself for the sake of others. Sincerely humble people are aware of the limits of their abilities and always back away from transgression.

Humility implies the notion that we know little and still have much to learn. It also implies the willingness to change and develop in accordance with all that we have learned.

In dialogues that are governed by humility, both sides search for the boundaries of their available knowledge and notions and, they both depart to discover unknown places. They travel from the familiar to the unfamiliar.

Epistemic Curiosity

The nature of people enables them to be curious and search for truth. This basic drive should be a primary component of a healthy foundation for dialogue.

Together we can search for the answers to these questions among many others:

• Who are we?

• Why do we exist?

• What is our origin?

• What is the destination of our journey?

• What is our relationship to the Creator?

• What is the relationship among people, life, and the universe?

• What is the relationship between faith and science?

• How should we interpret critical thinking?

• Are their metaphysical laws, just as there are physical laws?

Most likely, the deepest desire of a person is to bequeath to subsequent generations, who will inhabit this aged earth until the end of time, something essential and of fundamental importance, thus giving to his own transiency an aspect of something that is long lasting.

Affection, virtue, compassion, fairness, and concord are universal aspects of spiritual enlightenment and happiness that will never lose their value. They are the conditions of a meaningful and blessed life and comprise the best legacy we could wish to leave others.