TO ME, MY WAY, TO YOU YOURS. (The Qur'an)
Dear readers: assalamu alaikum
It's important to reflect on the actual article published in the
Frontier
Post. Did the Muslims do the wrong thing by reacting so strongly
against
Frontier Post? A certain viewpoint has emerged from secularist groups
and
rejectors of Hadith which goes as follows:
1. Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) did not retaliate for attacks on himself, so
why
should we retaliate for attacks on him?
{Note the subtext here: The information that the Prophet (pbuh) did not
curse
the oppressors when they hit him at Taif COMES FROM HADITH which these
people
are supposed to reject.}
2. We receive so much publicity material against Islam. It does not
weaken
our faith. So why be so concerned that an attack on Islam in Frontier
Post
will weaken our faith?
3. Freedom of expression is very important. Don't we want freedom of
expression? So why are we stopping Frontier Post from publishing abuse
of the
Prophet (pbuh)?
THESE ARE FALLACIOUS ARGUMENTS BUT THEY ARE VERY APPEALING TO THE
GROUPS
WHICH DOMINATE THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE MEDIA IN PAKISTAN. Hence these
arguments
must be rebutted.
Premise one: We are operating in an atmosphere of "Freedom of
expression."
THIS IS NOT TRUE. Take America's leading daily THE NEW YORK TIMES. It
publishes sophisticated attacks on Islam every week, sometimes every
day.
Thousands of Muslims respond to its writings. NONE OF THE RESPONSES ARE
EVER
PUBLISHED EVEN IN THE LETTERS COLUMNS. As far as authentic, 100%
Islamic
response, I doubt if even ONE has been published in the last 10 years.
MUSLIM SCHOLARS of the level of Shaikh Omar, Maudoodi, Madani
(Algeria),
Khomeini, and many others have been repeatedly attacked in the New
York
Times and a whole lineup of USA's major media. No Islamic reply has
ever been
published.
President Saddam Hussain is regularly demonized in the US media. Have
you
ever seen an opposing viewpoint being published?
{Note the argument here: They will not publish replies to their
attacks, but
we must tolerate their attacks even on Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) and the
Qur'an.}
i. The attack is not on the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) but on the minds of
the
elites of the Muslim community. In every Muslim community, there is a
westernized enclave. These individuals' earlier generations were handed
over
power by the withdrawing imperialist power. Most of these persons in
the
power elite do not study the Qur'an or the Hadith and seldom practice
Islam
in their daily lives. It is a very common phenomenon in Pakistani
gatherings
of the elites that obligatory prayers are ignored by most people. (This
can
be quite funny, as the elites hear the azan, lower their heads for a
minute
and then continue with their conversations. The women cover their heads
for
the azan and then continue as if nothing happened.)
iia. Thus the attack comes in English language papers aimed at people
whose
faith is already very weak. From being "tolerant" of Islam, these
people can
be recruited to be against Islam. A frontal attack can be very
effective with
these elites.
iib. They already hate the "mulla" (sometimes owing to the mulla's
fault but
mostly owing to the stereotype of the "mulla"). All they need now is
confirmation of their prejudice to color their faith itself.
iic. More and more these westernized groups will say: The Jews must be
right.
How come so many Muslims cannot defeat so few Jews? In fact the
Qadianis came
out openly after the Gulf War to say that the whole Muslim ummah is
astray;
that is why it is being whipped by the Americans and the Jews.
iii. RAISING the threshhold of acceptance is very important in the
overall
attack on religion. In USA, for instance, the Jews, in the name of
freedom of
expression, have made open season on the personality of Jesus (pbuh).
The
most abusive attacks on Jesus (pbuh) do not get more than a cursory
response
from the majority Christian population in USA. Does this mean
Christianity is
becoming stronger in USA and can ignore abuse of Jesus? No. The fact is
that
the Jews have systematically made religion trivial and downright
ridiculous
for millions of Americans. You won't find too many USA Christians
willing to
give their lives or even go to prison for the honor of Jesus' name.
The more abuse Muslims can accept, the wider the door will be opened
for
cultural imperialism. In our countries we still honor our father and
our
mother. If Muslims can calmly listen to abuse of the Prophet (pbuh),
then by
logical progression, the cohesion of the entire Muslim way of life will
be
under severe pressure.
PREMISE number 2. We have Islamic leadership in Pakistan which is
similar to
that of the Prophet (pbuh). If the Prophet could tolerate abuse, why
can't
we? AGAIN, NOT TRUE. Our government is extremely weak as far as Islam
is
concerned. We have hardly emerged from the era of BB and NS who
tarnished the
basic decencies of political life. Those who walk in the path of
Muhammad
(pbuh), like him tolerate personal insults. Maudoodi, Khomeini, Shaikh
Omar:
no Islamic scholar or leader is hurt by personal insults. They follow
the
example of the Prophet. Remember Ali (ra) let the kafir go whom he was
going
to kill on the battlefield when the kafir spat in his face. Ali (ra)
did not
want to fight for personal reasons.
But these attacks by the Jews are attacks on the ideological basis of
Pakistan (and the Islamic community). Their purpose is not a scholarly
criticism of the Prophet (pbuh) but a way of saying: I will come into
your
home and I will curse your father and your mother. Or I will throw a
pig into
masjid al-Aqsa (a Jewish woman actually tried this) or into the Ka'aba
itself. So the attack has nothing to do with freedom of expression.
It's part
of the war on Islam, comparable to the Jews of Madinah's linkup with
the
Quresh in the era of the Prophet. The same messenger who would never
curse
the unbelievers at Taif cut the throats of the Jews of Madinah. It's
the
internal attack which any leader would know cannot be tolerated by a
community which wants to live honorably.
PREMISE THREE: If we ignore abuse, it will go away and be ineffective.
AGAIN:
FALSE. There is a difference between scholarly argument and abuse. If
the
abuse is aimed at AN ENTIRE WEAK SEGMENT OF A NATION, it must be
stopped.
Rushdie's attack on the Prophet (pbuh) was the Zionists' way of
checking how
much tolerance the Muslim world had developed. If there had been no
Fatwa
against him, by now there would have been movies made in Hollywood
about the
Prophet (pbuh) and his family. And I am sure, the people who drink and
dance
in Pakistani streets on New Years' eve, who celebrated Valentine's Day
and
support Basant, etc, would have been watching the life of the Prophet
(pbuh)
as made in Hollywood on the wide screen and on VCR. The Fatwa protected
the
sanctities of the Muslim world for at least 12 years. Now we should
expect
new attacks.
If Pakistani students and people do not respond to the attacks on Islam
such
as the one in the Frontier Post, there is very little chance that
Pakistani
government will do anything. The response has to come from the
grassroots.
We do have religious tolerance. We have churches, cathedrals, christian
schools, temples, gurdawaras in Pakistan. Everyone is free to preach
and
practice a religion other than Islam. Muslims are simply saying:
Pakistan's
existence is based on the Qur'an and the Hadith of the Prophet (pbuh).
If you
walk on this sacred ground with your muddy shoes on, you will have to
be
stopped.
My suggestion: Let's have a thorough study of the Blasphemy law. Fine
tone
it. Put in place strict procedures for evidence and witnessing. Leave
doors
open for repentance. After that, one who attacks the Prophet (pbuh) his
family or his companions in an abusive manner (to be strictly defined)
should
be tried, convicted and hanged in the public square.
Sincerely
Kaukab Siddique, Ph.D
2001-02-24 Sat 17:16ct