Dear members,
Assalamu Alaikumu Alaikum.An useful article.You can form your judgement on its
merit.
Shah Abdul Hannan
----- Original Message -----
From: Yaminul ISLAM
Sent: Monday, November 10, 2008 9:38 AM
Subject: Muslim Responses to Freedom of Speech and 'The Jewel of Medina'
A Critical Evaluation of Muslim Responses to Freedom of Speech and 'The
Jewel of Medina'
Hamza Andreas Tzortzis
The Jewel of Medina is just a regurgitation of Qurayshi politics. Since
the advent of Islam attacks verbal and physical, on the Prophet (s), his family
and his companions, were harsh and frequent. Pick up any book on the Seerah and
you will find many evidences pointing to this fact. Most recently, in relative
terms anyway, the Muslim community has witnessed many attempts to slander,
defame and dishonour the Prophet, his family and his companions. This has
manifested itself in the publication of the Satanic Verses, the printing and
re-printing of the Danish cartoons and this month we saw the newly published
book "The Jewel of Medina". This book takes our sacred history and superimposes
western liberal values on the Islamic narrative. It is obviously fiction and
therefore full of lies. Not only has it been discredited by non-Muslim
academics, but it has been banned in some western countries.
There have been four types of responses by the Muslim community. The
first response is that the Muslim community must conform and align itself with
western notions of freedom of speech and liberal values. The second response is
that we must do nothing in order to prevent further promotion of this book. The
third response is that we must physically prevent the publication of this book,
even if this means resorting to violence and aggression. The fourth response is
that we Muslims, must understand the political reality and as a result
challenge the ideas that this book represents, and call on the Muslim nations
to demand sincere leadership that will follow the Qur'an and sunnah
comprehensively.
I will attempt to respond and comment on each of these Muslim responses.
You Must Accept Freedom of Speech and Western Values!
The first response is the height of intellectual and theological
redundancy. This response has already accepted freedom of speech and liberal
western values as the sole reference for our actions and behaviour. It is well
known, even amongst western philosophical discourse that freedom of speech has
no conceptual export into the real world - it doesn't and cannot exist. Even
the most liberal countries have pages and pages of legislation restricting
speech. Some of these include hate speech laws, libel laws, product defamation
laws, anti-terror laws and even public speaking laws. So in reality there is no
free speech, it is more logically coherent to describe it as "expression within
the context of the law and society's values".
The questions that follows is 'are western values the way forward?' With
the rise in violent crime, anti social behaviour, domestic violence and sexual
assault how can anyone be confident with western liberal values? Just to add
here, when western nations look at so called Islamic societies and they see
some perceived negative behaviours, they are very quick to blame the Islamic
values as the cause. However when it comes to their immense problems in western
societies they always add more legislation and turn a blind eye to the values
underpinning their societies. It is as if they have been divinely revealed!
The propagated values in western society are freedom and individualism.
How can the overemphasis of my freedoms and the notion of my individuality -
which are being forced down our throats via the political and economic
structures in western society - actually create a cohesive society? In reality
these values are non-cohesive values, and according to psychologists and
philosophers, if you propagate non-cohesive values you will get a non-cohesive
society. Now compare this to the Islamic cohesive values of mercy, compassion
and God consciousness; wouldn't they create a cohesive society? Now, I am not
saying that people in the western world do no carry these values, they do.
However the difference is that in the Islamic society, these values will be
propagated via the political and economic structures - and they will not be in
competition with non-cohesive values of individualism and freedom.
To conclude how can these Muslims who call for this type of response
believe in Islam when they adopt alien constructs and ideas? Wasn't Islam
revealed for our guidance for all all aspects of life - individual, social and
political? Doesn't this show an inferiority complex and no confidence or
conviction in Islam?
Don't say or do anything!
The second response is self refuting. What the advocates of this response
say is that staying silent is the best path to take. However in order to
promote this response the advocates will need to write or publicly state this
position. However this would contradict their very position. To say 'do
nothing' and yet write or promote the idea of 'do nothing' is actually
something! In order for them to promote this idea they have to say something
about the publication or offence, which defeats the purpose of what they are
trying to say. Its like crying out in a crowded hall "Don't tell anyone that I
am here!". The best way for the advocates of this response to be logically
consistent is to keep silent and hope others learn by their example. Putting
this aside, this response is dangerous, politically naive and is exactly what
the western ideologues want.
This publication is one of many publications attacking Islam. Anyone who
types 'Islam' into Google will quickly find out how nasty and degrading some
internet sites are regarding Islam and the Muslims. Theologically we all know
that this is not going to stop, Allah and His Messenger have told us so.
However the main concern with this recent publication - including the Danish
Cartoons and the Satanic Verses - is that they are being used as a tool by the
western ideologues to arm themselves against the ongoing attempt to secularise
Islam. This is because this publication sits within a current political
context. It is well known that the western ideologues have an ongoing campaign
to secularise Islam. This is due to the the fact that all ways of life want to
protect themsleves and part of this protection is the use of propaganda,
misinformation and negative imagery of the ideological other. There are many
examples to prove this in Communist, Capitalist and Liberal nations. The reason
Islam is the new target is because it is a valid political alternative with
solutions to existing political and social problems - it is a positive
challenge. Additionally the global Muslim community is now seeking for this
alternative way of life to be implemented politically in the Muslim world.
Therefore it is only natural that these western ideologues adopt a
strategy to prevent this challenge to the existing status quo from becoming a
reality. One way they attempt to do this is to de-politicise Islam and the
Muslims, thereby secularising them. Part of this secularisation is to break the
will of the Muslim community and to de-sensitise her to the point of passive
submission to the current status quo. They are expecting the Muslims to
passively stand by and watch Islam relegated to Friday service, just like what
happened to Christianity in the past.
So, if this publication (and many others) is being used as a tool to
secularise the Muslims, then keeping quiet will only be falling for the trap
and it will send out the wrong messages to the global community. Furthermore,
it will do nothing to prevent the potential "The Jewel of Medina: The Movie" or
a western rendition of the Qur'an with Chapter Tawba taken out! This response
of doing and saying nothing usually comes from those who care what others think
- specifically the non-Muslims - and those who know nothing about the process
of secularisation and current attempts to ensure that Islam is secularised.
By any means necessary!
Some people describe the third response as a form of jungle justice. This
is not what Islam demands or teaches. Without going into the khilaf
(theological difference) on this issue, reacting violently without an Islamic
authority and courts will not solve the problem or even implement what the
Sharia demands. It is well known that there is a Sahih Hadith demanding that
the one who insults the Prophet must have capital punishment enforced on them.
But where are the courts? Where is the mechanism to do this? Commanding all
that is good and forbidding all that is evil is an Islamic obligation but if we
do not have the power to fully implement the punishment system of Islam, what
do we do? Well, the Prophet told us, if we can't change it with our hands then
we change it with our tongues. Didn't the Prophet face abuse during his stuggle
in Mecca when he had no power? Did anyone respond with aggression or violence?
The answer is no.
[ you can ead the book The freedom of speech in Islam , where he has
shown that abuse of the Prophet is a heinous crine but there is no mandatory
death penalty for that , there is not enough textual evidence for that ]
Challenging minds and liberating society
This comes to the last response. This response is also in line with
classical scholarship as a Hanbali scholar, who summarised al-Ghazali's piece
on "Commanding the Good and Forbidding the Evil", wrote that if the the
prevention of a specific evil act caused more evil or fitna then the actions
must be re-evaluated. What this essentially means is that sometimes speaking
out is more powerful and more in line with the Islamic objectives then
physically putting an end to it. In the current political context of western
attempts to secularise Islam, challenging the western liberal values and
secular political framework is far more powerful and effective. This is due to
the fact that if Muslims, in the western world, are able to challenge the
political philosophy and world view of secular nations and show that the
Islamic model is philosophically and practically superior, wouldn't this impact
the global Muslim community in a positive way? Wouldn't Muslims rally behind
the call for Islam? Wouldn't they feel motivated and energised to implement
this beautiful way of life? Additionally, providing an effective intellectual
challenge would stir public opinion and actually show that Islam is a positive
alternative for Muslims and non-Muslims. This in turn would be a key milestone
in showing how degrading and awful these expressions of speech are, and most
significantly, it will highlight that the west (and the east) need their values
changed to the Islamic cohesive values.
An alternative paradigm
The Islamic model, if presented in the right way, can truly show that
Islamic values and the mechanisms to promote them are a positive alternative.
People, Muslims and non-Muslims, will see that Islam is not just a set of
morals but a comprehensive system whose political framework is founded upon
these sublime values. This model will propogate cohesive values and yet
acknowledge the fact that, in reality, absolute freedom to say what you want,
is detrimental to society. Additionally, truth, accountability and progress
will be values in themselves and not the other way round. For in western
society free speech is seen as the main value to uphold, with the blind
assumption that only free speech can cause progress, accountability and truth.
However, this approach does not stop people degrading and abusing others and
has actually negated the reason freedom of speech came about in the first
place, thus creating a paradox and a contradiction.
Take the following example: free speech societies were once allowed to
propagate that all Black people were evil, thus creating a social construct and
a social norm. In this social climate no one wanted to search for the truth
about Black people. This is because western society relegated the idea to the
level of a social taboo, something that should not have been investigated or
approached; hence preventing the search for truth. It was only when certain
values were enforced did people eventually realise that Back people are equal,
normal human beings.
Western history is full of these examples and freedom of speech is
actually speechless when it comes to these realities and contradictions!
This must agitate those responsible to evaluate this outdated idea of
freedom of speech and seek an alternative model that can achieve what freedom
of speech was meant to achieve minus the degradation of others and the
contradictions apparent to us all in the western world!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG.
Version: 7.5.549 / Virus Database: 270.9.0/1779 - Release Date: 11/10/2008 7:53
AM
