What did I say?
The cartoons of the Prophet Muhammed 
. Yep, I probably should say something about them. Really there has been so much going on about it and I’ve been trying to keep up with that, I kind of forgot to give my ‘tuppence’. Well I wrote a comment to BBC, I don’t know if it will be published but it basically sums up how I feel about the whole situation:
I’m a Muslim in the UK and I feel let down that the international press are so inconsiderate about other people that they think it is okay to publish things which they know will cause upset amongst a huge number of people. I think that this publication was not justified, and protests are in order to a certain extent. I do strongly believe, however, that the Muslims protesting should be careful about the manner in which they do so and also that they make sure that they do so in an Islamic fashion. It is not justified that people are getting hurt, and unfortunately this has been over reacted to when there have been so many more outrageous acts committed against Islam which have had a smaller response.
What would the Prophet Muhammad do?
The Prophet Muhammed said: “You do not do evil to those who do evil to you, but you deal with them with forgiveness and kindness.” (Sahih Al-Bukhari)
What would the Prophet Do?
This article basically reminds us that the Prophet Muhammed was a very peaceful and loving man, and even when he was at times of hardship, he was always the one to forgive those who harmed him. It is a very valuable lesson, and I really do hope that we all
see that problems like this need to be approached systematically.
Update
I just read a short update on Opinionated Voice which came to a great conclusion by Robert Fisk:
“There is no doubting that those preposterous cartoons originally published in Copenhagen last September have lit a small inferno…” …”They portrayed Islam as a violent religion. It is not. Or do we want to make it so?”
16 Responses to “ What did I say? ”
Leave a Reply
May Allah
protect The Muslims in the World !
Ameen
Usayd, I assume that you do not live in the United States. Here we have the 1st Amendment that protects Freedom of Speech. Sometimes people say and print things that are very hurtful to others, but that protects the Freedom of Speech for all of us.
In our country, artists have insulted our primary religion many times. Our press did not hesitate to print photographs of “Piss on Christ” even though they knew it would anger many.
“Free speech is the whole thing, the whole ball game. Free speech is life itself.”–Salman Rushdie
Good article. Particularly the incorporation of the Islam101 article. The cartoons shouldnt have been published, but the protestors shouldnt have reacted in such a violent way either.
Jason: I do not live in the US, but I know this much. There are so many people brainwashed by the media over there and that really does frighten me. Quoting Salman Rushdie, lol, I feel sorry for you. Just because your press printed something else that was bad, that doesn’t make this any more justified. If Christians had raised a voice about that then I’m sure something would have been done about it.
Jamal: That is basically it – I don’t see why that fact isn’t widely agreed on.
There’s not really any point in instructing muslims about freedoms, since they seem to despise the concept. Equal rights before the law do not exist under Islamic law. One citizen, one vote does not exist under Islamic law. Freedom of worship does not exist under Islamic law. Minorities — that is, non-Muslims — enjoy rights and protections at the pleasure of the Muslim community that are ever-subject to the capriciousness of a rights-canceling fatwa. Indeed, Islamic law is not the basis of a religion, as the Judeo-Christian world understands religion, but is rather a controlling ideology that is nothing short of totalitarian.
My view on this matter is controversial yet I think I share it with many others. I think I should declare myself a Theist beforehand though (in a somewhat neutral ground) – believing that there could be a God but choosing not to conform to one religion because I don’t feel any of the religions sum up my beliefs. I agree with probably all of them in one aspect or another.
For many centuries religions have been mocking each other and the cartoons printed in the Danish press are no different. I think Muslims would have a point to this uproar if they were being singled out and were the only ones being targeted by satirical images but they’re not. All religions at some point suffer the criticism of the 21st century and stable religions should be able to withstand it. I am not condoning the idea of satirising religious icons but it happens to all the religions and yet you don’t see them reacting in such a violent way. Let me give you an example:
I remember a picture posted on the internet of Jesus on a Cross smiling because of the use of No-More-Nails?:neutral: – Many Christians saw this as viscous and offensive and in most aspects you could say they were right, but I don’t recall Christians parading in county capitals offending other British citizens by telling them to expect another 9/11.
I think I should leave everyone with the following quote: An eye for an eye would make the world blind.:idea:
I have mixed feelings on this, some mirroring views already posted here. Firstly I’ll say I condemn any publication which makes fun of the Prophet Muhammad
(peace be upon him), and think it is my duty to uphold the respect I hold for and owe him by protecting his honour. However, being an artist myself, I respect someone’s right to convey what they feel through art. Art is special in ways literature is not. It can be a lot more personal to the artist, so for Muslims to take it as a ‘message from the West’ as many have (especially in the Middle East) is wrong. There is no consensus, it is a personal view held by many. Burning embassies, burning flags, let alone murder will not change these individual’s views, probably only reaffirm them. The fierceness of the response though only reiterates how wrong the deed was. At the end of the day, was the intention to simply offer a view or ignite a flame? Where does the balance slide?
The way I see it, the publishers knew the uproar and controversy the comic strip would cause, and thought what with the current height of media coverage in the Islamic world ‘the time is right, who cares about ethics!’ So in a way, the pureness of the artistic intention is crossed out by this. This is shown by how they told the artists exactly what they wanted, and how they had trouble finding artists willing to work for them. What makes it worse though is that they’re using freedom of speech as an excuse to hide behind all the negatives they can see. If they felt they really were free to do it they would not need any justification to protect their ideals, they wouldn’t need laws to protect themselves. This brings us to the conclusion that the matter isn’t really as controversial as people make it out to be, there is no serious ‘clash of cultures’ I can see from this. It is merely down to individual’s views of what is acceptable and what is not. Thankfully over here in Britain, there is the general view that the strip toes the line of acceptability, and to my knowledge no mainstream publishers have had anything to do with it.
To sum up, personally I would have accepted the comic strip’s validity to be published had it not been a direct drawing of the Prophet (peace be upon him), but a mention. But a mockery loses my respect and attention straight away.
I came across an interesting article by an English guy – Michael Coren, which basically speaks about the courage that Muslims had by standing up for their beliefs:
I personally found this quite an engaging approach. Although I don’t fully agree with the article, I find that it is encouraging that someone sees the situation from a more considerate perspective. He concludes with a very bold statement that basically rips apart any argument which is made to justify the cartoons in the first place:
Flanstein: Your statements are actually incorrect. Freedom of worship does indeed exist under the Islamic Law, perhaps you refuse to believe so but unfortunately for you it does. Islam says that there is no compulsion in religion and it is not allowed for a Muslim to force someone else to become a Muslim.
Seb: Thanks for sharing your opinions on the matter. As I said before, just because a different faith was insulted in the past – that doesn’t make it right. Imagine the uproar if Homosexuality was mocked in todays society. Read the article I quoted in this comment, it also addresses previous issues that were similar to this. I also was against the violent reaction of some Muslims as I said.
Qasim: I disagree with you to call this art – it is a political cartoon aimed at insulting. That is a fact, there is no argument even against that. I also think that you are stepping into dangerous waters by saying that you would accept the cartoon had it not been a drawing. It is the message behind the cartoons which is more insulting then the drawing of the cartoon.
There is also an issue of Islamophobia which I think is very much true – and I believe this phobia comes from a lack of knowledge about the true Islam.
“Freedom of worship does indeed exist under the Islamic Law”
Yes, I’ve noticed all those catholic churches springing up in Saudi Arabia?
I also think that you are stepping into dangerous waters by saying that you would accept the cartoon had it not been a drawing. It is the message behind the cartoons which is more insulting then the drawing of the cartoon.
Usayd, since when were people not insulting us or our Prophet? And since when did we have the right to deny them? I’m saying I disagree with it being a form of art (which I believe it is) as it is directly depicing the Prophet’s face, which is unacceptable. People insult Islam and everything that goes along with Islam everyday, its nothing new. It’s the way we deal with the issue that changes the views. The Prophet was the best example, insults had no effect on him, but he would try his hardest to change the minds of those disbelievers, in a peaceful manner. Thats why I thought the link you posted ‘What Would the Prophet Do?’ was well-placed, good job.:wink:
Flanstein, Usayd is correct in saying that “Freedom of worship does indeed exist under the Islamic Law”. The truth is though, no Muslim country, (though some claim to) actually practise Islamic Law the way it should. So next time maybe you should think a little out of the box before you judge all Muslims around the world, and not apply the religion to how it is but how it should be.
Qasim you are correct in saying that we as Muslims are being continously insulted, however that doesn’t justify anything. Thats why I quoted that article which was actually saying ‘Three cheers for people who will not simply fall down and allow their most deeply held religious beliefs to be spat upon and treated as garbage.’ because at the end of the day, we shouldn’t just accept any trash that is thrown at us out of ignorance.
Thank you for replying to Flanstein, you said pretty much the same thing I was going to say – but I would say maybe that few Muslim countries rather then no Muslim country because I know for one then when I went to Iraq there were many Churches and Christians lived in peace there, at least before the US/UK occupation.
The Danes screwed up by printing the cartoons. Muslims screwed it up even more by rioting in the streets in a non-peaceful manner. However, sorry to sound childish, but “they started it”.
The “what would the Prophet do?” question is useful up to a point, but it is at least equally important to ask ourselves, “what would the Prophet tell us to do?” The vagueness of the New Testament gives Christians a vast interpretive latitude in their meditations on “what would Jesus do?” The authenticity and specificity of the seerah and sunnah, and the fact that a codified shari’ah is available, decreases that latitude for Muslims, and tends to leave us with a lot less to be confused about.
What would the Prophet, Sallallahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, do in the case of the cartoons? Precedent is available. It is worth considering the story of K’ab Ibn Al Ashraf, for instance; being slightly more relevant than the trash on the doorstep story.
It is also important to consider that our history isn’t written in a secret code that non-Muslims cannot decipher; they can easily read the verses of jihad and their tafsir, they can read the history of Muslim raids on caravans, about the Banu al-Nadir and about Khaybar etc. If we are not reconciled ourselves with these aspects of Islam, our history, and the deeds and character of Rasulullah, Sallallahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, we are dangerously unprepared for any discussion with non-Muslims. Allahu ‘Alam
Asalamualikum Shahid,
Some very good points Alhamdullilah. I agree that a huge factor missing from many Muslims unfortunately today is knowledge. The K’ab Ibn Al Ashraf story is relevant too, but in this society I don’t see how such an approach is going to give a better impression of Muslims.
It is sad that some Muslims are acting without knowledge of their deen whilst perhaps some other Muslims with knowledge are not doing all they can to spread that knowledge to the less educated Muslims in particular.
I feel that much of the prejudice against Islam, particularly in this day, is purely out of ignorance. People think that quoting a single verse from the Qur’an or a single Hadith is going to justify their actions, whilst others are just blindly following what the media and others around them are saying without thinking about the consequences.