Once again we are in the same turmoil; this time it is caused by none other than the Pope. Any rational thoughtful mind might wonder what's going on. Why are these waves of attacks against the Muslims? Are these all carefully planned? Why did a person like the Pope make serious factual errors? What’s really behind all these? When’s the next attack coming?
The barrage of attacks on Islam by Pat Robertson, Jerry Falwell, Jerry Vines, Franklin Graham, and numerous other Bible thumping ultra-right-wing Christian fundamentalists and extremists; pseudo-American pro-Israeli likudnik Jewish groups; Arab Christian evangelists in disguise of ex-Muslims; Danish cartoons and now the Pope seem endless. Anybody who wants to have honest and interfaith dialogue can never make such comments. That was an act of provocation.
It was much unexpected from a person like the Pope. The wounds of Danish cartoon fiasco are still fresh. The fine twist here is that he wanted to give us a philosophical lesson. Another funny logic we hear is that he quoted the 14th century Christian Byzantine emperor’s remark, which was not his. But any sane mind can not miss the main point - he quoted those to endorse the same old hideous view in the Christian world which is “Islam was spread through violence by the early Muslims.” He did not repudiate the emperor’s remark in his speech.
Muslim entered India more than 1,200 years ago and ruled her for almost 800 years. Mr. Pope, why does India still have over 80% Hindus? The Hindus are not even considered as “the People of the Books” like the Christians and the Jews. Do you know how many Muslim countries have at least 5-15% non-Muslim population? How many European countries had that many percentages of indigenous non-Christians? How many Christians or Jews were living in Spain under the Muslim rule? How many Muslims or Jews survived the Spanish Inquisition? Even if we agree with your point for the sake of argument, the Christians will always lose the debate “Who committed more violence?” with any other religion. If you are honest and sincere, you should self-criticise Christianity's violent past before commenting on the other faith.
John Esposito, director of the Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding at Georgetown University, noted in Washington Post that the Pope’s speech contained an important factual error in addition to the emperor’s remark. The pope noted in the Regensburg address that one verse in a chapter (sura) of the Koran says, "There is no compulsion in religion," meaning that conversions should not take place by force. "According to the experts, this is one of the suras of the early period, when Muhammad was still powerless and under threat," the pope said. Esposito said that, in fact, the "no compulsion in religion" is a later verse, from Muhammad's time in Medina -- when he had effectively established a state, not from the Mecca period in which he was under threat. "The pope was suggesting that the ban on forcible conversions was overtaken by later verses advocated the spread of Islam by the sword, but that is false," the professor said.
Was it really an error or deliberate falsification? Has the Pope Benedict apologized for this error yet? Who prepared his speech? Are they looking for confrontation with the Muslims?
David Ban Biema wrote an article in Time magazine’s Sep 19, 2006 issue called "Does Islam Flout Reason? Why the Pope's Case Is a Flimsy On". Using the quotes from an 11th century Muslim scholar Ibn Hazm, a dead branch on the Muslim theological tree, the Pope did not do much justice. “It's completely selective!”, Ingrid Mattson, professor of Islamic Studies and Christian-Muslim Relations at Hartford Seminary in Connecticut and president of the Islamic Society of North America was completely frustrated when she heard the pope quoting Ibn Hazm to score his point. She mentioned in this article that the medieval Cordovan belonged to a literalist legal school known as the Zahiri, which never developed a community or a seminary. They were non-mainstream and never had great influence. The major point is Islam is not and was never monolithic. The Pope completely ignored Islam’s liberal and broad middle who believe that reason should be invoked "to understand scripture, to make analogies, to adduce particular rulings from universal principles and values."
The hypocrisy and the superlative double standards in the Western world are once again crystal clear. Anybody can say badly about Islam, its Prophet and holy book nowadays. If the Muslims protest, they are branded as an intolerant bunch. After that, all the atrocities against them would not sound bad at all. But at the same time if similar or even a hundred times milder statements were made by anyone against Israel or even constructive criticism about Israeli atrocities towards the Arabs, it would be categorized quickly as vilely anti-Semitic.
I really miss the previous Pope. Are all the interfaith developments made during his papacy wiped out? What is Vatican’s plan for future? Turning the clock backwards? After that how can the Muslims trust this new Pope? He sincerely (?) regretted that his remarks were offensive to the sensibility of Muslims, but he won’t apologize, i.e., he stands by what he said.
How can the Christian West forget the atrocities they perpetrated on the Muslims during the Crusades so quickly? Can we blame Jesus for all those evils and inhumane acts performed in the name of Christianity? Do they remember the chivalry of Saladin by any chance? Will they check their dictionary for a word called "Gratefulness”? Need some examples of real evil and inhuman acts? The fate of Native Indians in the two Americas; the very presence of millions of African Americans in USA, Canada, Brazil, and West Indies; colonization of whole Africa and most of Asia; killing, expelling (from a land where they lived for hundreds of years), or the forceful conversion of all the Jews and Muslims in Spain; and brutally persecuting Jews all over Europe until recently. "Turn thy other cheek" - can anybody show one such example by any Christian ruler in the two thousand-year-old history of Christianity? But there are many examples of "hundreds of lives for an eye" available all over the world.
Who inspired the Western enlightenment (modern thinking, renaissance, secular democracy, and new scientific ideas, all originated from it, but credits often wrongly go to Christianity)? It was Spain under Muslim rule. Who transmitted the Greek and Roman legacies? The Muslims. Why is the modern number system called Arab-Hindu numerals? Where did they get it? From the very Muslims they love to attack now.
Now what should we Muslims do? While writing this article something very interesting happened. I was almost halfway done when I left for afternoon prayer. After the prayer I try to recite one section from the Holy Qura'n regularly. Today it was chapter 41 and in there I came across verse 34:
“The good deed and the evil deed are not alike. Repel the evil deed with one which is better, then lo! he, between whom and thee there was enmity (will become) as though he was a bosom friend.”
While trying to find the same verse from online source to cut and paste on this article, I accidentally opened up chapter 42 and while browsing through it, verse 40 popped up as another lesson for us as a backdrop against the Bible’s “eye for an eye”:
“The recompense for an injury is an injury equal thereto (in degree): but if a person forgives and makes reconciliation, his reward is due from God: for (God) loveth not those who do wrong.”
I think this is how sometimes God communicates with us and gives us guidance, whether we want to follow it or not that’s a different thing.
[Interesting Verse No. 44 to 47 from Chapter 5 Al Qura'n - Surah Maidah (The Repast)]
44. It was We who revealed the Law (to Moses); therein was guidance and light.
By its standard have been judged the Jews, by the Prophet who bowed (as in Islam) to Allah's Will, by the Rabbis and the doctors of Law: for to them was entrusted the protection of Allah's Book, and they were witnesses thereto:
therefore fear not men, but fear Me, and sell not My Signs for a miserable price.
therefore fear not men, but fear Me, and sell not My Signs for a miserable price.
If any do fail to judge by (the light of) what Allah hath revealed, they are (no better than) Unbelievers.
45. We ordained therein for them:
- "Life for life,
- eye for eye,
- nose for nose,
- ear for ear,
- tooth for tooth,
- and wounds equal for equal."
But if anyone remits the retaliation by way of charity, it is an act of atonement for himself.
And if any fail to judge by (the light of) what Allah hath revealed, they are (no better than) wrongdoers.
46. And in their footsteps We sent Jesus the son of Mary, confirming the Law that had come before him:
We sent him the Gospel: therein was guidance and light, and confirmation of the Law that had come before him:
a guidance and an admonition to those who fear Allah.
47. Let the People of the Gospel judge by what Allah hath revealed therein.
If any do fail to judge by (the light of) what Allah hath revealed, they are (no better than) those who rebel.
No comments:
Post a Comment