Promoting sanity in the face of blasphemy

Bramantyo Prijosusilo ,  Ngawi, East Java   |  Tue, 04/01/2008 12:15 PM  |  Opinion

With the announcement of Geert Wilders' taunting film failing to entice violence, as many feared, more people are jumping on the Islam-bashing bandwagon to gain popularity amongst the xenophobic right in Western democracies. Inevitably many more will do the same in pursuit of cheap popularity.

The dilemma facing the global Muslim community is how to protect the sanctity of their religious symbols, while demonstrating to the world that freedom of speech was actively pursued by the Prophet Muhammad and the original Islam. The Prophet carried the light of reason to disperse the darkness of ignorance of jahiliyah in his times, and consequently freedom of speech is a highly regarded Islamic value.

A German theater is currently staging Salman Rushdie's notorious The Satanic Verses and the adapted play is due to run for eight weeks, Britain's Guardian reported Sunday. Turkish actor Oktay Khan, who was due to take part, bailed out after receiving threats. The novel was adapted for the stage by writer Marcus Mislin and Uwe Laufenberg, the head of the theater who is also directing the play. General Secretary of the Central Council of Muslims in Germany, Aiman Mazyek, has called for calm.

"This material has not lost its ability to offend, but freedom of opinion and the arts is of a high value and most Muslims are against censorship," he said.

Meanwhile another Dutchman, Ehsan Jami (22 years, of Iranian descent), is planning to film an animated comedy about the life of Muhammad in the style of the classic Monty Python cracker "Life of Brian".

Jami, who lives under police protection, claims his film is only a joke but it is unlikely Muslims around the world would share the humor.

There is a profound difference between the ignorant juvenile rants of Geert Wilders and taunts of ex-Muslims like Rushdie and Jami. As people who were once insiders of the faith, Rushdie and Jami posses an intimate knowledge of sensitive nerve points in the traditions of Islam.

English readers who have no intimate knowledge of Islamic traditions find it difficult to understand why Muslims all over the world were mad about Rushdie's book. How could such a beautiful blend of impeccable English and exotic magic-realism make Muslims so upset?

Was Ayatollah Khomeini upset at being characterized as a mullah living in an exile's flat, bent on creating a revolution to "turn the clock back" through taped sermons?

The problem with understanding the anger at The Satanic Verses was that Rushdie's mischievous mockery was cunningly woven into the fabric of Islamic traditions using threads recognizable only to insiders.

In Rushdie's abuse of Islamic traditions the Prophet became the villain Mahound and his wives were depicted as prostitutes. To emotionally understand this you needed an intimate, first-hand knowledge of Islam. Jami's planned film which claims to focus on the wedding of Aisha no doubt will hit raw nerves in much the same way.

Protests have been delivered from all over the world but the bullies do not care. Rushdie immediately gave the go ahead when he was approached for permission to stage his novel, even though he knows people have killed and died because of it.

Obviously some people enjoy playing the blood-sport of taunting Muslims, as if seeking to hound and destroy any positive image Islam has left in the West.

Muslim leaders should refrain from anger, as any rage they express will only play into the hands of pathetic attention seekers who pretend to be courageous while taunting and mocking from the security of their own democracies. Of course they realize they risk the lives of many but as 'free speech bullies' they do not give a damn.

It is sad but true there are probably many Muslims who will be enraged by this constant barrage of blasphemy, and some will urge people to commit violence in the name of religion. These are the elements of Muslim society that the blasphemers are counting on, to prove their point--that Islam is incompatible with modern values.

To stem these blasphemies, it is imperative that intellectual sections of the Islamic community come forward to call for restraint and encourage Muslims to emulate the behavior of the Prophet in the face of mockery.

No one ever made a novel, play or a film about him in his time, but the Prophet was no stranger to being the butt of evil slander in rhetoric and poetry. Yet through his consistent practice of kindness, charity, justice and chivalry, the forgiving Muhammad eventually won over the ignorant jahiliyah of his time.

Contrary to the image that free speech bullies are trying to build, the Prophet Muhammad was a beautiful man in thought and deed, who won his biggest battle--the takeover of Mecca--without a sword being drawn or a drop of blood being spilt.

Nearer to our time, and closer to home, we could also learn from a prosecuted Islamic sect amongst us. There is much to admire in the conduct of the followers of the Ahmadiyah sect in Indonesia. Recently they endured slander and libel, intimidation and violence from mainstream Muslim communities who were egged-on by foolish fatwas from leaders who should know better.

And yet never have we seen the Indonesian Ahmadiyah faithful descend to the level of madness their attackers wallow in. This is how we must treat the blasphemous films, plays and novels that are being used to taunt us.

Inevitably there will be many more attempts to mock and desecrate everything we hold holy in Islam. We must understand these bullies are reacting towards those amongst us Muslims who do commit heinous crimes expressly 'in the name of Islam'. Just as we condemn blasphemy by liberal extremists like Wilders, Rushdie and Jami, we must also accost religious bullies who blaspheme through violence in the name of our own noble religion.

Sing waras ngalah, say the wise Javanese: The sane must give-over.

The writer is an artist and former journalist. He can be reached at bramn4bi*yahoo.com.

Comments (2)  |   Post comment
A  |   A  |   A  |   Mail to a friend  |  Printer Friendly Version |  Digg it!  |  Add to Del.icio.us!  |  Add to Reddit!  |  Stumble it!

Wilder’s film is a caricature without any nuance or balance. Depicting Islam as an ideology of violence that inspires people to become terrorists is an insult to the millions of peaceful Muslims. Wilders uses a technique of misleading generalizations and repetition, focusing on the negative deeds committed in the name of Islam, without showing for instance the many positive aspects of Islam or the likewise many negative deeds committed in the name of other religions or non-religious ideologies. Fortunately, thanks to freedom of speech, people in the West have easy access to a free media which vocalizes a multitude of opinions and have largely a more balanced view. The primitive form of hate-propaganda that Wilders uses is not going to change that. If there are growing feelings of Islamophobia, they are mostly a form of xenofobia with largely social and economic backgrounds, just like anti-immigrant attitudes and laws exist in Muslim countries. The aspect religion is added to it because it is such an emotional issue and because of the lack of reciprocity between the rights Muslims enjoy in the West and non-Muslims in Muslim counties. For example, people in the West are aware that they can’t immigrate to Saudi Arabia, get social benefits, open a church there, convert local people to their own faith and publicly practice their own habits if these conflict with local habits. It is obvious that western immigrants in a Muslim country who would publicly state that they hate the society they live in and want to destroy it would be in deep trouble too.
Still, I think it is very positive that an Indonesian newspaper publishes opinions and articles that don’t close their eyes for the many festering problems in the West. We should be thankful about this type of criticism because ‘outsiders’ can help us better understand our wrongdoings and mistakes. The question is, are Muslims ready to see this the same way?
While the West should do more about the growing Islamophobia, shouldn’t the Muslim countries do more against he growing westernophobia, anti-semitism, homophobia, secularophobia and misogyny in Islamic societies as well? Or is the fact that the criticism comes from a right-wing extremist a valid excuse to deny this?
It amazes people in the West that important people in Muslim societies have been so preoccupied with this film, even months before its release. According to a statement alleged to Al Qaeda, insulting the prophet and the Koran is far worse than slaughtering defenseless women and children. Is that also what tolerant Muslims believe? It is hard to believe that. But if that is not the case, then why are moderate Muslim politicians reacting so (vocally) violently while they remain silent about several selected problems and conflicts that do cost many innocent people’s lives? If Muslims feel deeply offended that their religion is portrayed in a negative way, then why were there no mass protests against Al Qaeda and other terrorist organizations by moderate Muslims? Are the acts committed by those who call themselves Muslims but act in violence, not more blasphemous than cartoons or caricatures of ‘non-believers’ that claim Muslims are terrorism-prone?
Perhaps Westerners do not fully understand the priorities and sensitivities of moderate Muslims after all?
Months after the infamous Danish cartoons were published, the president of Iran, who calls himself like a brother to the president of Indonesia, retaliated by organizing a cartoon-drawing contest, mocking with and ridiculing the sufferings of Jews in the holocaust. Of course people who were victims of the holocaust or their offspring must have felt deeply hurt and offended by this.
People around the world of different convictions and cultures have different sensitivities and holy symbols. Everybody should respect that. But apparently many people only seem to think about their own sensitivities and forget about those of others, even if many innocent bystanders get dragged into the mudslinging. Wilders has given a nice example of that. But he is not the only one.

Pagans in the West or East will always mock anything about religion, especially if it will make them money or gain them noteriety. As a follower of Isa Al-Masih, I agree that it is ungodly to use crude mockery such as that which is being used by film-makers, dll. There is a calmer and godly way to discuss differences of belief. Isa bin Mariam did not resort to crass mockery.

I also agree with the writer of the article that calls to violence to avenge the mockers will only prove the mockers' point. God is merciful and compassionate, but he will also perfectly avenge evil and lies. God is the best defender.

marto kusumo

Today's Paper

  • Friday, July 4, 2008

Weekender

  • COVERPAPER-July.jpg