By Dr Javed Jamil
When Rushdies and Tasleemas, Yogis, Sadhavis and Cartoonists vilify Islam, depicting Quran, Prophet and his companions in highly derogatory manners, the international as well as Indian media rise in their support claiming it was their right of “freedom of speech”; when some Muslim preachers or leaders make just a few harsh sentiments, which are nowhere in venomousness or ridicule of others than the works of Rushdies and Taslmeemas and Cartoons denigrating Prophet Muhammad, the media develops total amnesia for the golden maxim of the modern world, the “Freedom of Speech”, and goes berserk vilifying them as the preachers of hatred and violence. And what can be more ludicrous than that Tasleemas and Rushdies are often invited to join the debate against the “hate speeches” of Muslim preachers. The message is clear; religion in general and Islam in particular is unacceptable to the forces of modernity.
While the radicalisations of Westernism and modernity have left all other forms of radicalisation miles behind in terms of devastation they caused, they would use “radical” only to describe Islam. And when they discuss “Islamic Radicalism”, they would totally ignore the fact that if there is any real “Islamic Radicalism”, it is the direct result of the Western radicalisation at the global level and Hindu radicalisation within the country. They will never debate the violence against Muslims and will never ask questions to the perpetrators of that violence even if it kills millions of innocent Muslims at the international level and tens of thousands in communal riots in India. But as soon as a Muslim name appears linked to any violence even if it kills a few dozens, they will leave no stone unturned in bringing the whole Muslim community to the worst possible media trial.
I happened to watch Times Now debate on Friday night with Arnab Goswami at its worst shouting at the panellists. If there is one radicalist in the Indian media, it is none other than Goswami. Only he knows what the best is; those not in agreement with him have no right to even claim that they are right. And see the hollowness of his arguments. He was spouting venom on Zakir Naik just because he linked the condemnation of Osama bin Laden as a terrorist to the proof of allegations against him. He said that if “Osama was really involved in those acts; he was surely a terrorist and must be condemned”. This sentence was a proof of Naik’s crime in Arnab’s view and his support to terrorism. On the other hand, I have yet to see an Indian TV focussing the entire debate on those who announced booties for killing Naik.
I do count Zakir Naik as perhaps the most overrated “Islamic scholar” of recent times. He has hardly any innovative researches or thoughts of his own and most of his lectures have been prepared on the borrowed materials from the works of people like Ahmad Deedat, Achatya Naved Usmani, Ved Parkash Upadhyaya and Harun Yahya. Apart from his mesmerising ability to produce references from scriptures, I do not think he is a good speaker. His answers to the queries are often unsophisticated displays of polemics. His certain remarks may have rightly irked certain Muslim sects. But I cannot see any of his statements as a proof of his spread of hatred against other religions or support of violence. I in fact value his contribution because he attracted many wayward young Muslims to the truth of Islam and tried to bring Hinduism, Christianity and Islam closer by highlighting their common origin. When he said that instead of targeting innocent people, terrorists should instead think of targeting the mischief makers, this was nothing but a way to dilute the anger of those Muslims who have resorted to illegitimate means to confront the illegitimate violence of West against Muslims. Only a naive or an enemy can infer from this that he was really telling them to take law in their own hands and kill the wicked. At the most, this denoted failure in conveying what he wanted to convey: that violence against innocents is intolerable under all conditions. Even his supposed remarks against other religions must be seen in their entirety. Islamic scholars including him always argue that all the previous scriptures and the founders of religions were true many being the Messengers of God. They quote Gita, Upanishad and other scriptures to show that like Quran, they also preached oneness of God and it was later that the purity of the original religions was adulterated. Like many Christian and Hindu preachers who spread venom against Quran, Muhammad and Islam, Islamic preachers hold Jesus, Moses, Buddha and Ram in high esteem.
But when there is a predetermined effort to denigrate a person, and use this as an opportunity to put question mark on a whole community and their religion, who can question these media persons. They and their masters just know the art of questioning and never bother to face questions themselves.
The questions that need to be asked to them are:
If violence is the proof of radicalisation of a community, group, country or ideology, why West and Westernism are not described as the worst forms of radicalisation?
Why they are not asked: Why they killed about one hundred thousand Afghanistanis when the alleged mastermind and his men we hidden either in Pakistan or somewhere in the nearby hills?
Why they killed 2 million innocent Iraqis when there was absolutely no evidence of weapons of mass destruction or its link with terrorism? (This has officially been proved by the Chilcot Commission Report.)
Why there is no worldwide debate on the role of Western radicalism leading to millions of Muslim deaths?
Why no one argues that if “Islamic radicalism” is to be uprooted, Western radicalism will have to be abandoned and Western violent campaigns against Muslim lands will have to be stopped forever?
Why the debate is always centred on “Jihadi ideologies” and Western military ideologies are not discussed at all? Why are they not asked: why is the last century full of their wars against other countries, invasions and support to civil wars killing almost 180 million people?
And in India, why is it that the majority of deaths in communal riots are Muslims? And when the overwhelming majority of terrorism related deaths in India in last few decades have taken place at the hands of non-Muslims including Naxalites, Bodos, Ulfa terrorists and Sikhs, why Muslims are singled out as terrorists?
*****
The author is India based thinker and writer. He can be contacted at doctorforu123@yahoo.com. Read more about him at http://www.worldmuslimpedia.
Javed jamil sahaab…excellent. but in nutshell for the saffronised hindu ” mainstream media ” goose steeping along with western zio garbage churned by likes of bill maher…pamella galler…robert spencer and their bible swaying messanics….likes of arnab goswami love to play to the ” patriotic majority “… for whom islamic atankwaad is a cancer to the sociey…but this mainstream crowd goes overboard to praise their ” bishmapitaahmah ” – narendra damodardas modi….and offer salutations to a patriotic ravaan – bal thackhray with a state funeral with a 21 gun salute…thus it validates their “patriotic mainstream” asli deshbhakti….least said the better of indian rubber stamp secularism…..hell to hindutwaad.
Goose stepping…society — typo error corrected
Double Standard!
It is not in our interest to create Zakirs, Owaisis and Azams as a reply to Rushdies, Tasleemas, and Yogis. Our interest is to be diplomatic enough not to create Rushdies, Tasleemas, and Yogis if possible, or just ignore them when it is appropriate.
I agree that western countries have killed many innocent people in middle east. But this is not the only reason behind muslims becoming terrorists. You can see that there are many terrorists killing muslims only. Before Iraq war the relation between Iraq & Iran was worst..in fact they had a war. Today turkey military attacked their parliament. ISIS so far has killed 1.5 lacs muslims. In Iraq sunni terrorists are killing innocent shia. So my point is, there is inherent violence among muslim community. And only western countries can not be held responsible for this.
Another point about ‘freedom of expression’. Let me add that no country in this world can offer 100% freedom of expression. However, US & european countries are offering this freedom at highest level. In India it is medium level & in Islamic countries it is almost zero. Zakir naik openly criticizes Hindu religion. He says Ram was non-vegetarian, Ramayan, Mahabharat is a myth, Hindu religion is a false religion. He has been saying this since last 25 years & he is still alive in India. This shows that Hindu religion shows tolerance. Now think other way round.. suppose a Hindu gives public speech in Saudi arabia & criticizes Islam to prove Hindu is the only true religion. Will he remain alive? Muslims will kill him immediately. This proves that Hindus are peace loving & tolerant.. where as muslims are inherently violent & intolerant.
I think instead of writing such useless articles, muslim community should think about increasing tolerance level & accepting other religions same as Islam..
Secular Mr Hindu,
First of all educate yourself: Zakir Nayak hundred of Times
made it clear.Hindus are a Nation Not a Religion.
Ramayana is a tale of Arabian Nights confirmed by Mr Nehru & Mr Gandhi. Indian Brama Samaj rejected worship of Idols.
Zakir Nanak clear that vedas oppose Idol worship.
In west most western now understand Islam & accepting Islam.
In USA in some Churches Muslim pray Jumma Namaj.
Why truth hurts . Ram Ate Beef & you Hindus now against Beef Eating but love nudity of Cino girls made Nude lover Muslims named Actors Billionaires. Shame on you nude lovers.
Install a secret camera & see how many your Baba leaders watch Nude Sex Films.
Zakir proposes quotes in hindu scriptures which are convenient to him. Hindu scriptures is very rich & understanding them requires high intellect which a meat eater like Zakir cannot have. You gave example of Nehru & Gandhi… they are not scholars in Vedic science. If you really want to know about hindu scriptures then learn it from authenticate sources. If you do it seriously then after learning it you will leave Islam.
I know Hindu is not a religion.. the correct name is ‘Sanatan dharma’.
There are several hidden truths about Islam as well. Your kaba is a shiva temple. The temple was destroyed & Kaba has been built. Muhammad’s uncle was hindu & devotee of lord Shiva. If you see all rituals performed at Kaba.. you will find they are exactly same to hindus do at Shiva temple. Hence, I say that Islam is a small portion of Hindu religion.
Mr plain truth,what you might be saying is truth but you should avoid making it look bitter.
As yogesh engineer alias engineer said we should learn to be diplomatic.
The problem with we Muslims is we have reduced Islam to emotions rather than way of life.
Let’s try to be polite and put across our views
To always give the example of Saudi Arab is the favourite pastime of Hindus. They forget that there are more than 50 Muslim majority countries including countries like Malaysia, Indonesia, Turkey, Azerbaijan, Bangladesh which have no lesser freedom of expression than India. If India had been a country with almost a 100 pc population of Hindus, they would have behaved much worse against Muslims than Saudi Arabia. There are so many Muslim countries with Hindu minorities but except for a few in Bangladesh, there is no history of anti-Hindu riots there like anti-Muslim riots in India.
You have given list of islamic countries like Malaysia, Indonesia etc. I am sure even in these countries if an hindu gives public speech saying hindu is true religion & islam is false then he will be killed.
In islamic countries where hindus are in minority, you will not find much violence because hindus are basically peace loving. We are not fundamentalists & we love science & technology. Hindus are never involved in terrorist activities in those countries. Hindus also live in US & european countries. These countries invite hindus & ban muslims.
Secular Hindu
For your kind information just have an access to following weblinks.
50 MOST VIOLENT CITIES IN THE WORLD
The Citizen Council for Public Security and Criminal Justice, a Mexico City advocacy, has compiled a list of the most violent cities in the world by murder rate per capita. Despite Honduras topping the list for the second year in a row, 2016 Summer Olympic Games hosts Brazil has 19 cities in the top 50.
http:/www.seguridadjusticiaypaz.org.mx/sala-de-prensa/1165-por-cuarto-ano-consecutivo-san-pedro-sula-es-la-ciudad-mas-violenta-del-mundo
Contrary to what is alleged by bigots, Muslims are not more violent than people of other religions. Murder rates in most of the Muslim world are very low compared to the United States.
I could go on and on. Everywhere you dig in European colonialism in Afro-Asia, there are bodies. Lots of bodies.
Now that I think of it, maybe 100 million people killed by people of European Christian heritage in the twentieth century is an underestimate.
See more at: http://www.juancole.com/2013/04/terrorism-other-religions.html
Every religion has produced evil and violent people. So It is unfair to raise finger against any particular community for this crimes committed by some mis-guided and unscrupulous people.
Anyone who understands Islam and follows the clear guidance of the Holy Qur’an, will agree that what happening these times (terror attack) around the world is wrong.
This widespread terror related incidents has hurt the cause of Islam, because the western media has tainted the name of Islam and the Muslims with one brush! The religion of Islam cannot be held accountable for the misdeeds of a few people, just like the religion of Christianity was not labeled with barbarism and genocide through the acts of Hitler, or of John McVeigh, or of Mussolini, Slobodan Milosovic, etc. When these evil people commited the crimes against humanity, we did not ask the Christian world to wake up on the right side of the bed and not on the side of terrorism! So why do ignorant people today want to make the acts of a few people a clash between the Western and Islamic civilization?
Thus my beloved brother in humanity, it is neither wise nor intelligent to take the example of a few misguided individuals and generalize the state of the general muslim nation and people as terrorists or extremists! Calling all the muslims terrorists and extremists for the acts of a few individuals would be as wise as calling all our 700 million Hindu brethren terrorists just because a small minority of them like the RSS or Shiv Sena cause acts of terror in the name of Hindu extremism!
The principles of Islam state that we, as believers, are not allowed to attack or kill any civilians, old people, women, children, etc., even if they are at war against us. The believes are only allowed to fight those who fight against us in war. No matter how many atrocities and aggression the disbelievers may do against us and our civilians, we are not allowed by Islam and Shariah to transgress the boundaries of Allah, and retaliate by killing their civilians. We cannot allow their injustices and enmity to provoke us to such an extent, that we over-step the boundaries set by Allah and His Messenger (peace be upon him).
Allah says in the Holy Qur’an Chapter 5 Surah Maidah verse 8: “O you who have believed! Be steadfast in righteousness and just in giving witness for the sake of Allah. The enmity of any people should not so provoke you as to turn you away from justice. Do justice; for it is akin to piety. Fear Allah! Indeed, He is fully aware of what you do.
Allah and the History of the Muslims is witness that Islam has always been very tolerant of the other religions of the world; but we see today that the secular world is not tolerant to Islam. We live by a Divine Code which is unchangeable, and Allah is our witness, we do not want to change it. All we ask is to live, and let us live in peace.
The Rights of Non-Muslims in Islam
Islam is a religion of mercy to all people, both Muslims and non-Muslims. The Prophet (peace be upon him) was described as being a mercy in the Qur’an due to the message he brought for humanity:
“And We have not sent you but as a mercy to whole worlds.” [Qur’an 21:107]
When a person analyzes the legislations of Islam with an open mind, the Mercy mentioned in this verse will definitely become apparent. One of the aspects constituting an epitome of this Mercy is the way the legislations of Islam deal with people of other faiths. The tolerant attitude of Islam towards non-Muslims, whether they be those residing in their own countries or within the Muslim lands, can be clearly seen through a study of history. This fact is not only purported by Muslims, but many non-Muslim historians also accept it.
Patriarch Ghaytho wrote:
‘The Arabs, to whom the Lord has given control over the world, treat us as you know; they are not the enemies of Christians. Indeed, they praise our community, and treat our priests and saints with dignity, and offer aid to churches and monasteries.’ [1]
Will Durant wrote:
‘At the time of the Umayyad caliphate, the people of the covenant, Christians, Zoroastrians, Jews, and Sabians, all enjoyed degree of tolerance that we do not find even today in Christian countries. They were free to practice the rituals of their religion and their churches and temples were preserved. They enjoyed autonomy in that they were subject to the religious laws of the scholars and judges.’ [2]
These just relations between Muslims and people of other faiths were not due to mere politics played by Muslim rulers, but rather they were a direct result of the teachings of the religion of Islam, one which preaches that people of other religions be free to practice their own faith, only accepting the guidance offered by Islam by their own choice. Allah says in the Quran:
“There is no compulsion in religion…” [Qur’an 2:256]
Not only does Islam demand their freedom to practice religion, but also that they be treated justly as any other fellow human. Warning against any abuse of non-Muslims in an Islamic society, the Prophet stated:
“Beware! Whoever is cruel and hard on a non-Muslim minority, curtails their rights, burdens them with more than they can bear, or takes anything from them against their free will; I (Prophet Muhammad) will complain against the person on the Day of Judgment.” [Abu Daawud]
How far is this mannerism than the majority of nations, to this day, which not only suppress the rights of foreign religions, but also foreign peoples and races! In a time when Muslims were being tortured to death in then pagan Mecca, Jews were being persecuted in Christian Europe, and various peoples were being subjugated due to their particular race or caste, Islam called to the just treatment of all peoples and religions, due to its merciful tenets which gave humanity the right to their humanness.
“O ye who believe! stand out firmly for justice, as witnesses to God, even as against yourselves, or your parents, or your kin, and whether it be (against) rich or poor: for God can best protect both. Follow not the lusts (of your hearts), lest ye swerve, and if ye distort (justice) or decline to do justice, verily God is well-acquainted with all that ye do.” [Qur’an 4:135]
“Do not let your hatred of a people incite you to aggression.” [Qur’an 5:2]
“And do not let ill-will towards any folk incite you so that you swerve from dealing justly. Be just; that is nearest to heedfulness.” [Qur’an 5:8]
Footnotes:
[1] Tritton, Arthur Stanley: ‘The People Of The Covenant In Islam.’ p. 158.
[2] Durant, Will: ‘The Story Of Civilization.’ vol. 13. p. 131-132.
How not to talk about Muslims after a Fringe Terrorist Group attacks
Refuse to hate and refuse to be afraid. Bend over backwards to be nice to Muslims. They’re human beings, just like you, but they are being stalked by very dangerous people.
Stop suggesting that there is something wrong with Muslims that they keep producing terrorists. All the major world faiths produce violent people. In the Rwanda genocide of the 1990s, Christian Hutus murdered between 500,000 and 1 million other people, and the Christian churches were deeply involved in enabling this slaughter. Indeed, Christian missionaries had played a sinister role in importing the idea of racial divides and racial hierarchies into Rwanda in the first place. That the American mass media have virtually ignored sanguinary episodes such as the Rwanda killings and the central role of the Christian churches in them in itself helps create an image of Muslims as unusually violent. If you only report on Muslim violence, then that is what people will think.
Read full article at http://www.juancole.com/2016/03/how-not-to-talk-about-muslims-after-a-fringe-terrorist-group-attacks.html?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=facebook
You said muslims are inherently violent…
I mean seriously which world do you live in?? Should I tell you about the Hindutva ideologies?? Religious fundamentalism is a problem in Hindutva not in Islam. There are cordial inter-faith relations in Islam. We don’t murder people over whether they had beef or not. We don’t hang cattle traders. Caste system doesn’t exist here.
The Creator has taught us in the Qur’an and Sunnah that all other `religions’ and ways of life are unacceptable to Him if a person is aware of Islam. The Qur’an states (translation),
And whoever desires a religion other than Islam, it shall not be accepted from him, and in the hereafter he shall be one of the losers. [Qur’an 3:85]
However, even though the Creator has clearly specified that no other way of life is acceptable to Him except Islam (i.e. submission to Him as embodied in the Qur’an and Sunnah), He has also commanded the Muslims to be tolerant of people who espouse other creeds. From the Sunnah, specifically in the study of the Sunnah called Al-Awsat by Al-Tabarani, we find regarding those non-Muslims living in the Islamic state,
The Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) said, “One who kills a non-Muslim person under protection (Arabic: dhimmi) will not even smell the fragrance of Paradise.”
Also from the Sunnah, specifically in a report from Al-Khatib, we find that the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) also said:
Whoever hurts a non-Muslim person under protection, I am his adversary, and I shall be an adversary to him on the Day of Resurrection.
In short, Islam is intolerant of false ideas, however it is tolerant of the people who hold to those ideas. One historical example of Muslims living up to the standard of Islam can be found from the time of the Spanish Inquisition. During that disaster sprung by misguided Catholics, some Spanish Jews fled to Muslim Turkey and to this day, there is a community of Spanish-speaking Jews in Turkey. Another example may be found during one of the Crusader invasions from Western Europe. Some of the the Catholic Western European knights were so likely to rape, murder, and pillage the Jews and Orthodox Christians, that when the Muslims won, they were treated as a liberating force by those non-Muslims.
Javed Jameel Saheb excellent analysis.
Government of India is promoting fake muslims leadership to toe /agree with Hindutva majorterion democracy, while silencing true and faithful Muslims leadership under pretext of Nationalism and majorterion democracy
While BJP / RSS Sanghis abuse Islam & Muslims on a daily basis,TV Channels like Zee & other bring rented Paki Bhagodas like Tarek Fateh & BD Taslima Nasreen to insult & demonize Indian Muslims ..Muslims must Counter this hate campaign on SM & MSM..
Well conceived article. The author has substantiated his points giving various illustrations. Scholarly written.
Why there is no worldwide debate on the role of Western radicalism leading to millions of Muslim deaths?