The Book is also Just a Book

Re: # 95
Dost Sahib,
Very well stated and in such a short post. It is true, the US has traditionally supported right-wing Muslim activity against Soviet/Chinese Communist influence. Now the chickens have come hom to roost.

is it OK to use a religious symbol in attempting to gain information which can potentially save lives (of muslims as well)? in this case, the desecration was most likely not done in a malicious way but to obtain information.

The article (WSJ) below is for only those whose feelings have been hurt. Sorry for the long cut and paste.

Hypocrisy Most Holy

By ALI AL-AHMED
May 20, 2005

With the revelation that a copy of the Quran may have been desecrated by U.S. military personnel at Guantanamo Bay, Muslims and their governments -- including that of Saudi Arabia -- reacted angrily. This anger would have been understandable if the U.S. government`s adopted policy was to desecrate our Quran. But even before the Newsweek report was discredited, that was never part of the allegations.

As a Muslim, I am able to purchase copies of the Quran in any bookstore in any American city, and study its contents in countless American universities. American museums spend millions to exhibit and celebrate Muslim arts and heritage. On the other hand, my Christian and other non-Muslim brothers and sisters in Saudi Arabia -- where I come from -- are not even allowed to own a copy of their holy books. Indeed, the Saudi government desecrates and burns Bibles that its security forces confiscate at immigration points into the kingdom or during raids on Christian expatriates worshiping privately.

Soon after Newsweek published an account, later retracted, of an American soldier flushing a copy of the Quran down the toilet, the Saudi government voiced its strenuous disapproval. More specifically, the Saudi Embassy in Washington expressed ``great concern`` and urged the U.S. to ``conduct a quick investigation.``

Although considered as holy in Islam and mentioned in the Quran dozens of times, the Bible is banned in Saudi Arabia. This would seem curious to most people because of the fact that to most Muslims, the Bible is a holy book. But when it comes to Saudi Arabia we are not talking about most Muslims, but a tiny minority of hard-liners who constitute the Wahhabi Sect.

The Bible in Saudi Arabia may get a person killed, arrested, or deported. In September 1993, Sadeq Mallallah, 23, was beheaded in Qateef on a charge of apostasy for owning a Bible. The State Department`s annual human rights reports detail the arrest and deportation of many Christian worshipers every year. Just days before Crown Prince Abdullah met President Bush last month, two Christian gatherings were stormed in Riyadh. Bibles and crosses were confiscated, and will be incinerated. (The Saudi government does not even spare the Quran from desecration. On Oct. 14, 2004, dozens of Saudi men and women carried copies of the Quran as they protested in support of reformers in the capital, Riyadh. Although they carried the Qurans in part to protect themselves from assault by police, they were charged by hundreds of riot police, who stepped on the books with their shoes, according to one of the protesters.)

As Muslims, we have not been as generous as our Christian and Jewish counterparts in respecting others` holy books and religious symbols. Saudi Arabia bans the importation or the display of crosses, Stars of David or any other religious symbols not approved by the Wahhabi establishment. TV programs that show Christian clergymen, crosses or Stars of David are censored.

The desecration of religious texts and symbols and intolerance of varying religious viewpoints and beliefs have been issues of some controversy inside Saudi Arabia. Ruled by a Wahhabi theocracy, the ruling elite of Saudi Arabia have made it difficult for Christians, Jews, Hindus and others, as well as dissenting sects of Islam, to visibly coexist inside the kingdom.

Another way in which religious and cultural issues are becoming more divisive is the Saudi treatment of Americans who are living in that country: Around 30,000 live and work in various parts of Saudi Arabia. These people are not allowed to celebrate their religious or even secular holidays. These include Christmas and Easter, but also Thanksgiving. All other Gulf states allow non-Islamic holidays to be celebrated.

The Saudi Embassy and other Saudi organizations in Washington have distributed hundreds of thousands of Qurans and many more Muslim books, some that have libeled Christians, Jews and others as pigs and monkeys. In Saudi school curricula, Jews and Christians are considered deviants and eternal enemies. By contrast, Muslim communities in the West are the first to admit that Western countries -- especially the U.S. -- provide Muslims the strongest freedoms and protections that allow Islam to thrive in the West. Meanwhile Christianity and Judaism, both indigenous to the Middle East, are maligned through systematic hostility by Middle Eastern governments and their religious apparatuses.

The lesson here is simple: If Muslims wish other religions to respect their beliefs and their Holy book, they should lead by example.

Mr. al-Ahmed is director of the Saudi Institute in Washington.

In South Asia and Middle East, nothing moves like `religion in Danger` slogan. Few give a damn when thousands innocent die horrendous deaths. Yet, many rile and riot if even a rumor of religious offence circulates - UNFORTUNATE. Much energy and wealth is spent on EMPTY symbolism than morality and upright citizenship. This affliction is not peculiar to muslims. There are such hijras in Sikh and Hindu communities -though not as notorious.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

FV-ji,

What next?

``The Prophet is also just a man?``

``Ramzan is also another 30-day weight loss plan?``

I shall await those with bated breath.

Re: # 48

Lokraj ji thanks for correction. Memory is failing me. It is like as Daag has said

Hosho hawaas taab-o-tawan, Daag kho chukay
Chalnay ka ab sama hai, samaan to gaya

Why the Quran cannot be desecrated



Dear Farzana Versey,
Your quote ``Forget about killing myself``, begs me to ask, `WHY you did forget`?.PRAY, why did you?.

Sincerely,

Cayenne

Re: # 102
The Prophet IS just a MAN. The Quran its self tell Muslims that. It says not to make distinctions between Prophets and that in the eyes of Allah, all prophets are equal.

Only God is divine and prophets are just men, great men but men nevertheless. Born after being carried in the placentas of women for nine months save one called Adam.

What would have happened if the offender had drowned a Hafiz in the toilet? Would that be considered desecration of the Quran or a just a plain good deed?

I think that’s what the writer of this essay is hinting at.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

Dear Chowk Moderator

Please enlighten us what Mr Echoboom is trying to say. I does`nt mind even if he is abusive.

#106 by Kulharee on May 24, 2005 6:25pm PT


What would have happened if the offender had drowned a Hafiz in the toilet?


That would have been desecration of the toilet....

=== Interact Removed ===

This discussion has gone way ahead and beyond the scope of the article, while retaining the kernel. Thank you all for it. And for the kind and not-so-kind comments. And for once forgetting about the coffee I imbibe…

A few points:

Urstruly (#4): This is not about atheism and religion, but the misconstrued concept of religiosity and desecration. Atheism in primarily religious societies is about managing contradictions. Unless you are fanatical about espousing a no-god scenario (and I am not fanatical), then you may be as sensitive to the essence of one or several religions.

PS: You don’t ever seem to come up with my being an atheist when I am routinely called an Islamist-jihadi.
- - -
HP (#9): That last bit I did not see as a conspiracy theory. It has been proven often enough that Islamic societies are easy game for the West – this is not the first time. Even re. this incident, while the US has been talking about a “black eye” for its PR, Afghan President Hamid Karzai has said the protests are by those who are against his country’s alliance with the US.

However, the primary aim of this article is not about “Westernised thugs”. My tangential point here is, “How many Islamic nations put their wealth and manpower to fight the Western forces against their aggression towards their own? Where is the Islamic revivalism one hears about? …where is the unified, self-respecting, self-sufficient Islam?”

Unlike some people here, I do not believe that unless you blow hot against something you become a slave of that thing. I do believe that sagacity and showing complete disdain would send out a stronger message. What is the purpose of following the pattern that the West has got used to, and ensnared many into?
- - -
Aisha (#38): [Islam that was marked by an anti-idoleterous ideology is now just that. I think the Quran was descecrated the day it was preserved in a book, not for study but for protection, not for critique but for the ``feel good factor.``]

Spot-on.
- - -
Naqshbandi (#44): [If you don`t feel anything that says more about the state of your own imaan than anything else!]

Absolutely. In fact I said so in the article, “Desecration is when you allow yourself the torpor for your core to be tarnished. And if you are a true believer, then the Quran – or any ideology that enlightens you -- ought to have seeped into your soul. Save that.”
- - -
Feroz (#53): There have been a few responses to your post already that have dealt with what I might have elaborated on. Let us discuss a few things…

[Every religion has an element of irrationality in it and every religion has an ideal]

Often irrationality becomes the ideal, for the simple reason that faith by its very nature cannot be rationalised. Belief systems can be. The conflict arises when there is an emotional reaction to practical injunctions.

You talk about symbols. The Quran talks about politics, law, society, relationships besides religion…so what aspect of the symbolism is one adhering to or deflecting from? The current event is to a large extent political, therefore must the symbolism attached to it be religious? Then does it not transform into a ritual, as much “performance” as NOT dancing to the tune of the West that seems to worry a lot of people?

I did use what might appear to be facile examples in the beginning to emphasise the very nature of desecration and its myriad interpretations. As I said, the Quran is an individual symbol; at the social level it is a value system. And a whole society cannot react emotionally to a value system in ONE voice.
- - -
Charlie (#60): [If americans are burning qurans and they know that it is something sacred for muslims, it means that they are trying to provoke them. Is it ethical to provoke a group by hitting its sensitive issues...]

Why must one expect mind-colonisers to not provoke? Why are you looking for ethics here? Why is it then that the Muslim world does not stay united when it comes to such a potent symbol? Why are we not provoked sufficiently when our people are debased and humanity is desecrated?
- - -
dost-mittarji (#72): [What other purpose is served by flushing down some paper and ink down the toilet?]

If it is mere paper and ink, then why protest against it?

[You might as well say that Indian Muslims should not have been hurt after the demolition of the Babri Masjid because it was merely an ``unused structure``, as was claimed by some.]

I deliberately avoided the Babri argument in the piece, but now we can get to that…The Quran is The Book, supposedly for all Muslims, who interpret it in the manner they deem fit. But there are several million copies being printed, in various sizes, languages, formats. It is personal.

The Babri Masjid was truly of no value at one point in time. After the rath yatra and the demolition it became a symbol for Muslims in India, not for Islam. It stood for minorityism and identity. Islam was not threatened (no religion can be, which is my point), but Indian Muslims were. The real wounds came from the riots that followed, which is why the Muslims even while still stinging from that episode are still prepared for a court verdict re. that site.
- - -
Vertex (#54, 80):

Obviously it is governments in Islamic societies and not the common people who create problems, but why do people follow the herd mentality? (Incidentally, democracies – in the West too – suffer from this malaise.)

[I mean, to me it seems like people are misusing this story to produce righteous diatribes, and we see this not only from the usual suspects (Manji, Tom Friedman), but even some resident chowkies ... :-)]

Hmmm, a swipe?? If it is, then this is no righteous diatribe. Self-questioning never is. The fact that one of the earlier respondents used the names of Mullah Omar and me together should reveal that the righteousness is a bit off-key :)
- - -
Nauman (#92): In a rather long article I used two quotes by Daniel Pipes and neither is offensive to Islam. I found his comment on Islamic democracy and socialism interesting.
- - -
Harimau (#102):

[What next?
``The Prophet is also just a man?``]

Yup. (Thanks Sajal…)

[``Ramzan is also another 30-day weight loss plan?``]

Depends on what you do after dusk…gorge and work up some sweat or go off to sleep.

[I shall await those with bated breath.]

Hate to keep you waiting. So…

Zakaat is also an excuse for a new wardrobe.
Namaaz is also a fine meditation and exercise regimen.
The ghusal is a good way to clean up untended parts of your body (e.g.behind the ears).
The Haj is also the only time for Muslims of all nationalities to come together dressed up as senators of the old Roman Empire.

You get the drift? Now you may exhale…

- - -

Inquirerji:
Aap ko kya moderates or Mullahs ki ladai se mazaa aa raha hai? Jaise Ana ne kahaa, yeh mud`aa sab ke liye mahatvapurna hai. Aur waise khud ke astitva se baghaavat karna tau aur bhi mushkil hota hai!
- - -
#109 by arstoo:

[Dear Chowk Moderator

Please enlighten us what Mr Echoboom is trying to say. I does`nt mind even if he is abusive.]

One is not aware of the content that is being filtered out, although Chowk staff did object to certain cut-paste material. Re. abusive stuff, if indeed it is that, you doesn`t mind, but I does. By anyone. (I had no idea people got enlightened by abuses...)

Sincerely,
Pakeezah :)
- - -

Kardesh:

Salim, is this your idea of a bachelor party?! Khush raho...let us see if you will still walk around these parts during the baby-shower...