November 04, 2006
The Pope and the Prophet, Sallallahu Alaihi wa Sallam!
Section: WRITINGS | 384 reads
November 04, 2006
Section: WRITINGS | 384 reads
Dr. Pasha
God in his heaven sent down the Prophet, Sallallahu Alaihi wa Sallam. Right here on earth, the Church gave us the Pope. And now the Pope and the Prophet, Sallallahu Alaihi wa Sallam, some among the followers of both say, are on a collision course.
This should warm the cockles of Harvard Professor Sam Huntington, who, in his 1996 book titled The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order, argued that the world was inexorably headed in the direction of a culture clash between Islam and the West.
But the outgoing United Nations Secretary General Kofi Anan, Prime Minister Jose Zapatero of Spain, the former Reformist President of Iran Mohammad Khatami and Prime Minister Recep Erdogan of Turkey seem to take a somewhat different view. They all argue that maybe it is time to work for the building of an alliance of civilizations rather than fan the fires of a clash of cultures. Mr. Anan is particularly concerned about reducing prejudice and misunderstandings between Islam and the West.
According to a UN press release dated July 14, 2005, here is some of what Mr. Anan’s spokesman said about the formation of the AoC:
“The Secretary-General is pleased to announce the launch of an initiative for an “Alliance of Civilizations”. The initiative is intended to respond to the need for a committed effort by the international community — both at the institutional and civil society levels — to bridge divides and overcome prejudice, misconceptions, misperceptions, and polarization which potentially threaten world peace. The Alliance will aim to address emerging threats emanating from hostile perceptions that foment violence, and to bring about cooperation among various efforts to heal such divisions.”
The UN press release went on to say:
“Events of recent years have heightened the sense of a widening gap and lack of mutual understanding between Islamic and Western societies — an environment that has been exploited and exacerbated by extremists in all societies. The Alliance of Civilizations is intended as a coalition against such forces, as a movement to advance mutual respect for religious beliefs and traditions, and as a reaffirmation of humankind’s increasing interdependence in all areas — from the environment to health, from economic and social development to peace and security.”
All this was before the Pope is supposed to have made a reference to the Prophet, Sallallahu Alaihi wa Sallam, that the Muslims found offensive and unacceptable. They also said it was flat out false.
The Pope says he did not make the questionable comment himself, but he was only quoting a medieval source. The Muslims say if the Pope did not share the view of his source, why did he not correct it or distance himself from it.
And why quote such a derogatory and patently false statement by a clearly biased source now, say most Muslims and some others, when tensions between Muslims and the West are running so high and when Muslims are under so much pressure from so many sides, most if not all of them Christian.
The Pope says he is filled with sorrow. Muslims ask over what.
Let us see if we can sort out any of this.
I don’t know what the exact story was. That is partly why I hesitate to comment on current events: it is hard to know what exactly happened and I don’t have the resources to keep up.
Yes, there were a slew of stories on the subject in the newspapers. But while newspaper stories may be a viable basis for invading and occupying countries and nations – of course I am being sarcastic but only in part – they are often a bit of a stretch when it comes to putting one’s own life and reputation on line.
In many cases, media stories are just that: stories pieced together from a number of accounts gathered from a number of sources, each with a fair likelihood of error and, quite frequently, each with a stake the story. So, woe to those, if I may borrow some Biblical language here, who base their faith fully and entirely on media accounts of what is going on in the world.
That is because news accounts are neither always accurate nor complete. Often, they are like snapshots of a fast-moving train. And often they change with breathtaking rapidity.
Fully aware of all these limitations and constraints, here is what I recall was in the newspapers: the Pope quoted a Medieval Emperor as asking what new things did Muhammad (Sallallahu Alaihi wa Sallam) bring into the world that was not evil and inhumane?
And how reasonable was it for him to ask his followers to spread his faith with the sword?
It was, I seem to recall, in the context of the role of reason in matters of faith that these comments were made. How fortunate were the Christians, the Pope and or the Emperor seemed to have felt, that they embraced reason from the teachings of the Greeks, while the Muslims did no such thing.
Therefore, one or the other or both argued, while the Christian faith had reason on its side, the Muslim faith did not.
And then the Pope and or the Emperor noted the absolute unreasonableness of the Prophet of Islam, Sallallahu Alaihi wa Sallam, asking his followers to spread his message with the sword, by force that is.
Now, there was a certain background to the Emperor’s dark musings on Islam. The Emperor was engaged in an ongoing war with the Muslims and his armies were not faring too well. He was losing territory fast and he needed help.
So, the Emperor traveled around European capitals asking his fellow-Christians to help him fight and defeat the Muslim “infidels” who were overrunning his domain. This, in my view, was a perfectly “rational” thing to do.
As to his distorted views on Islam and the Prophet, Sallallahu Alaihi wa Sallam, they were a product of either his ignorance or his hate, frustration and desperation. And again, in my view, the man had a perfect excuse in either case.
As for ignorance, traditionally the Christians’ knowledge of Islam could have been etched on fingernails. These were the folks who asked their administrators in 19th Century India to read Arabian Nights to learn about the culture of the native “Mohammadan” population of India after they took over that land from the Muslim Mughal emperors.
The logic of “Mahammadan” and “Mohammadanism” was disarmingly simple: Worshippers of Christ are called “Christians,” they seemed to have argued to themselves. So those people the center of whose religion was “Mohammad,” (Sallallahu Alaihi wa Sallam), must be called “Mohammadans.”
A fairly leaned gentleman called Gibb once even wrote a book called “Mohammadanism.“
And these are also the folks who wrote other books saying that Muslims worshipped an idol in Ka’aba at Makkah. Historically speaking, sad as it is to say, many of the Christian followers of the Pope, never seriously bothered to find out what the Muslim followers of the Prophet, Sallallahu Alaihi wa Sallam, really believed or stood for.
Often it took a lone dissenter like Thomas Carlyle to take his fellow-European-Christians to task on the distortion of some of their facts and the perversity of some of their thinking concerning the Prophet, Sallallahu Alaihi wa Sallam.
Carlyle in effect argued that a false man could not build a brick house, leave alone put together a complete religion and get a whole generation of people to believe and follow it.
Carlyle called the Prophet, Sallallahu Alaihi wa Sallam, “Mahomet.” And to many in Europe Islam was but “a bastard kind of Christianity.”
As for malice and hate, well what do you expect a king to have in his heart when his armies are being defeated, his land is being overrun and his faith is being shown up and swept aside by a bunch of upstart “infidels”? It would be naive for anyone to expect the Emperor to have anything but malice, hate and contempt toward Islam and Muslims under those circumstances.
Unless, of course, the Emperor were a truly great man, in which case he would have lost his battle but not his honor, soul and integrity by lying or being cheap about his enemy.
Abu Sufyan was such a great man, who, at the top of the 7th Century, resisted the temptation to lie about Prophet Muhammad, Sallallahu Alaihi wa Sallam, when another Roman Emperor asked him about the Prophet’s (Sallallahu Alaihi wa Sallam) credentials and character.
I had such a strong temptation to lie, said Abu Sufyan, or words to that effect, but I refrained from distorting Muhammad’s (Sallallahu Alaihi wa Sallam) record on that occasion for fear people will call me a liar.
Many of the Christian followers of the Pope labor under no such fear. Not then, not now. As for the future, may God Almighty guide us all to his truth in future, regardless what that truth may be.
Once, a couple of young ladies knocked at my door. They wanted to offer me Christianity and save my soul. I listened to them patiently and respectfully and asked a number of questions along the way.
Then they asked me if I would join them in a prayer, to which I readily consented. When they were done, I asked if they would now join me in a prayer. They hesitated and then finally nodded yes.
And I prayed:
“Oh, our God Almighty!” I prayed. “Who art in Heaven! God of Abraham and Moses! God of Noah and Jacob! God of Jesus and Joseph and of all the other prophets! Creator, maker and master of everything! Here we are, holding our hands up to you for help. Help us, guide us, show us your path. Open our hearts and minds and lead us on to truth wherever and in whatever form it may be and then give us the humility and the courage to embrace it, celebrate it and rejoice in it!”
I finished with an Amen. My young Christian visitors said nothing. When I suggested to them if we can all say Amen together, they quite firmly refused.
So, this truth thing does not come easily to everyone. All too many people in this world fear truth, like the mythical vampire Count Dracula is said to have feared daylight.
And truth is what Islam is all about. No matter how you cut it.
You may be a good or a bad Muslim on so many different counts, but truth is the minimum threshold that every human heart must cross before entering God’s kingdom of his Deen – Islam – in this world.
There is no place for falsehood in the heart and mind of a believer – Mu’min. Those who base their lives on lies are technically called hypocrites – Munaafiqs – in the language of Islam.
And the Qur’an says that the Munaafiqs – who are essentially liars and falsehood mongers – would end up in the darkest dungeon of Hell: the lowest level of it.
And that is why also the Prophet, Sallallahu Alaihi wa Sallam, says that truth is a believer’s lost property. He has a better title and claim to it regardless of where he finds it.
So, when it comes to truth, the followers of the way of the Prophet, Sallallahu Alaihi wa Sallam, and quite a few of the followers of the way of the Byzantine Emperor and the Pope move in somewhat different orbits.
The followers of the Pope and the Emperor have the wonderful luxury of turning to some other human beings like themselves in this world and having their sins forgiven. Followers of the Prophet, Sallallahu Alaihi wa Sallam, have been given no such luxury.
They must deal directly with God.
What is interesting, therefore, is not what the beleaguered and harried Emperor thought or said, but what the Pope thought and said and did. And his reasons and timing for saying what he said and doing what he did. Those are the questions really worth asking.
Of course, the Pope, himself a learned academic, was giving a learned discourse, in a university, on the subject of faith and reason. And he probably thought this was a good place to make the Emperor’s point about Islam and the Prophet, Sallallahu Alaihi wa Sallam.
There are two possibilities as to what the Pope himself believed or did not believe about Islam and Muslims. One possibility is that his views were the same as the Emperor’s. The other possibility is that they were not.
If the Pope’s views were the same as the Emperor’s, then the Pope should have said so, boldly and honestly, because, as Pope, it is both his right and his duty to do so: to speak the truth at all times. And a Pope should be able to express his views freely and openly, at the time and place of his choice, with perfect impunity.
As for Muslims, the Pope is entitled to nothing but politeness and respect from them.
But if the Pope’s views were different, then the Pope evidently missed a great opportunity to correct the error and the falsehood in the Emperor’s views. For, the greatest commitment of a religious leader, especially of the one with the Pope’s stature and role in the world, should be to truth – and not to expediency.
For, God is truth. And truth is where God is, no matter where that is.
What ensued, unfortunately, was a bit of foolishness and naiveté on the part of the Muslims. The Muslims were reportedly upset, and they should be. They expressed shock, horror and outrage at what they thought were highly and gratuitously derogatory comments on Islam and the Prophet, Sallallahu Alaihi wa Sallam, by the Pope.
And it was anyone’s right to do so.
But some Muslims were also reported to have resorted to sporadic violence, which is clearly wrong. Those who engage in violence in the name of defending Islam clearly cross the line. For, Islam neither propagates, nor permits, nor condones violence as a means of discourse on Islam – or on any other subject – or as an excuse for anything else.
Many people may not know this, but the fact is, Islam and violence do not mix, even though a great deal of unresolved anger may be simmering among many Muslims. And there are a lot of reasons for that.
But Islamic teachings are not among them.
But when it comes to dealing with the People of the Book – Christians for example – Islam clearly requires Muslims to use better, superior and more civilized arguments and means of discourse.
Wa laa tujaadil ahlal kittabi illaa billatee hiya ahsan is how the Qur’an puts it.
Islam holds Muslims to a much higher standard of conduct when it comes to dealing with the Pope and his followers, which is not always easy to adhere to. But that is what God asks Muslims to do.
And then there was an “apology.” At least that is what some of the media called it. But who is to tell the media what to call what?
The Pope reportedly expressed sorrow over the “reaction” his comments caused among some Muslims, but, evidently, not over his choosing, at this rather delicate time in human history, to repeat the disgruntled Emperor’s anti-Islamic and anti-Prophet, Sallallahu Alaihi wa Sallam, rant.
That was not an apology by the Pope for his own rather unhelpful role in this episode. It was an expression of sorrow over the way in which the Muslims had reacted to his comments.
But what the Muslims must ask themselves is this: How do you force someone to apologize? The Pope or anyone else? For, an apology is a verbal expression of the remorse and regret a person feels in his or her heart for the wrong that person realizes he or she has done someone.
How do you force, bully or intimidate someone to feel those feelings in their hearts?
So, it was, in my view, a foolish and pointless thing for Muslims to demand an apology from the Pope, if that is what they did.
Next Article: Islam Gave the World Monotheism and Education
Previous Article: Four Words that Changed the World! All It Takes Is You!
Home | Writings | Audio | Quote of the Day
Related:
Home | Writings | Audio | Quote of the Day