Tag Archives: prophet Muhammed

Hatred doesn’t come free.


After decades of promoting and indulging in Free sex, they have now shifted to endorsing Free Speech. While the popularity of the former was arrested by a certain incurable virus, the latter is growing unhindered across blogs, tweets and discussion fora. What could have triggered this ado? Do a Google search and you can instantly locate the partisans on either side of the battle lines. Fierce looking Muslim youth holding placards reading “Death to those who defame Islam” on the far right (literally) , and liberal, cool, inspired, educated ,intellectuals on the other- The proverbial clash of the civilizations . The community has once again worked itself into a nasty corner. Changing their online status from “Victims” to “Aggressors” overnight- due to their reactive, crude style of activism. Flag burning is permitted in America, because it is a free country, they say. But the flag burners invariably end up, spied and stalked forever or even in orange overalls behind barbed wire enjoying generous doses of water boarding. And even in the strongest bastions of freedom, holocaust denial is taboo. In the recently held UN World Conference Against Racism- Canada, Italy, America and the best of the west announced they would boycott the session if Israel is criticized. A spokesman for Franco Frattini, Italy’s foreign minister, said that a proposed passage, which relates to the situation in the Palestinian territories, contains “unacceptable, aggressive and anti-Semitic phrases”. The champions of free speech went on to drop that passage unanimously. But as long as it is not on the streets and not as outrageous as the placards, America is a free country and its these radicals who are against free speech.

Most write ups for Free speech reveal the Villain in the first paragraph itself. And the heroes are always the ones who provoked the antagonists in the first place. Though I cannot speak on behalf of the whole community, I can confidently say that believing Muslims have never been against “Free Speech”. It is perfectly fine to disagree, discover, debate, decide and then strive to make a difference. But it is just not ok to use one’s uninformed assumptions and prejudices to abuse, hurt and attack the dignity of others. It is said that over 60,000 books were written against Islam in the last century. Go to Amazon and search for “Islam” and see the number of books for and against it. In my last count, I found 4 books FOR and 18 AGAINST. No problem mate. But when someone doles out “classics” calling the prophet a dog and his wives prostitutes, any self respecting community will definitely have a problem with that. For that is Hate speech disguised as Free speech.

Mahatma Gandhi, Prophet Muhammed and Joseph (The husband of Mary) married women aged below 13 years. All three girls had attained puberty and had agreed for the nuptial union. But if you are uncomfortable about the age, please take some effort before shooting off. Read books from sources close to them, ask the scholars and try to understand the context behind the event. If you still feel uncomfortable, go ahead and express it by all means. But make sure that what you say is True, Kind and above all is intended to reform and not to insult and provoke. This is hugely different from degrading them as “lusty pedophiles”. I can express my reservations against girls wearing miniskirts, but if I call them sluts, then I am asking for trouble. The fact that technology makes it easier to make our voices heard (even my blog has over 3500 followers) makes it incumbent upon us to be even more responsible and careful. In a recent poll that I conducted online, I had posed the question “What hurts longer and more- an insulting verbal attack in public or a slap?”. The results are given below and are self explanatory.

Let us go by what the Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم said: “Whosoever believes in Allah and the Last Day, then let him speak good (khair) or remain silent.” Disagree by all means, but be true and kind with the intention to reform.

Coming back to the double speak of the enlightened west, Noam Chomsky, summed up the western concept of freedom of speech when he said: “If you believe in freedom of speech, you believe in freedom of speech for views you don’t like. Goebbels was in favour of freedom of speech for views he liked. So was Stalin. If you’re in favour of freedom of speech, that means you’re in favour of freedom of speech precisely for views you despise.”

Going by this- forced detentions, banning the niqab & the building of minarets and burning the quran are the best examples of efforts against “Free Speech”, not the angry youth with the placards.

5 Comments

Filed under A new sunrise

History keeps repeating- Burning the reformers at the stake


The Spanish Inquisition is back… with a difference. The reformer that is getting burnt at the stakes today is a book revealed to mankind 1400 years ago. Though, the fervent clamors of the Florida pastor fizzled into a “No show”, the most civilized army in the world went ahead and burned the book. Big boys are all over the media issuing apologies, not because they deplore the act, but because the crocodile tears may reduce the likelihood of increased threats to their invading and ravaging forces.

They have always hated reformers. And have unapologetically used the Assimilate or Annihilate strategy against them. And history tells us that has succeeded to an extent. May reformists changed their viewpoints and started toeing impotent official lines. Other were either made irrelevant or outrageous thorough the media or just bumped off. But unfortunately, they can do neither with this book, though they are trying hard.

Why do I call this book a reformist? Let me answer using the words of eminent western historians and sociologists.

It inspired an ideology that was the first to denounce aristocratic privileges and reject hierarchy. So says the Great Bernard Lewis. The Constitution of Medina, drafted and implemented by the Prophet in 622 is the first instance of a charter that brought together different religions and tribes, with specific rights and responsibilities within the fold of one single community- the Ummah. John Esposito credits Islam and the Quran with the abolishing of rampant customs like Female infanticide, exploitation of the poor, usury, murder, false contracts, adultery and theft. The Quran has a specific verse on infanticide- “When the sun shall be darkened, when the stars shall be thrown down, when the mountains shall be set moving, when pregnant camels shall be neglected, when the savage beasts shall be mustered, when the seas shall be set boiling, when the souls shall be coupled, when the buried infant shall be asked for what sin she was slain, when the scrolls shall be unrolled, when heaven shall be stripped off, when Hell shall be set blazing, when Paradise shall be brought nigh, then shall a soul know what it has produced”.


The Quran was the first book that established a process towards purging slavery. Trading of slaves was prohibited. Slavery was permitted only as a mechanism to save and accommodate prisoners of war who were previously executed ruthlessly. The prophet made it the responsibility of the Islamic government to provide food and clothing to captives, regardless of their religion. Jonathan Brockopp writes that the idea of using alms for the manumission of slaves and the practice of freeing slaves in atonement for certain sins is unique to the Qur’an. John Esposito categorically states that the Quran’s reforms affected marriage, divorce, and inheritance. Women were not accorded with such legal status in other cultures, including the great west, until centuries later. Gerhard Endress states: “The social system builds up a new system of marriage, family and inheritance; this system treated women as an individual too and guaranteed social security to her as well as to her children. Legally controlled polygamy was an important advance. It was only by this provision (backed up by severe punishment for adultery), that the family, the core of any sedentary society could be placed on a firm footing.” “Women were given inheritance rights in a patriarchal society that had previously restricted inheritance to male relatives” says Annemarie Schimmel. She continues- “Compared to the Jewish and Christian position of women, Islamic legislation meant an enormous progress; the woman has the right, to administer the wealth she has brought into the family or has earned by her own work”

No wonder they are paranoid. They had painfully, through media and technology, created a culture that openly promotes loose values and low living, allowing man to be driven by his hedonistic animal instincts-Man who would never question their masters as long as their primal desires are met. However people in droves are rejecting the world they have created and are pursuing their higher spiritual and self actualization goals- Read this article (Click Here)from CNN.

This also proves that the “TERROR TAG” isnt working either.

No wonder they are fervently arranging the stakes again.

But will burning the book do any good? It is estimated that over 5 million people around the world have memorized the Quran. Even if you burn every single copy on the face of the earth, it cannot be destroyed. Believers from US, France, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Ghana and every country in the world can come together and recreate the book within hours.


So much for the arsonists. History keeps repeating- Truth does rise from the ashes.

1 Comment

Filed under A new sunrise