Lesson Unlearned: The Prophet
Transcends All Films or Cartoons (Le Monde, France)
"Can a
work of fiction, a cartoon or a very bad film undermine Islamic values and
foundations? In principle, no. ... The
Prophet is not in these cartoons; he is a spirit, a transcendence that escapes all
physical representation. ... Let us remember that Islam is 'submission to
peace,' to a higher form of patience and tolerance. At least that is what I was
taught."
Is Islam so vulnerable, so fragile, so threatened wherever
it is practiced? Can a work of fiction, a cartoon or a very bad film undermine
its values and foundations? In principle, no. But what Islam are we talking
about? We wonder this in light of the tensions and violent protests in some
Arab and Muslim countries.
Deaths, injuries, fires, cries of hatred, incomprehension - in
short, an urgent need for vengeance that surprises only those who refuse to
recognize that certain Muslim states, instead of entering modernity and
cultivating democracy, encourage this passion that preoccupies their
populations and makes them forget the essential: the establishment of justice
and rule of law that would favor the emergence of the individual. Because recognizing
the individual means a break with the clan system, and the right to liberty, the
right to one's own conscience and an open door to critical thought. This is what
the Islamist states cannot tolerate.
The signal was given by Ayatollah Khomeini
in 1989 with the fatwa
launched against Salman Rushdie, who had
published a work of fiction, The Satanic
Verses. We recall protests at the time in Pakistan that led to several
deaths. And just when we thought Iran had more or less abandoned this fatwa,
the reward for killing Rushdie has just been raised
[by $500,000] to $3.3 million.
Books critical of Islam do exist. Muhammad,
the essay by MaximeRodinson
(Seuil, 1961), is a rationalist, firm analysis of the
life of the Prophet. The book did not cause a scandal, but it did pose
questions that many devout Muslims would prefer not to address.
With The Satanic
Verses, what shocked the Iranian leadership was that a Muslim had dared to mention
Quranic verses that must at all costs be ignored. A
Muslim belongs above all to a nation (“the Ummah”),
which is like a clan or family. He or she has no right to leave or utter the
least criticism of dogma or the sacred text. Rushdie is Muslim by birth; he is
therefore seen as a traitor who must be punished for “blasphemy.”
This notion of putting a person's place within a community
above all leads to the confusion of secularism with atheism and apostasy.
Whoever criticizes the dogma renders his blood “legal” to spill. Whether it be a
cartoonist or a madman consumed with a hatred for Islam, a newspaper or a film,
even absurd or pathetic - the Muslim fundamentalist feels the duty to respond
and make his anger known to all by any means. Add to this reflex the shadowy
manipulations of certain states or agencies, and the result is the hideous
spectacle of murderous, aggravated fanaticism.
Since the vaunted “Arab Spring” has slid toward Islamism,
hopes have been betrayed and revolutions aborted. Other actors have entered the
scene, promising a long period of instability. Because traditional Islam is now
twinned by a more radical, more right-wing movement (the Salafists),
we have surprised ourselves by making excuses for Egypt's Muslim Brotherhood and
members of Tunisia's Ennahda Movement. Others regret the passing of the ancien
régime, saying that a corrupt dictator is better than an Islamist regime
that flaunts its incapacity to govern, incapable, for example, of preventing Salafist thugs from attacking women and artists. The
situation in Egypt is even more complicated, as the SalafistNour Party won 24.4 percent of the vote in the
legislative elections. The Muslim Brotherhood must take that into account.
Salafism is a literalist theology
that rejects anything but any rationalist reading of sacred texts. In 1744, it
formed an alliance with the Wahhabi movement, which advocated an absolutist
radicalism of the Muslim faith that included a rejection of Sufism and Shiism, and a prohibition of worshipping of saints and paying
reverence in cemeteries. In recent decades, many mausoleums housing the remains
of saints have been destroyed in Algeria and Mali, not to mention the Buddhas demolished by the Taliban in Afghanistan in March
2001. This is the extremist current, backed by Saudi Arabia, that is trying to establish
itself in Muslim countries. It is this same current that refuses democracy and all
constitutions, because the only worthy legislator is the divine principle.
The powerful reactions that have shaken several countries will
now delay and complicate the demise of Bashar al-Assad,
champion of mass murder and bombing civilian populations. If he hangs on, it
will not only be thanks to Russian support. That matters - but another reason
he's still around is the analysis of the Americans, as well as by a majority of
European countries. The Islamist threat to the future of Syria is being put
forward as a major argument. We know that brigades like Ahrar
Al-Sham, who have joined the insurgents, do nothing to hide their allegiance to
the Salafist movement. Even if everyone deplores the
barbarism of the Assad clan, some people whisper that if he were ousted, the
Christian minority would be in danger. Once the Assads
are rendered harmless by their removal, Syria will choose its own destiny. It
serves no purpose to cloud the picture and invoke
Islamist horror as an inescapable alternative.
What is vulnerable about Islam is neither its spirit or its
values, but the populations who have been kept in ignorance and have had their
beliefs manipulated. All who have tried to read the Quran with heart and reason
together have failed, and irrationality, absurdity and fanaticism are gaining
ground.
Posted
by Worldmeets.US
This confusion suits every provocation: the French Salafists who demonstrated on the Champs-Elysées were
comforted and affirmed in their prejudices. Charlie Hebdo’s
pages will not calm such hair-trigger protestors. This was one provocation too
many and like it or not, it feeds into an Islamophobia
that is gaining ground. I know that the satirical journal has never spared popes
nor priests, and that Catholics have not cried foul. The newspaper is within
its rights. We live in a democracy where free expression is sacred. If these new
cartoons have hurt believers, they must take it to the courts to renounce this type
of agitation. France is a secular country. We mock everything, even religion.
The Prophet is not in these cartoons; he is a spirit, a
transcendence that escapes all physical representation. Finally, let us
remember that Islam is “submission to peace,” to a higher form of patience and
tolerance. At least that is what I was taught.
*Tahar
Ben Jelloun is a native of Morroco and is author of The
Spark: Uprisings in Arab Countries (Gallimard, 2011)
