Keep to forgiveness

As Muslim indignation at caricatures of the Prophet Muhammad spills over into outbursts of anger and violence, we find both sides of the conflict sadly lacking in ethical conduct.

Many of the cartoons are deeply offensive, not so much because they portrayed Prophet Muhammad but because they are hateful, slanderous and inflammatory to the point of verging on racism, particularly the ones showing the prophet with a bomb-turban, as the devil in disguise, or blindfolded and bristling with knives. These cartoons pander to the basest prejudices, defaming the prophet’s character with gross stereotypes of Arab culture, equating the mistakes of his followers with his personage. The cartoonists had to know those images were going to be as provocative and insulting as Martin Scorsese’s The Last Temptation of Christ or Andres Serrano’s "Piss Christ" images. It is clear that they were meant not to open dialogue, as the editors who requisitioned them claim, but to provoke; it is hardly customary or productive to start a conversation by spitting in the face of the person you wish to talk to.

The actions of Prophet Muhammad’s followers, however, are no less an insult to him. They are completely out of keeping with the prophet’s example and the teachings of the Koran. If one claims to love and follow the prophet then one should do so, not go on a rampage he would have condemned and whose rationale will be laid at his feet by those who are not familiar with his true character.

During his life, Prophet Muhammad was received with great love by many but he also met with great resistance, as were most prophets. He was insulted and cursed, at times physically assaulted, and yet he did not return insult for insult, attack for attack. One such incident occurred in Taif, where the citizens of the city set their children to throwing stones at him. Rather than seeking vengeance, Muhammad asked god to forgive the people of Taif, much as Christ asked god to forgive his tormentors, saying they did not know what they did.

This example is in keeping with the Koran, which advises Muslims to "Keep to forgiveness and enjoin kindness, and turn away from the ignorant" (Chapter 7, Verse 199) and which tells us "Invite all unto the way of thy Lord with wisdom and fair exhortation, and reason with them in the best of ways" (Chapter 16, Verse 125). Clearly, the groups of Muslims who are threatening violence against the cartoonists, who have burnt and torn down embassies, who carry signs screaming "Death to those who insult Islam", even those who boycotted Danish manufacturers and withdrew ambassadors, have betrayed these injunctions and abandoned the prophet’s example.

The other principle that had been ignored by these would-be defenders of the prophet is that Islam brooks no compulsion in religion, nor does it demand followers of other religions adhere to its religious sensibilities. "There shall be no compulsion in matters of faith" (Chapter 2, Verse 256) and "To you your way, to me mine" (Chapter 109, verse 6) lay out Islam’s cardinal rules of tolerance and make it clear people who are not Muslim are not expected to follow Islamic religious rules. Even though many Muslims believe Islam prohibits portrayals of the prophet, the Danish cartoonists aren’t bound by Islam’s rules. They can’t be blaspheming because they aren’t Muslims.

Freedom of expression is a cardinal value in both the West and in Islam. (The prophet never chastised his followers for challenging him, for questioning, indeed he praised people who did not let their shyness get in the way of speaking frankly. Another value, we note, that many in the Muslim world have neglected to uphold.) We must defend the right of cartoonists to draw satirical, biting, even blasphemous commentary and the right of papers to publish items which may be offensive or perceived as heretical by some. A society without such freedom rapidly becomes poisonously repressed and out of balance.

But at the same time we must insist that the practice of freedom of expression must be responsible. It is universally agreed that inciting others to murder is a form of free speech we will not tolerate. And there are items that no editor would publish because they are too bigoted, because they are too obscene or because they foster hatred and intolerance to such an extent as to threaten the very fabric of the society we live in.

It is never easy to draw the line between ironic reflection that will make people laugh, pointed commentary that will open the doors of discussion on difficult issues and pieces that incite to hatred and from there perhaps to violence. It is almost impossible to draw up universal standards by which one can judge whether to print an item or not but we must still strive for responsibility in our decisions.

This is particularly true in a time where tensions run high – where segments of society are disenfranchised, alienated and aggrieved. While some Europeans might like for European Muslims to "go home", that is not going to happen; and even if those who emigrated from other countries did return to their places of birth that would leave millions of Muslims for whom Europe is their only home. In this atmosphere, publishing cartoons that are racist, hurtful and provocative can only lead to a widening of the gap – affirming the opinions of those who think badly of Muslims and reinforcing the feelings that Muslims are the new Jews of Europe. n