Tuesday, 08.26.08
A Question for Islam
photo by Flickr user chrisjohnbeckett under a creative commons license
What is the Koran?
January 1999
Toby Lester investigates the new research into the early history of Islam.
The limits of tolerance
August 2005
Excerpts from Sherry Jones's The Jewel of Medina do not make it sound like fiction worthy of the novel's latest defender, Salman Rushdie. Denise Spellberg, an Islamic historian who reviewed the manuscript, called it "soft-core pornography," and "ugly" porn at that. Consider a first-person passage from Aisha, who, according to some traditions, married Muhammad at age 6 and had sex with him at 9:
This was the beginning of something new, something terrible. Soon I would be lying on my bed beneath him, squashed like a scarab beetle, flailing and sobbing while he slammed himself against me. He would not want to hurt me, but how could he help it? It's always painful the first time.Yeesh. But do these sentences sound grotesque because of the author's prose, or because of her subject?
In the interest of not igniting a flame crusade in the comments section, I will not venture an opinion on the age of Bibi Aisha on the night of her supposed squashing. The accusations and counteraccusations abounding on the Internet are fascinating, though, and reveal an intriguing debate both within Islam and outside it. Under a plain reading, it does sound as if many of the traditions of Muhammad's life agree that Aisha was very young. Abu Hisham, Waqidi, and Abu Dawud all narrate chronologies that suggest as much, and add details such as Aisha's playing with dolls during the early years of her marriage. The rebuttals score points too, although if I were rebutting pedophilia charges, I probably wouldn't choose the "everybody's doing it" defense.
Rushdie has wisely chosen to enter the debate more on grounds of free speech than of blasphemy, which isn't to say the two are unrelated. (I haven't seen evidence that he read The Jewel of Medina or liked the excerpts.) If, however, he were to try to challenge the novel's detractors on their own turf, I wonder how the argument would proceed. The charge of heresy against his own The Satanic Verses stemmed from a panoply of perceived slights, including several that involved Aisha. The most prominent, of course, was the title, which echoes the famous gharaniq controversy. According to some intriguing traditions, Satan tricked the Prophet into including a line in the Koran that suggested that listeners hedge their bets, theologically, and consider worshiping three pre-Islamic deities in addition to the one true god. After the Angel Gabriel scolded him, Muhammad retracted these "Satanic verses" and put unambiguously monotheistic ones in their place.
The responses to the gharaniq tradition range from weak (they argue circularly -- that later parts of the Koran confirm the integrity of the earlier parts) to plausible. Muslims point out, for example, that the Satanic verses aren't well attested; Waqidi and Tabari, the principal sources, can't be trusted in this case, and the redoubtable Ibn Hisham and Abu Dawud are both silent on the matter, even though the whispers of Satan would seem to be worth mentioning, if they happened.
The science of authenticating hadith is tricky, and not one I know well enough to pronounce on. There is, however, a conflict visible even to the layman: Ibn Hisham and Abu Dawud, both invoked as strong (non)reporters of tradition in the Rushdie case of the Satanic verses, suddenly become dubious when they report the tender age of Aisha at consummation. And Tabari, so confidently invoked when he says Aisha was born before the revelation of the Koran (and was therefore well past her alleged jailbait phase when she married the Prophet), is eagerly disregarded when he relays the tale of Satanic interference in the recitation of the Koran.
Of course, these events happened centuries ago, and all history -- even (or especially) religious history -- is tangled with contradiction. I'm just glad I'm not the one who has to untangle it.
Fear and consequencesAsra Nomani laments Random House's decision to avoid controversy. |
Abusing historyDenise A. Spellberg counters that the book falsified Islamic history to create a controversy and boost sales. |
Let them fightAccording to The Guardian's Sunny Hundal, controversies over freedom of expression help each side understand the appropriate boundaries. |
Words and meaningLinguist Bill Posner takes Stanley Fish to task for a highly convenient misreading of Salman Rushdie's letter. |
(9)
I did my entymology and discovered that all sane cultures and religions of the world have experienced ISLAM to actually be an acronym for the following hidden message:
I- ignorant, S- stupid, L- lame, A- arrogant, M- madmen,
ISsssLAME!
Aisha herself reports that she was six when the betrothal happened and nine when the 53 year old Mohammad -- the perfect example to humanity for all time -- had sex with her. Because of this, Khomeini halved the marriageable age for girls in Iran from 18 to 9. Forget the Talmud. There are no 9 year old Jewish brides these days but because of the perfect man's example, the ME is full of raped children who then struggle to give birth and suffer all sorts of horrors, including vaginal fistulas.
I find the comment of 5-pillar to be blindly amusing. The fact that despite anger by Jews this movie came out shows Jews, unlike Muslims are unable to browbeat the world into submission. Hey 5-Pillar, compare the death toll by Jews angry over Mel Gibson or the President of Iran's Holocaust Cartoon Contest with that of the Prophet Mohammad Cartoon Massacres. zeo to 300, right? And you're angry that Ms Spellberg "is questioned even by the layman". Yeah, in America even middle class people without PH.Ds get to speak back to Islamic scholars. That seems to offend you.
It's not the death toll due to a cartoon (which I agree is wrong for Muslims to kill over such); but the death toll of primarily Muslims in today's world from Bosnia to Xinjiang, Iraq to Algeria, Afghanistan to Somalia, Palestine to Chechnya that comes from the anti-Islamic propaganda by the way of Hollywood, the mainstream media, etc. To ignore these aspects and allow this kind of incitement to rioting is similar to why the U.S. has imprisoned the likes of Sheikh Omar Abdurahman. I get it, I'm wasting my time because I'm operating on a system that supports the status quo -- which even at least half Americans no longer support because they discovered the ultimate goal in going to war. It is not to dispute with you or the other commenters that is my goal; but to offer a voice of centered reason. May we all learn in peace. Please understand that I recognize Dr. Spellberg's involvement as a cheap ploy to continue the hateful propaganda and help sell a few books, creating controversy for the the sake of along with stroking an ego. 5pillar.wordpress.com
...'hateful propoganda'. Like the civilized world needs to contrive propoganda to build a case against ISLAME. The truth speaks for itself in the ME with raped children, a raped continent is Darfur Sudan and Africa, ridiculous Saudi Arabia legal system filled with child and woman's rights violations, Iran's total disregard for free speech and christians right to worship or convert from ISLAME, and the list just goes on and on. I can't wait for the national deportation of muslims from America day, you will be happy to live in Iran under sharia law, and we will be happy to not influence you.
5Pillar you say the "death toll of Muslims in today's world... comes from the anti-Islamic propaganda by the way of Hollywood, the mainstream media". Then ironically enough you call yourself "a voice of centered reason". You are the athisis of it! Muslims are killing Muslims and nonMuslims the world over. As to blaming Hollywood, Muslims have been at war with Hindus in India, with Christians in Armenian/Turkey and Africa, and each other in Algeria long before Hollywood knew what a Muslim was. The bloodiest conflicts involving Muslims are not taking place in the west! Now with all the terrorist attacks by Muslims in China and against Buddhists in Thialand there is not a religion or ethnicity on earth that is not victimized by Islamic terrorism
I still feel profound reluctance as I hit these keys. I am not sure if anything I say will change anything. I always thought, and still do, that it is best in human relations to begin by focusing on agreements before delving into any dialogue/debate. However, I need to express two disagreements, first. I think the title needs to be "a question for Muslims", and I honestly do not think that deporting all Muslims from America is a good idea, let alone a realistic solution. Yes, it may give emotional comfort even just to say it for those with some very good points to make. Sadly, their points become wasted in the hyperbolic fog that will surly follow. Every faith has its dark side and every holy book has disturbing verses. The person who reminded us that no Jews marry children these days (and there are no inquisitions by Christians either) has a very good point to make. What Islam needs is more moderate/modern Muslims so that it, too, become reformed. Ironically, most of these Muslims do live in America. Debating the historical accuracy of Aisha's story is useless, and trying to defend it is both harmful and counterproductive. It is impossible to defend it, let us face it. In Islam, the prophet is to be considered as human. A chosen one, but human after all. This is NOT a defense, it is a suggested alternative that might allow some harmony between Muslims and others someday. The last thing we need is to alienate all Muslims, including those with courage to be moderate. GB
If I was a muslim, I'd be getting out of any western country soon. Why you ask. Well, the west has been very very generous to it's muslim poplutaion, putting up with all sorts of nonsense and aggression from it. The current financial collapse will get worse, and then peak oil will plunge us deeper into economic and civil chaos. The thing is that a righ affluent country might put up with the constant bitching that muslims do over the slightest little thing, all while milking our system to the max and then planning terrorist attacks against us and promoting sharia law in "our" countries. The muslims are rubbing their hands together with glee at the worsening economic problems, but when the shit really hits the fan, gone will be all the aid to the Islamic hell holes, and gone will be political correctness. We won't have time, energy, or money to concern ourselves with the muslims sensitivities anymore, but of course they will begin to make more trouble then ever. I can see the day coming when people are just going to have the attitude........kill em......kill em all.
By using this Service you agree not to post material that is obscene, harassing, defamatory, or otherwise objectionable. Although The Current does not monitor comments posted to this site (and has no obligation to), it reserves the right to delete, edit, or move any material that it deems to be in violation of this rule.
-->
How about looking into how you feel about the movie Passion of the Christ? When Mel Gibson tried to bring about truth, many in the Jewish community saw it as a problem--and his movie was focusing on his own religion. How about the many things that supposedly come from the Talmud relating to sex with a child and how there is nothing wrong with that, or a rabbi using his mouth as part of the circumcision ceremony of infant boys, or the direction of King Saul to David in the Bible to cut off the foreskins of hundreds of Philistines so he can marry his daughter? Do I look at Christians or Jews as this sadistic? Well, actually today, it's hard not to for those committing the war crimes. It seems that Dr. Spellberg's purpose to study Islam did not come with the best intentions of learning it; but rather to contribute the public hype. Her status as an objective historian is questioned even by the layman. 5pillar.wordpress.com
Posted by 5-Pillar Scribe | August 26, 2008 5:51 PM