Mohammad Who?

At the height of Mohammad’s (PBUH) depiction in Danish cartoon controversy (started by Jyllands-Posten), I am receiving a mixed reaction around the globe. Some of us don’t care while others are concerned. Muslim scholars, Mullahs, and heads of States in Muslim countries are coming forward and offering solace and comfort to the bereaved Muslim soul. Muslim heads of state like Karzi are appealing the outraged Muslims to stay calm but their words are still entertaining the Muslim sensibilities by suggesting that the depiction of Prophet Mohammad is despicable and we condemn the publishing of cartoons. Even King Abdullah said in his meeting with President Bush that violence is unacceptable and protests should be peaceful (emphasis on peaceful is mine as I don’t think that there is a need for protest).

Apart from the issue that depiction of prophet of Islam is prohibited in paintings and pictures, or how west would respond considering it a war of liberty, and whether these acts of iconic blasphemy have occurred in Muslim tradition as well or not, no one is telling us:
1. How Prophet of Islam Muhammad (PBUH) would have reacted if he would have been alive today and confronted this issue?
2. Do Muslims have a right to demand an apology from a non-Muslim who is living under a different government or set of moral values?

In order to answer these two questions let’s assume for the sake of argument that the Prophet is alive today and some acts of, so called, blasphemy are committed so that we can learn something from him. This assumption should not be unreasonable as Muslims believe in tradition of the Prophet and should do the same as their Prophet would do. Therefore, I imagine the following acts as blasphemous from the Muslim sensibility point of view happening to prophet of Islam in front of the eyes of Muslims who have chosen to take streets in protest:

1. A Bedouin arrives and starts beating the prophet; everyone rushes to stop him...
2. Another Bedouin arrives and desecrates the prophet’s place of worship in response to nature's call. Everyone rushes to beat him up...
3. People of ’Tiaf’ valley stoned him in response to his invitation to Islam and he bleeds so profusely from head to toe that his shoes are filled with his blood. Even heaven and earth could not take it anymore and angel Gabriel descends from heaven to offer punishment to blasphemous beings ...
4. A woman is so sick of prophet that she starts throwing her daily household waste on him....
5. People mock at him; call him a magician; and a liar....
6. People make fun of him in every possible way.....
7. Last but not the least they make caricatures of Prophet in newspapers...

All the blasphemy scenarios except the last --which has just occurred-- happened in his lifetime and the only thing he offered in response was mercy.

1. He forgave the Bedouin who would beat him.
2. He let the Bedouin finish his nature's call and after that ordered his companion to wash and clean the Masjid. Only thing he said to the Bedouin was this is not a place to relieve oneself.
3. He not only refused the punishment offered by angel Gabriel to people of Tiaf but remarked as well that they don’t know what they are doing.
4. One day the woman did not throw anything on him so he knocked at her door to inquire if she is doing alright. He found out that she was ill and he did the best by taking care of her and cleaning her house.
5. In all the other events he did not let emotions run over; rather he stayed calm and remained merciful.

Looking at the tradition of the Prophet, I am sure if the cartoon event had occurred when he was alive he would have smiled at his followers and dismissed their protests and said they don’t know what they are doing. Why is no one talking about that? If the Prophet had allowed Muslims to respond in all of the above circumstances with force it meant that he would allow them to worship himself.

For overly concerned Muslims, I must ask which Muhammad we are talking about. Mohammad who? The one who was prophet of Islam or the one that appeared in Danish cartoons. To me they are two separate entities. So as to speak of Mohammad in caricatures, to me it is depiction of today’s misguided Muslims. The Islamic world is abundant with self-proclaimed Mohammads. For majority of Muslims having first name Mohammad is equivalent to Islamic baptism. In order to show their love, or probably out of reverence for the prophet, Muslims name their sons Mohammad XYZ apart from the fact that many of them even don’t know about the teachings of their own religion. This act of naming their children Mohammad can be considered equivalent to worshiping Mohammad (PBUH) or bringing shame to the prophet of Islam which is evident from what Muslims are doing in their outlaw world.

So I dare to ask Mohammad who? You or me? Or the prophet of Islam?

While many consider the cartoon distasteful and not dare to look at it out of reverence for the prophet of Islam, I dared to look at the cartoon. The cartoon with a bomb shaped turban resembles a ’Sikh’ more than it does to a Muslim. Even the turban is ’Khalsa’ genre. So little the cartoonist knew about Islam or Mohammad. That even makes it more distasteful and unappetizing for any comment---yet I am commenting because of all the controversy out there.

I don’t consider it reasonable to protest or ask for apologies from those who do not even know about Islam or the prophet of Islam. By demanding an apology Muslims are not only making fun of themselves but rejecting the tradition of the Prophet of Islam. Asking for an apology is itself a mockery of not only the tradition of Prophet but an effort by Muslims themselves lampooning the principles of Islam. Islamic law does not hold anyone else liable for someone else’s actions. Is it consistent with the principles of justice in Islam?

In my less than humble opinion all the responses that are coming out so far are catering to Muslim sensibilities and are either not helping or making the situation even worse. You earn respect through your actions not protests or burning embassies or demanding death for the cartoonist. The Muslim countries must take a tough stance on this and educate protestors about the tradition of prophet and tell the protestors to go home. The burning of embassies, churches, harming ambassadors and citizens of Western countries should be considered a punishable act in Islam. Muslim countries must take a tougher stance that they would not tolerate these acts. If a Muslim ambassador is harmed in another land Islamic Shariah declares a war on the offending nation. In the times of the Prophet his companion Osman traveled to Mecca as his ambassador to negotiate peace. News broke out that he had been killed. The Prophet took an oath along with his companions to avenge the killing of his ambassador. Having said that, from a similar perspective the ambassadors and embassies of other countries should be treated in the same way as Islamic law treats its own embassies and ambassadors. I want to ask Muslims how they would feel if foreign countries avenge the demolition of their embassies the same way the Prophet of Islam wanted to avenge the death of his ambassador.

As we have seen now that boycotting Danish products (although I have disagreement on this issue as well and I still love Danish cookies) would have been a more powerful and peaceful response than taking to the streets and burning embassies. However, I seek help from Tariq Ramdan as he says:

"For Muslim majority countries to react emotionally to these cartoons (with boycotts) is to nurture the extremists on the other side, making it a test of wills. On one side, the extremists argue that, "See, we told you, the West is against Islam," and on the other side they say, "See, Muslims can’t be integrated into Europe, and they are destroying our values by not accepting what we stand for." This way of opening a debate on emotional grounds is, in fact, a way of closing the door on rational discourse."

I am sure more and more Muslims will speak up against the reaction that is shown by the ignorant masses in the Muslim world and teach the tradition of Prophet to their fellow beings. Muslims should apologize to Danes for burning their embassies, I suggest you go and check this website by Muslim youth http://www.sorrynorwaydenmark.com/ to show support to Danes and Norwegians.

For a while I was thinking that this issue does not affect me in anyway so why do I care? In fact, whatever is going on in the Muslim world is an attack on my freedom and liberty as well; the liberty that I enjoyed while living in a foreign country. The liberty and freedom that I did not have back home in Pakistan. In Pakistan, I was afraid to go for prayers in a mosque because I might get killed in a bomb attack by another Muslim sect. In a Muslim state I was more distant from my religion and Allah.

Is Islam all about people being forced to stay away from their belief? Allah himself says there is no compulsion in religion!