The Case For and Against The Satanic Verses

Zafar:

You`re back!! Did you get my messages? I called your house a couple of times, always ended up missing you though. Good trip?

Parag

DR.subroto
It was not worth my time to proceed beyond this kohinoor.

[Yet such an initial response may be followed by another very different set of sincere and vital emotions. Upon reflection and a second reading, it is possible to feel exhilaration, delight, even the calm of a Shia Muslim spiritual experience from the book. These may be accompanied by a conviction that Rushdie has produced a significant work of art even if he himself remains unaware of its nature. ]

How does one acquire `...the calm of a Shia Muslim spritual experience from the book.` ?

That is exactly what Ayotullah Khomeini experienced.

No wonder that mentioning of DAKTAR and phD and Faarin degrees and PRAFESSURRR allows you to get across some very select intellectual & cultural turnstiles.

Please read again what you have written and sue the pants off the CHOWK editors for considering it worthwhile to print. Why else are they here for? and it is your derivative reputation which is at stake.

Then e-mail this to cellman rushdick.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

Errr...I recently re-read Stanic Verses (agree, not as good as Moors Last Sigh)...and I enjoyed it and found Rushdie`s (mis?)use of language impressive. (People, it`s true hard core Bombay Urdu/English, not an incorrect version of our Northie stuff.)

What struck me this time round was that the hullaballoo was about some hypothetical brothel-owner naming hypothetical prostitutes after the Prophet`s wives, rather than the (very funnily presented) POSSIBILITY of appocryphal verses being sneaked into the Koran Sharif.

(In any case, wasn`t the Koran only written down years after the Prophet`s death? And NOT dictated the afternoon after revelation? Somebody please correct me if I`m wrong.)

What gives?

Saimaji - I didn`t really see how Rushdie`s perspective was more ``Pakistani and Muslim than Indian and British``. I would agree that his perspective is antithetical to any idea of religious purity, and its politicisation, but that is not quite the same thing. His (IMO highly Westernised and irreligious) sensibility, certainly, seems to be of upper class Bombay in the years immediately preceding and after Independence (said by some to be Bombay`s golden years), and its that which he seems to be mourning in parts of many of his books - or at least that part of it which was open and unbigotted.

Regards

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

#26 by mbenzenglish on December 26, 2002 10:20pm PT


MUN TORA HAJI BAGOyum TUH MORA HAJI BAGOW

it is mun tora qazi NOT mun tera haji.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

#18 by einsteinwallah on December 25, 2002 7:03am PT

Pretty weak arguments (and the pettiness is unbecoming of someone seriously trying to emulate Big Al!)

War is murder. Whether it is justly waged or not. Are you willing to label US efforts to liberate Iraqi souls by direct action and sanctions as murder?

Dr. Roy,

This was fascinating! Your case about the many perspectives dialoguing about Islam seems a compelling and authentic interpretation.

I tend to agree with Saima Shah regarding what you judge as the cartoon like representations of Eastern characters; it seems an intentional device. Perhaps Saima (if she were interested) could write a survey comparing Rushdian characters from various novels/short stories to interrogate what his modus operandi is? I`d be interested in reading that...

My other quibbles concern your representation of highbrow and lowbrow culture; the task of a diasporic writer, as any contemporary writer is to locate thee tensions between several cultures in debate, conflict, negotiation. The culture that produced Madonna and Boy George understood that these two icons were questioning the construction of gender, sexuality, Westernness within the arena of the mainstream. These are precisely the icons that the more conservative among most of cultures find disturbing and threatening. Beethoven`s struggle with his vision and growing deafness while an romantic narrative easily translatable to any culture is considered appropriately dignifiec, please remember that almost every culture has had its equivalent of Madonna and Boy George. During the English Renaissance while Shakespeare or whomever was producing Macbeth and Othello, Christopher Marlowe, Ben Jonson, Aphra Behn and Thomas Dekker were writing and performing plays that interrogated gender, sexuality, race, religion, class, and the growing economic mobility of the merchant class in urban areas that were traditionally run by old money....My point is Rushdie is correct at looking at the places where these negotiations take place-and in contemporary times, they are in pop culture-which of course travels more readily thanks to MTV...

Urstruly:#21

Excellent compendium of facts. Thank you very much. You,as usual made CHOWK a bit richer today.

``PurR gaee kis* kee nigaah-e muttabassum Seemaab,
Ho gayaa hurf-fe ghalat,-- daftar-ay issyaan meiraa``

*pbuh.

#32 on Sheeshank Lele board is for you.

THE LEGACY OF A GENERAL

Eienstien # 15 enquires “……………A body count of less than 30 was mentioned for violence that happened when Makkah was taken. Does anyone know how much is total for entire venture to establish brand new religion of Islam? What I mean is during the time of prophet under his direct orders………….”

Further in #18 he writes “………..It is probable that he was trying to resolve a political problem of exploitation of some people or legitimation of some human right violations and so forth. But his methods for combating those ills (whatever they may be) were not of political activism…………”


Reply:

There is no other person in the history of mankind whose life has been scrutinized more than the life Holy Prophet (pbuh); scrutinized equally by his friends and foes. There is no other person in the history of mankind whose life is as open book as that of the Prophet. Every action that he took, every word that he spoke has been recorded and reaches us via more than 6 hundred thousand narrations and traditions.

During his life time Holy Prophet acted also as a general who conquered an area of one million square miles in 10 years; that is an area equal to the Europe West of Russia. He conquered all this territory by sacrificing less than 150 (145 to be precise) Muslims in 10 years. This can only happen when one is set out to conquer hearts and minds and not the bodies.

There are two types of military expeditions that took place during his life time which are termed as Ghazwat and Saraya . By definition Ghazwat are those military expeditions in which he himself took part; Saraya on the other hand are those expeditions which he sent under the command of his companions. In his life time he fought 22 Ghazwat and 37 Saraya. Most of the Ghazwat and Saraya ended up without a single loss of life because most of these expeditions were just policing and enforcing the Medina Pact which he made with the tribes of Medina and surrounding areas. BTW Medina Pact is the first ever written constitution in the history of mankind.

A complete list of Ghazwat and Saraya is given below with the number of casualties listed. The loss on the side of enemies is also negligible given the barbaric nature of early Arabian society. The execution of 700 Jews after the battle of trench may not be considered as casualties of war, since that was actually an act of treason and breaking of Medina pact that resulted in their execution. But even if it is considered an act of war the number of enemy casualties still is less than 1000 approx., which makes it 120 casualties per year. There is only one man who was killed by him in a war. Similarly, the 14 people killed (which your sources say as 30) during the conquest of Mecca were not casualties of war, instead they were killed because the next of kin of their victims refused to forgive them. So it was a judicial execution and not an act of war.

A detailed history of these military expeditions can be seen at the following website, and can be verified through million others:

http://www.witness-pioneer.org/vil/Books/SM_tsn/

And BTW Muslims are open to inquiry if it is done without malicious intent. There are no taboos in Islam.


GHAZWAT

Year 2 A.H (2 years after migration)
1: Ghazwat abwa also called Ghazwah Dawaan
Muslim Casualties: 0
Enemy: 0

2: Ghazwah Badr Kubra
Muslim Casualties: 14
Enemy: 70

3: Ghzawah Banu Qainuqa
Muslim Casualties: 1
Enemy: 1

4: Ghazwah Saweeq.
Muslim Casualties: 0
Enemy: 0

Year 3 A.H: Three Ghazwaar took place:

5: Ghazwah Gharfaan
Muslim Casualties: 0
Enemy: 0

6: Ghazwah Uhud
Muslim Casualties: 70
Enemy: 23

7: Ghazwah Hamrâ` Al-Asad
Muslim Casualties: 0
Enemy: 1

Year 4 A.H Two Ghazwaat were faced:

8: Ghazwah Banu Nudair
Muslim Casualties: 0
Enemy: 0

9: Ghazwah Badr-e-Sughara.
Muslim Casualties: 0
Enemy: 0

Year 5 A.H Four Ghazwaat were faced:
10: Ghazwah Zatur-Raqa`
Muslim Casualties: No info
Enemy: No info

11: Ghazwah Doomatul-Jandal
Muslim Casualties: 0
Enemy:0

12: Ghazwah maresi, also known as Ghazwah Bani-ul-Mustaliq
Muslim Casualties: 1
Enemy: fewer than 10

13: Ghazwah Khandaq (Ditch), the more important and famous one.
Muslim Casualties: 0
Enemy: 700* (see note above)


Year 6 A.H Three Ghazwaat occurred:

14: Ghazwah Bani Al-Hayaan
Muslim Casualties: 0
Enemy: 0

15: Ghazwah Ghabah also known as Ghazwah Zi-Qarah
Muslim Casualties: 0
Enemy: 0

16: Ghazwah Hudaibiyah.
Muslim Casualties: 0
Enemy: 0

Year 7 A.H One Ghazwah in this year:

17.Ghazwah Khaibar.
Muslim Casualties: 18
Enemy: 93

Year 8 A.H Four Ghazwaat happened during this year:

18: Conquest of Mecca
Muslim Casualties: 0
Enemy: 15

19: Ghazwah Hunain
Muslim Casualties: 4
Enemy: 70

20: Ghazwah Ta`if
Muslim Casualties: 0
Enemy: 0

Year 9 A.H Only one Ghazwah in this year:
22 Ghazwah Tabuk
Muslim Casualties: 0
Enemy: 0

SARAYA

1: Saryah Hamzah
2: Sarayah Ubaidah.
3: Saryah Zaid bin Muslim
4: Saryah Zaid bin HarithFour Saryah
5: Saryah Abu salmah
6: Saryah Abdullah bin Anees
7: Saryah Munzar
8: Saryah Murthad.
9: Saryah Muhammad bin Muslimah toward Qartaa
10: Saryah Akkashah
11: Saryah Muhammad bin Muslimah towaed Zil Qasd
12: Saryah Zaid bin Harithah toward Bani Saleem
13: Saryah Abdur-Rahman bin Auf 6: Saryah Ali
14: Saryah Zaid bin Harith toward Umme Qarfa
15: Saryah Abdullah bin Ateek
16: saryah Abdullah bin Rawaha
17: Saryah Karz bin Jabir
18: Saryah Amr Ad-Damri.
19: Saryah Ghalib Toward Bani Al-Maluh
20: Saryah Ghalib toward Fidak
21: Saryah Shujah
22: Saryah Ka`b
23: Saryah Amr bin Aas
24: Saryah Abu Ubaidah bin Al-Jarrah
25: Saryah Abu Qatadah
26: Khalid, also know as Ghameesa
27: Saryah Tufail bin Amr Dusi
28: Saryah Qutaba.
29: Saryah Alqamah
30: Saryah Ali
31: Saryah Akkashah.
32: Saryah Khalid bin Waleed toward Najran and
33: Saryah Ali toward Yamen.
34: Saryah Abu Bakr
35: Saryah Bashr bin Sa`d
36: Saryah Ghalib bin Abdullah
37: Saryah Ajzam. Saryah under the command of Usama. which set out after Prophet’s demise.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

{Yes, there is a clash. But it is not between Muslims and the West. It is a clash of haves and have-nots. It is a clash of the rich, arrogant, enfranchised US-led West and the poor, humiliated and disenfranchised peoples of underdeveloped countries, which happen to have Muslim majority populations. }

....what a load of apologist crap....there are poor people in every corner of the world from paraguay to tibet to the congo...one doesn`t see them flying planes into buildings...for example, saudi hijackers were not poor by any means...what compelled them to become demons?....you find the answer...

[ #16 by AmericanExpress on December 24, 2002 9:27pm PT
...
On the Internet there is lot of Garbage.
...
Similarly in this case who cares why the killer of FIDO killed.]

I agree with you that the murder may not necessarily have anything to do with what friends of victim surmise or conjecture. Murder investigation should be free from what others say. Murder investigations have dual purpose of finding truth as well as quality evidence which is good enough for successful conviction.

I stumbled upon the site when trying to put together a body count of how many died when the prophet tried to found his new religion. I thought the fact that it was less than 30 when taking Makkah tells only half the story.

I also do not like the insinuation that Salman Rushdie distorted the memory of the prophet. Roy is writing about his words at death bed. But in his lifetime Muhammad was a violent man. It is probable that he was trying to resolve a political problem of exploitation of some people or legitimation of some human right violations and so forth. But his methods for combating those ills (whatever they may be) were not of political activism.

What he did was argue of being recipient of god`s communications. And with that he tried to was forcibly seek allegiance to his new religion based on this so called communictions from god. In that process he killed a number of people. What ensued after his death was worse. In no small measure the story of Muhammad`s life might have become source of legitimation of murders that were committed later.

It is just sophistry to argue that all these murders were acts of criminals and the connection of those murders to Islam is a matter open to question. No. Whereever such connections can be established we should condemn not only the act but sequence of reasoning which led to the act. In my opinion discovery of such connections between religion and murders it inspires is as much important as ``secular and judicial`` convictions. The problem of religion being invoked to commit murders, has gone way out of hand.

Salman Rushdie did not sully memory of prophet. That memory was already dirty. There was blood. Lot of blood. Salman Rushdie was unoriginal in his judgement of the man. Conclusions he wrote were arrived at before Salman arrived at the scene. Another bit siphistry is in the argument that when he wrote Verses he was living in Britain at the time and that he did not set out to write a modern diatribe against all religious traditions he had encountered. Let me ask Roy: Are you free to criticise (say) Rabindranath?

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts