‘Massacre In Paris’ A Brief Thought By F. Sheikh

The killing of innocent civilians in Paris is a horrible act and we strongly condemn it. Our heartfelt sympathies and prayers to the families of the victims and the citizens of France.

As  Muslims, every time we hear innocent civilians being murdered in terrorist attack,our hearts start beating fast and we hope and pray that the perpetrator is not a Muslim. But most of the time, in our heart and mind we also know that it is a Muslim. After the perpetrator of terrorism is confirmed a Muslim, we become overwhelmed with sadness and depression. Then the usual explanations follow: the terrorists do not represent Islam and they have hijacked Islam. I have now gotten tired of saying this.

The perpetrators of such hideous and violent acts do not suddenly appear out of nowhere. They live in the communities, with families and friends. It is possible, but it is hard to believe that no one notices anything unusual about them that are worth addressing. The Muslim communities, especially the Mosques which are also the focus of cultural activities, are failing in this regard. It seems as if that they have a hands-off policy in this regard, and somehow think that just condemning such attacks and labelling it un-Islamic is enough.  The Muslim communities and mosques have to take an active role in addressing this scourge.

These perpetrators do not represent true Islam, but, whether we like it or not, they do affect and represent us all.

7 thoughts on “‘Massacre In Paris’ A Brief Thought By F. Sheikh

  1. I fully endorse this statement by F. Sheikh.
    I believe this statement represents the true feelings of every enlightened Muslim.

    As a community we should speak expressively and loudly that acts of terrorism do not represent the true spirit of Islam.

    Any act of terrorism is a blemish against all Muslims of the world.
    Every act of terrorism should be condemned collectively by all Muslims.

    I feel that Muslims are hesitant to reflect on the real causes of terrorist activities, extreme minority of Muslims indulge in.

    Lack of vocal debates in Muslim communities, is a matter of great concern.

    Marwan Majzoob.

  2. Every time a shameful act like this occurs we all tell each other that this is not the true spirit of Islam and we go to churches and synagogues and try to tell non-muslims that Islam is a religion of peace. And every time such an event occurs I wonder, if this is not Islam, where is this ideology coming from; why is it happening so many times? We try to rationalize it by saying it is “an extreme minority” that’s committing this but do any non-muslim believe this? I would not if I were a non-muslim.

    To answer my own Q’s I went to Google. The things I found may not be the most authentic but they are worth reading. The first link is the Wikipedia article on the matter and it clearly says that neither the Quran nor Hadith mention killing for blasphemy; that such an association was made by later jurists.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_and_blasphemy

    The other, by a Muslim writer, in a Pakistani newspaper has a sightly different angle to it. He quotes a hadith that may justify killing because of blasphemy but goes on to make, what I think is a weak argument that the killing of Ka’b ibn al Ashraf was political and not religious. Read the 5th & 6th paragraph of this article

    http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/opinion/03-Nov-2014/islam-and-the-blasphemy-law-i

    And then there is the piece from religionofpeace.com,a Muslim hating site and of course it has the opposite view. But are the 3 quotes each from the Quran and Hadith it quotes correct? I am not knowledgeable to answer that Q. so please someone more informed shed some light on it.

    http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/Quran/016-insulters-islam.htm

    • Shoeb Amin has raised some critically important points.
      TF USA affiliates should have a collective courage to discuss these points in detail.
      .
      1st point is that Islam is a religion of peace.
      .
      TF USA affiliates should discuss this point.
      .
      I am not a religious scholar.
      A religious scholar is not a Mufti, Maulana, Ayatullah, Priest or Rabbi but a person who specializes in comparative study of religions and who studies Philosophy of Religions.

      A traditional believer cannot claim to be a Religious Scholar.
      We need some analytical thinkers.

      We will see how many TF USA affiliates have a simple courage to write even a comment here in this discussion.

      I did a quick read of Shoeb Amin’s comment.
      He has given some links, so I will go there and I will report you back what I read and understood.

      But you are also obligated to read and report back.

      It is our collective responsibility to our own children. We came here only for money.
      Our children did not come for money.
      They were born, raised and educated here.

      Just speak to them and ask them how they feel about these terrorist acts perpetrated by Muslims.
      ..
      Muslims of present day all over the world are frozen in past.

      If we can make money, we don’t give a damn about anything else.
      But our children are differnt if they were educated here.

      Let us go back to our original point, whether Islam is a religion of peace.
      If, we as TF USA affiliates cannot discuss this point, then who will?

      Thanks Shoeb Amin, at least you courage to initiate this discussion. Let us see where it goes.

      Marwan Majzoob.

      • By F. Sheikh

        Fareed Zakria wrote following in Washington Post;

        “But in fact, the Koran prescribes no punishment for blasphemy. Like so many of the most fanatical and violent aspects of Islamic terrorism today, the idea that Islam requires that insults against the prophet Muhammad be met with violence is a creation of politicians and clerics to serve a political agenda.
        One holy book is deeply concerned with blasphemy: the Bible. In the Old Testament, blasphemy and blasphemers are condemned and prescribed harsh punishment. The best-known passage on this is Leviticus 24:16 : “Anyone who blasphemes the name of the Lord is to be put to death. The entire assembly must stone them. Whether foreigner or native-born, when they blaspheme the Name they are to be put to death.”

        By contrast, the word blasphemy appears nowhere in the Koran. (Nor, incidentally, does the Koran anywhere forbid creating images of Muhammad, though there are commentaries and traditions — “hadith” — that do, to guard against idol worship.) Islamic scholar Maulana Wahiduddin Khan has pointed out that “there are more than 200 verses in the Koran, which reveal that the contemporaries of the prophets repeatedly perpetrated the same act, which is now called ‘blasphemy or abuse of the Prophet’ . . . but nowhere does the Koran prescribe the punishment of lashes, or death, or any other physical punishment.” On several occasions, Muhammad treated people who ridiculed him and his teachings with understanding and kindness. “In Islam,” Khan says, “blasphemy is a subject of intellectual discussion rather than a subject of physical punishment.”

        http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/fareed-zakaria-blasphemy-and-the-law-of-fanatics/2015/01/08/b0c14e38-9770-11e4-aabd-d0b93ff613d5_story.html?hpid=z2

      • Weather Islam is a religion of peace is not the question. The question is which religion has not been used as a tool to commit atrocities to put humanity to shame? Which holy book (from major three) is not guilty of using the name of God to instigate violence?
        We all have heard a lot about Quran prescribing death penalty for the apostates, instigating war against infidels etc. but what about others: Here is one from Bible:

        5th book of Hebrew Bible Deuteronomy states (13:12-16), ” If you hear that in one of the towns which Yahweh your God has given you for a home, there are men, scoundrels from your own stock, who have led their fellow citizens astray, saying, “let us go and serve other Gods”, hitherto unknown to you, it is your duty to look into the matter, examine it, and inquire most carefully. If it is proved and confirmed that such a hateful thing has taken place among you, you must put the inhabitants of that town to the sword: you must lay it under the curse of destruction – the town and everything in it. You must pile up all its loot in the public square and burn the town and all its loot, offering it all to Yahweh your God. It is to be a ruin for all time and never rebuilt”.

        What about the God of all three (Jews, Christians & Muslims) setting some examples: God required the torture and murder of his own son and promises to send to eternal torture all who do not accept Christianity. How does God look dispensing His wrath, wiping out entire populations for homosexuality and corruption with floods and volcanic eruptions. Killing first born babies of Egyptians while passing over Jewish babies. Hold it, what about damning the entire human race because of the acts of first two people. Please note even His method of atonement for that original sin was through the crucifixion of Is own son!!
        I know most of the affiliates here are Muslims and some might say the wrath and punishments mentioned above are not correct so let me quote from Quran for them to show how God will treat his own creation, when that creation fails to defy Satan – whom He created too:
        Part 5, Chapter 4, verse 57-58 Al-Nisa “We shall soon cause those who disbelieve in our signs to enter the fire. As often as their hides are burnt up, we shall give them in exchange other hides that they may feel the torment keenly. Surely, Allah is mighty, wise”.
        I am not being clever and criticizing Quran again, I am talking about God of all three. These are examples of how God Himself is supposed to treat his own creation.
        Sam Harris’s book “The end of Faith” is a comparative study of all religions. Most of the affiliates will also agree that in fact all the major three religions are one religion with different names and slight cultural variations. Jews preferred crucifying, Christians burning on stakes and so what if Muslims prefer beheadings? What they do is nothing what their God prefers to do when crossed.
        My point in short, after a long explanation, is that, its not the religion, its the nature of man. Man, who created God in his own image, who wrote holy books, to exploit it all to commit atrocities. Not God, not religions but our animal nature is to be blamed and only way to evolve out of it is to educate ourselves, make ourselves civilized without fear of fictitious entities and let go of the fables and make believe Gods.

        My final question; Is killing (deplorable indeed) of twelve people justified to be referred to as a “massacre” specially when the main target were those who didn’t care hurting anyone’s feelings? I didn’t see such reaction when 142 kids were massacred in Peshawar …. why are we so badly trying to look civil and caring when 50,000 killed in our country are hardly a worth mentioning news on Western media?

        Babar

  3. By Fayyaz Sheikh

    It is ironic that one the police officer shot at close range was a Muslim, Merabet Ahmed.
    Following two paragraphs from NYT are worth reading.

    “Some Twitter users wrote that Officer Merabet had died defending a newspaper that was accused of insulting his faith, and one user posted a quote attributed to the French philosopher Voltaire: “I do not agree with what you have to say, but I’ll defend to the death your right to say it.” Other commenters online echoed the #notinmyname social media campaign against the Islamic State. “One mustn’t forget that Muslims are the first victims of terrorism,” said one Twitter post in French.

    “He was killed in a cowardly way by people who had misinterpreted their sacred text,” said Christophe Crépin, a spokesman for one of France’s police unions. “Yet he himself was from an immigrant background.”

  4. This is in reference to my comment of Jan. 7th in this discussion. From the later postings in this discussion and after listening to comments and my own reading I am convinced that at least in the case of blasphemy the Quran does not advocate violence.
    But when you look at the hadiths, it’s a different story. Just google “blasphemy in the hadiths”. I am including links to some of the ones I came up with.

    http://www.patheos.com/blogs/altmuslim/2014/06/apostasy-laws-and-blasphemy-in-islam-islamic-or-not/

    http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/opinion/04-Nov-2014/islam-and-the-blasphemy-law-ii

    The above two are more balanced; one of them combines blasphemy with apostasy but they still give us an idea as to how all hadiths may have evolved, especially the ones involving blasphemy.

    http://www.deoband.net/blogs/blasphemy-in-islam-the-quran-curses-and-hadith-prescribes-punishment

    http://aljamaat.org/islam/articles/a37.htm
    The last two have a different, more radical opinion.

    So if Islam consists of both the Quran + Hadiths, aren’t these terrorists(or whatever you want to call them) doing what their religion exhorts them to do? If so, should we be going around telling people Islam is a religion of peace? Can we fool all the people all the time? Is the reason we don’t hear as much condemnation of these acts that we are conflicted about these acts in our own minds.? And should we – mostly our religious and political leaders – declare that all hadiths that do not agree with what’s in the Quran be considered invalid? In the absence of any such changes and if these terrorist acts continue, the sentiments expressed in the article below may actually become reality.

    http://voxday.blogspot.com/2015/01/multiculturalisms-last-gasp.html

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.