Friday, February 17, 2012

Muslim Voices In Defense Of Hamza Kashgari

There actually are some voices being raised among Muslims condemning the persecution of Hamza Kashgari. This is certainly worth taking note of, at least for the sake of giving credit where credit is due.

by Tehmina Kazi
[excerpt:]
As of 6pm (UK time) today, 7,894 people had signed a petition urging the Saudi government to drop all charges of blasphemy against Hamza Kashgari, a columnist for the Jeddah-based daily Al-Bilad. Kashgari, 23, had sparked outrage for detailing an imaginary conversation with the prophet Muhammad on his Twitter account, in which he addressed him as an equal: "I will say that I have loved aspects of you, hated others, and could not understand many more."

After generating over 30,000 fevered responses (including a number of death threats), Kashgari deleted the post and issued a formal apology. However, this did not stop the juggernaut. As of 6pm (UK time) today, A Facebook page entitled "The Saudi people want the execution of Hamza Kashgari" had 26,632 members – a figure that sadly dwarfs the number who had signed the petition to save him.


by Myriam Francois-Cerrah, a British Muslim and Oxford PhD student
[excerpt:]
The case of Hamza Kashgari has entered a new and deeply worrying phase as Malaysian authorities have deported the 23-year-old journalist back to Saudi Arabia, where he currently risks execution. There has been widespread and rightful opprobrium of the Saudi government’s response but few seem to question the official Saudi line that their indignation at alleged blasphemy is behind the call for the death penalty. Specifically, the government claims Hamza’s tweets, in which he appeared to express irreverence for the Prophet, is the source of its vendetta.

by Jalees Rehman
[excerpt:]
Last week, the Saudi writer and blogger Hamza Kashgari tweeted about Prophet Muhammad and his tweets caused an unanticipated fire-storm of outrage among many Saudis. They formed an "electronic lynch mob" and responded with hate-filled tweets, Face-book posts, comments, threats and YouTube videos, calling for the arrest and punishment of Kashgari.

by Shalah Khan Salter, Muslims for Progressive Values (Canada)
[excerpt:]
When I was 23 years old, I drew a hooded white figure on posters that advertised a special lecture at my university. It was to be delivered by an up and coming leader, starting a new federal political party. I had read the leader had ties to racist groups in Alberta.

I defaced the posters wherever I found them on campus.

If I had been caught, would I have been beheaded?

Such may be the fate of 23-year-old Hamza Kashgari, a Saudi writer who messaged via Twitter an imaginary conversation with the Prophet Muhammad a week ago, around the time of Prophet Muhammad's birthday.

press statement by Malaysian Muslim women's group
[excerpt:]
Sisters in Islam (SIS) is deeply disappointed that the Malaysian government has deported the Saudi blogger Hamza Kashgari without due process. This deportation was carried out despite the absence of an extradition treaty between the two countries and the probability that Hamza might face the death penalty in Saudi Arabia for alleged blasphemy.

Home Minister Dato Seri Hishammudin Hussein’s statement that we have an agreement with other countries to always return their citizens should they ask for them is therefore questionable. In the absence of an extradition treaty with Saudi Arabia, under what legal provision did Hishammudin act in deporting Hamza Kashgari?

statement by the Center for Policy Initiatives, Malaysia
[excerpt:]
The BBC, reporting on Hamza Kashgari’s deportation from Kuala Lumpur back to his native Saudi Arabia, said the charge hanging over the young man’s head of insulting the Prophet Muhammad is considered blasphemous in Islam and punishable by death.

Kashgari, 23, fled his country was detained upon his arrival here on Thursday en route to New Zealand where he was planning to seek political asylum. A journalist, Kashgari was recently sacked by Saudi daily al-Bilad where he had a column.

Three allegedly blasphemous tweets were made about Muhammad on the prophet’s birthday (Maulidur Rasul) last week and sparked vociferous calls for the death penalty to be imposed on him.

The climate of fear and caution has been such that – even merely for the purpose of reference – it’s difficult to find Kashgari’s tweets reproduced in reputable websites (although some independent blogs have carried them). One website which initially reproduced them has withdrawn the tweets.

by the Islamic Renaissance Front
[excerpt:]
The Islamic Renaissance Front strongly condemns the deportation of Hamza Kashgari over his allegedly offensive tweets.

Due to the irresponsible and cowardly actions of the Malaysian government in enabling the deportation, Mr Kashragi now faces the possibility of the death penalty in his home country of Saudi Arabia for the simple act of demanding his right to practice the most basic human rights – freedom of expression and thought.

"Why you won’t see Muslims adopting the ‘right’ to insult Prophets"

Hamza Kashgari and the Divide Over Free Speech
Dr. Abdul Wahid, writing for the NewCivilization.Com website

The case of Hamza Kashgari is one that I think most people in the West simply don’t understand.

Even those who are not hostile to Islam find it hard to reconcile European notions of free speech – established after many battles with the religious establishment – with cases like this one, where a Saudi writer and poet has been extradited from Malaysia at the request of the Saudi regime after being accused of insulting the Blessed Prophet Muhammad, peace and blessings be upon him.

Kashgari appears to have posted the disparaging and offensive remarks on Twitter in a month when Muslims around the world remember his birth.

Thankfully, it’s been reported that Kashgari has retracted them, removed them from the web and apologized for making them, all of which ought mark the end of the matter.

Yet there has been much focus on the remarks of the Saudi ‘king’ calling for his arrest and that he was even extradited by Malaysia to face a possible death sentence. It’s been said that Abdullah al Saud has simply used this case for political reasons, and the outrage he has expressed is little more than hypocrisy by the regime.

It’s a pretty safe allegation to make, given that hypocrisy in this regime is more abundant than oil and sunlight in the ‘kingdom’ they dominate. Other than the fact that the regime doesn’t govern, run its economy or foreign relations according to the standards of God and His Messenger, it is infamous for its ill treatment of pilgrims who spend their life’s savings to visit the Prophet’s mosque out of heartfelt love. The accusation of playing politics may also be true, since the regime has been very concerned about growing disquiet, both from a younger generation and from its Shia community. It’s argued that by arresting Kashgari, Abdullah ibn Saud can send a strong signal to dissident voices.

Yet, this affair does draw a sharp distinction between Islamic standards and secular liberal standards – and it is important not to gloss over this aspect, for various reasons I will discuss.

Islam is a belief system that has encouraged accounting political authority since its earliest days. Even the Prophet faced questions and scrutiny by the people he ruled over. His closest companions, who succeeded him in political authority as Caliphs, faced (sometimes harsh) questioning by citizens in the state – men and women, Muslim and non-Muslim. The accounting of authority is considered not so much a right but a duty in Islam. The questioning of scholars is a norm – since there is no priesthood in Islam. Moreover, Islam – in its so-called golden age encouraged intellectual inquiry, debate and scrutiny.

So how is it, secular commentators may ask, that an insult to the Prophet can be a capital offence.

Yet it is important for people to know that this response is not some fringe or aberrant opinion. According to any orthodox reading of Islam, in an Islamic state (for the record, the Saudi ‘kingdom’ lacks legitimacy as an Islamic state) someone proven to have insulted the blessed Prophet and who did not retract what they said would indeed be punished by execution.

In his beautiful book about the status of the Prophet of Islam, known as ‘Al Shifa’, (the full title translates as ‘Healing by recognition of the Rights of al-Mustafa), Qadi Ayyad ibn Musa (1083-1149) – an Islamic scholar and judge from Granada in Andalusia, Spain – not only addresses characteristics of the Prophet – but also mentions the verdict on those who disparage him in any way.

One may certainly criticise the cynical false allegations of blasphemy in places like Pakistan that we may have come across. Or we can criticise vigilantism, where emotional people might act as judge and executioner without the legal authority to do so – for the rule of law in Islam is extremely important. Indeed, the Prophet explicitly said “Nobody has the right vested in him to establish anything from the Hudood without the Sultan (authority of the State).” [Baihaqi]

So the magnitude of the sin of any insult to the Prophet is without question; and the prescribed punishment from the judicial authority (if proven and the person did not retract and repent) is well established in Islamic law.

So why discuss it.

Firstly, a frank explanation of Islamic values gives a more honest engagement between Muslims and non-Muslims, which is important at a time when some Muslims may feel uncomfortable about responding to these issues for fear of being labelled ‘extremist’. There is, amongst some Muslim commentators, a desire to speak out positively for the Prophet but a reluctance to discuss capital punishment in liberal societies, fearing a backlash on these issues [which rather illustrates how liberal societies can be as supremacist as they sometimes accuse others of being].

Secondly, for a Muslim hearing the orthodox Islamic view on this issue, it is a sobering reminder of the magnitude of the offence according to Islam. Even if we don’t live in a land where there is an Islamic legal authority to try and punish anyone found guilty of the offence, being reminded of the standard laid down for centuries steers us away from the kind of flippant manner of addressing the Prophet’s of Allah that has become so common in secular Europe. Indeed, the Kashgari case shows how secular values, globalised via satellite and internet, have had an affect on individuals in the Muslim world; all the more likely because states like the Saudi state are intellectually arid from an Islamic perspective and tend to deal with people by discipline and not with stronger arguments, when individuals mimic a western discourse.

Thirdly, secularists love to use such issues to twist or erase any Islamic law or value that contradicts secular liberal norms that dominate the world today. Such attempts have been made before, and will be made again, but should not go unchallenged, and the traditional Islamic standard should be presented – and indeed Islamic values as regards respect for the Prophets should be championed.

If people understood the Islamic framework on the limits of speech (and every society and value system has a limit), they might see that it addresses something that secular Europe has lost; and which some people mourn the loss of.

When Western Europe developed its attitudes to ‘free speech’ in response to the hegemony of the Catholic Church, arguments about theology were seen as a challenge to political authority, so defiance of the papal authority became integral to people speaking their mind; and people fought for a right to question beliefs.

But, what started in this way went far beyond what was first envisaged. Over several decades challenging papal authority shifted to denigration of God and His messengers; and eventually to a situation where to insult others is a badge of pride. Humour is built around it; politicians thrive on it; and yet others will argue that disrespect has grown in society – and antisocial behaviour along with it. People in Europe respect the Prophet Esa [Jesus] as the source of their moral viewpoint and legal system on many issues (even if they don’t think of him as a prophet) – but they don’t think twice about ridiculing, parodying and mocking his name and cannot see how it undervalues that morality and legal system that has underpinned social relationships for centuries.

The Islamic Shari’ah welcomes intellectual inquiry and debate, and political accountability. It allows humour, art and cultural expression. But it draws a red line at the sanctity of God and His messengers – all of them, not just the Prophet Muhammad .

Muslims ought to celebrate that a red line separates the legal and moral standard for society, the Lawgiver and His messengers – from those who execute those legal and morals – the citizens and their rulers.

Dr. Abdul Wahid is a regular contributor to New Civilisation. He is currently the Chairman of the UK-Executive Committee of Hizb ut-Tahrir in Britain. He has been published in The Times Higher Educational Supplement and on the websites of Foreign Affairs, Open Democracy and Prospect magazine. He can be followed on Twitter @abdulwahidht or emailed at abdulwahid@newcivilisation.com

Tuesday, February 14, 2012

Thomas Pooley, Hamza Kashgari, and the right to blaspheme

In 1857 Thomas Pooley, a well-digger in the small English village of Duloe, was ordered to appear before the local magistrate after having been formally charged with multiple counts of the crime of blasphemy. The charges against Pooley were based on sworn statements claiming that he had been seen writing blasphemous statements on fences and walls around the village (twitter not having yet been invented). Pooley not only answered the summons voluntarily, but told the magistrate forthrightly that he was of the opinion that "the blackguard Jesus Christ ... was the forerunner of all thievery and whoredom."

Pooley was tried on July 30, 1857, and convicted on four counts of blasphemy for which he was sentenced to 21 months imprisonment. The trial and conviction transformed Pooley from just another village eccentric (who had been listed in the 1851 census as a pauper) into a nationwide cause célèbre. Freethinkers, atheists, secularists, and others mounted a sustained public campaign on Pooley's behalf. Eventually several members of Parliament personally intervened in the case, and Pooley was freed after serving 5 of the 21 months.

The movement to free Pooley was spearheaded by George Holyoake, who also raised funds for Pooley and his family. Holyoake was a Chartist, an Owenite, a Co-operatist, a Malthusian, a Comte-ist, a feminist, a socialist, an atheist, and an all-around trouble-maker and egalitarian rabble-rouser. He is credited with being the first to popularize the use of the term "secularism" in it's modern anti-religious sense (this attribution is vouched for by both the Catholics and the atheists). For more on Pooley's case look at this old post of mine: Blasphemy, and also at this paper by Iain Rowe: The Case of Thomas Pooley: A Reinvestigation.

Can anyone point to anything faintly resembling the vigorous "free-thought" movements that thrived in the West over 150 years ago (or, for that matter, to the Enlightenment which was already in its heyday 250 years ago)? With the life of Hamza Kashgari now in the balance, where are the voices of outrage from "moderates" and "reformers" in the Muslim world? And where are the bravely freethinking George Holyoakes of Saudi Arabia, Malaysia, etc.?

Not to put too fine a point on it, but the case of Hamza Kashgari presents a golden opportunity to those who claim to be (and are claimed by others to be) "moderate" Muslims: now they have the chance to prove themselves. How easy it would be for them to go on Al Jazeera, CNN, etc, and to simply and clearly articulate their principled opposition to the very idea of criminal prosecution based on the free expression of religious ideas and to call, in no uncertain terms, for the immediate unconditional release of Hamza Kashagari and the dropping of all charges against him! Think of the sensation that this would cause.

But where are the "moderates" when we (and especially Hamza Kashgari!) need them? Where are the American Society for Muslim Advancement and the Council of American Islamic Relations ? Where are Daisy Khan and Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf? Where is congressman Keith Ellison? Where is everyone's favorite smooth-talking Muslim intellectual Tariq Ramadan? And where are all the "progressive" Islamophobia-mongers and interfaith-dialogue peddlers?

Let's hear no more about "moderate" Muslims, unless and until we hear from them that they will stand up to the Wahhabists and others who call for the blood of apostates, blasphemers, and infidels. Muslims will never be free until they have the freedom to express their own thoughts about their own religion. Such freedom must go far beyond being allowed to politely disagree when and if that is considered acceptable by the "authorities". Muslims must be free to question, criticize, reject, renounce, and even ridicule every aspect of their own religion. And most importantly of all, genuine religious freedom for Muslims must include the right to leave Islam and then to embrace some other religion, or no religion at all. Until such freedom exists in the Muslim world, Muslims will continue to lag centuries behind even the hide-bound puritanical society of mid-nineteenth-century Victorian England (a time and place when women had fewer rights than they do today in the Islamic Republic of Iran)! And until that time Muslims who live in the West will continue to enjoy far greater freedom to practice their own religion, as they themselves freely choose to do so (and only if they choose to do so!), than any Muslim who lives in a Muslim-majority country, no matter how "moderate" or "modern" that country might claim to be.

more blasphemy at
e g r e g o r e s:


.

UPDATED: Supporters of Hamza Kashgari "should be tried for apostasy"

.
Call to try those who supported Saudi blogger
By Habib Toumi, GulfNews Bureau Chief, 00:00 February 14, 2012

[This GulfNews article directly below by Habib Toumi gives a much more detailed account than the one in the Asia News International article I originally had for this post. Scroll down for the ANI article.]

People who encouraged a controversial Saudi columnist facing charges of blasphemy could be summoned by the public prosecutor, a report has said.

"The public prosecutor in Jeddah is filing a lawsuit against Hamza Kashgari on charges of disrespecting God and insulting Prophet Mohammad (PBUH) in his Twitter account," sources told Al Hayat daily.

The sources said that public prosecutor in the Red Sea city of Jeddah was likely to summon people who expressed support or agreed with him on the social network, the daily reported yesterday.

"The public prosecutor, as the attorney for the society, has the right to summon anyone who encouraged the defendant or who is connected to matters that motivated his action," Abdul Aziz Al Zamel, a legal consultant, said, quoted by Al Hayat.

The prosecutor is based in Jeddah, the city where Hamza Kashgari posted his tweets on Prophet Mohammad's (PBUH) birth anniversary before fleeing to Malaysia, the sources said.

According to Saudi daily Arab News, "a number of Saudis have called for the trial of all those who tweeted support for Kashgari, saying they were equally guilty."

"Those who supported the contents of Kashgari's tweets are considered criminal exactly like him," Khalid Abu Rashid, a lawyer and a legal consultant, was quoted as saying. The sentence to be passed on Kashgari should be imposed on his supporters too, he said.

The lawyer, however, said it was important to use the written texts to differentiate between two things in this case.

"If the support was for general principles like freedom of expression, then this is a different matter, but if the support was for the attacks on Allah and His Prophet (PBUH), then the supporters should be tried for apostasy," he said in the report quoting Al Eqtisadiah newspaper.

The Arabic daily said that individual and collective calls were made to the Prosecution and Investigations Commission to try Kashgari and all the bloggers who supported him in his blasphemy.

The 23-year-old columnist was deported on Sunday by the Malaysian authorities who arrested him at Kuala Lumpur International Airport.

On Sunday, a Malaysian daily reported that Kashgari was deported back home hours before his lawyers managed to get a High Court injunction to stop the deportation.

The lawyers, led by R. Kesavan, said that they obtained the injunction at 1:30pm on Sunday, but were told that Kashgari has been put on a plane at 10am.

The injunction was an order to the police, the Home Ministry, as well as the Subang and Kuala Lumpur International Airport immigration authorities to stop Kashgari's deportation, the daily said.

However, Home Minister Hesham Al Deen Hussain yesterday denied the claim, saying that no court order was issued to prevent his repatriation.

"There was no injunction. No court order was given to prevent us from returning him to Saudi," the minister told reporters. "If there was a court order, we would abide by it, but there wasn't, so don't make up stories. We have never failed to obey the justice system," he said, quoted by The Malaysian Insider.

The columnist is a Saudi Arabian national wanted by his home country to be tried in the justice system for his offence, the minister said.

"I will not compromise. Do not look at Malaysia as a safe transit... Do not think you can come in and out of Malaysia. He is a foreign national, he is wanted by his own country of origin," he said.

Hussain said allegations made by several parties that the columnist would be killed if he was deported were "illogical."

"Allegations that he would be executed, abused, do not make sense. The country being accused is a dignified country. These are serious allegations against Saudi Arabia," Hussain said, quoted by the daily. The home minister said that there were no requests made by Interpol for Kashgari to be returned to his country of origin.

Deportation decisions are made on a case-by-case basis and not all those apprehended are sent back, Hussain said.

--------------------------------------------------------


Supporters of Saudi columnist accused of blasphemy, abusing Prophet, may face court summons

Riyadh, Feb 14 (Asian News International): People who have supported a young Saudi Arabia columnist, who was accused of blasphemy and for abusing Prophet Mohammed, could be summoned by the public prosecutor.

"The public prosecutor in Jeddah is filing a lawsuit against Hamza Kashgari on charges of disrespecting God and insulting Prophet Mohammad (PBUH) in his Twitter account," sources told Al Hayat daily.

Sources revealed that public prosecutor in Jeddah was likely to summon people who expressed support or agreed with him on the social network.

According to Saudi daily Arab News, 'a number of Saudis have called for the trial of all those who tweeted support for Kashgari, saying they were equally guilty.'

"Those who supported the contents of Kashgari's tweets are considered criminal exactly like him," Gulf News quoted Khaled Abu Rashid, a lawyer and a legal consultant, as saying.

The lawyer, however, said it was important to use the written texts to differentiate between two things in this case.

"If the support was for general principles like freedom of expression, then this is a different matter, but if the support was for the attacks on Allah and His Prophet, then the supporters should be tried for apostasy," he added.

Meanwhile, the 23-year-old columnist was recently deported by the Malaysian authorities, despite fears that he may face execution Saudi Arabia. (ANI)

Sunday, February 12, 2012

Hamza Kashgari forcibly returned to Saudi Arabia by "moderate" Malaysia

Multiple media sources (see links below) are reporting that Hamza Kashgari has been extradited from Malaysia back to Saudi Arabia.

On Saturday, February 4th, Kashgari posted three tweets that were officially ruled to constitute "blasphemy" and the order for his arrest came from both the highest Islamic authorities in Saudi Arabia and from the King himself. Kashagari fled for his life and had hoped to receive asylum in New Zealand, but he was arrested when at Kuala Lumpur airport, where he was to make a connecting flight to New Zealand. As soon as they had Kashgari in custody, Malaysian authorities contacted the Saudi government and began the extradition process.

Sources:


Saturday, February 11, 2012

"We cannot separate Islam from the government in Malaysia." (On Malaysia and the Myth of Moderate Islam)

This post contains a short list of links to articles that present the case for Malaysia as an example of moderate Islam. The last article linked to, based on a speech given by the Prime Minister of Malaysia while visiting Turkey in February of 2011, is also repeated here in full.

I am not linking to rabid right-wing denunciations of Islam. I am linking to things written by those who sincerely believe that there is a good Islam and a bad Islam, and that Malaysia represents a very positive example of good Islam.

The first article was written by Nazry Bahrawi, a Research Associate at the Middle East Institute, National University of Singapore, who, perhaps somewhat surprisingly, cautions against too much of a good thing when it comes to moderate Islam.

The second article is by Jiesheng Li, a doctoral candidate at the Department of Political Science and International Studies, University of Birmingham, who argues that in the wake of 9/11 "Malaysia’s actions were to change the international perception of Muslims worldwide and indirectly help to steer Muslims away from joining extremists or terrorist groups."

The third article is written by and Evangelical Christian who states with enthusiasm that " While Democracy and Islam do not usually go hand in hand, in Malaysia they co-exist with a surprising degree of harmony."

The final article is based, as already mentioned, on a speech given by Malaysian Prime Minister Najib Razak, from which the quote in the title of this post is taken.

The immediate inspiration for this post is the arrest in Malaysia this week of a young Saudi journalist, Hamza Kashgari, fleeing for his life, after he was officially declared, by the King of Saudi Arabia himself, to be an "infidel", for which only one penalty exists in Saudi Arabia: death. The "moderate" Malaysian police were waiting for Kashgari when he landed in Kuala Lumpur airport, where he had hoped to make a connecting flight to New Zealand. And the "moderate" Malaysian police immediately contacted the Saudi Arabian government and began making arrangements to turn Kashgari over to those who wish to put him to death for his blasphemies.

  1. Moderate Islam in Southeast Asia and Egypt EastAsiaForum.org, Oct. 28, 2011
  2. Moderate Islam as a base with pragmatism GlobalPost.co.uk, Jan., 2008
  3. On Malaysia’s Moderate Muslims and why you should care The Evangelical Outpost, Oct. 14, 2010
  4. "Moderate Islam is what Malaysia offers the world." MCOT.net (Bangkok based news site) Feb., 2008 [The full test of this article is given directly below.]

ISTANBUL, Feb 25 [2011] (Bernama) - Prime Minister Najib Razak said Malaysia has proven that its system of governance, based on moderate Islam, has worked and can be a good model for other countries in the world to emulate, especially Islamic countries.

He said in view of what was taking place in the world today, it was important to ensure that the system of administration adopted was working.

The key consideration, he said, was that "if you have a system, would it work to produce good and effective governance?" Najib said this as a panellist at the Global Movement for Justice, Peace and Dignity Conference, here, Wednesday.

The session was recorded by BBC World News to be aired by the channel at a later date. It was moderated by BBC journalist Zeinab Badawi.

The other panellists included Turkish Deputy Prime Minister Ali Babacan, Paramadina University of Indonesia president Dr Anies Baswedan and Arab Business Council co-founder/vice-chairman Khalid Abdulla-Janahi.

Najib said a good and effective governance could deliver the goods and services to the people.

"A good system allows the people to participate in the system, it empowers the people to decide their own destiny.

"In case of Malaysia, it is very much like Turkey. Without having to blow our own trumpet, we have a modern system, much like Turkey.

"Therefore, we can offer the Malaysian model because it has worked. From a relatively poor nation whose economy was based on agriculture, we have moved to industrialising the economy.

"Now, we have planned initiatives for the next phase. We have a very detailed roadmap of transformation. The next wave of transformation is to become a high-income nation," said Najib.

He said the success of a system was not just about numbers but also about whether it could improve the quality of life, and about good values, ensuring fairness, rule of law, being inclusive, having social safety net and caring for the poor.

"These are the things that we have put in place in Malaysia. So, in this regard, I believe we have something to offer to the world." Nevertheless, he said, every nation would have to look at its needs based on its own peculiarities and had to make adjustments to the values, to empower the people to a more prosperous and better future.

When asked by Zeinab Badawi whether the Malaysian model was a better model for an Islamic country than the Turkish, Najib's response which drew laughter from the audience was, "I have to be careful on this as I am in Turkey." The Malaysian prime minister said it was an important thing for Malaysia to choose its own destiny.

"And the way we have developed our political structure is that Islam plays an integral part in the country's policies and administration.

"We cannot separate Islam from the government in Malaysia. But having said that, it is also Islam that is moderate that we apply in Malaysia. For example, Islam in Malaysia is not associated with violence, Islam in Malaysia is benign and that is being practised by and large," he added.

The conference was jointly organised by the Institute of Strategic and International Studies (ISIS) Malaysia and International Movement For A Just World (JUST) in conjunction with Najib's three-day official visit to Turkey from Feb 21-23. (Bernama)

Friday, February 10, 2012

"Wherever you find them, kill them." Part Two (On the arrest and impending death of Hamza Kashgari)

According to media reports (see links at bottom of post), 23 year old Saudi Arabian journalist Hamza Kashgari is in grave danger. There is a very real likelihood that he will be put to death for the crime of blasphemous tweeting.

On Saturday, the anniversary of the birth of Muhammad, Kashgari posted the following three tweets (text taken from the Global Post article linked to below):
  • On your birthday, I will say that I have loved the rebel in you, that you've always been a source of inspiration to me, and that I do not like the halos of divinity around you. I shall not pray for you.
  • On your birthday, I find you wherever I turn. I will say that I have loved aspects of you, hated others, and could not understand many more.
  • On your birthday, I shall not bow to you. I shall not kiss your hand. Rather, I shall shake it as equals do, and smile at you as you smile at me. I shall speak to you as a friend, no more.
As a result, according to Global Post, "a warrant was issued by kingdom authorities for his arrest and the Kingdom's religious Fatwa Council condemned him as an apostate and an infidel, crimes which are punishable by death."

Those who have been following this story know that Kashgari fled Saudi Arabia fearing for his life. He planned to request asylum in New Zealand, but only got as far as Kuala Lumpur airport in Malaysia, where he was arrested on Wednesday while waiting for a connecting flight. According to the New York Times, “The [Malaysian] police have contacted their counterpart in Saudi Arabia to determine the next course of action,” according to Hishammuddin Hussein, the Malaysian Minister of Home Affairs.

It is often claimed that Malaysia offers a good example of a "moderate" Muslim society. I believe that this is true, and that we are now seeing just what "moderate" Islam looks like in action.

Sources:

Further reading:

Thursday, February 9, 2012

2011: Year of the Mucker? (Morbid Musings On Mass Murder)

2011 was quite a year for high-profile instances of individuals running amok with the intent to kill.

The year began with Jared Lee Loughner's shooting spree in Arizona in January and ended with three separate incidents in December that occurred in California, Belgium and Italy. In between the world witnessed several other mass killings, including the horrendous massacre carried out by Anders Breivik in Norway on July 22, which is considered to be the deadliest "killing spree" in history.

When I heard the news about the Norway massacre I immediately thought back to the shootings in Arizona earlier that year, and that led me to recall the phenomenon of "muckers" that played such a central role in John Brunner's dystopian (before dystopian was cool) novel, Stand On Zanzibar (first published in 1968), and as a result of those morbid musings I posted a few excerpts from that great work of literature.

I can't see a pattern in the motives or any other connecting thread in these acts of seemingly senseless violence. Many of them do fit a pattern of lone mentally ill individuals motivated by megalomania and delusional ideology. But some are obviously examples of severely psychologically damaged human beings who reached a breaking point without any "ideological" direction to their violence.

And it's not 100% clear that 2011 actually saw more of this kind of violence than other years, especially since definitions vary for such things as "spree killing", "rampage killing", "mass murder", etc. Here are four good discussions of some of the different definitions:

Previous years have of course not been without their fair share of mass killings. In 2010 there was a truly Brunner-esque wave of violent attacks in China, including a wave of attacks on schoolchildren in which at least 21 children were killed, some as young as four years old (link). That same year a Chinese construction worker went on a drunken rampage with a shovel loader, killing 11 people (link). And early Spring of 2009 also saw an alarming string of mass murders committed in the United States (link). If we go back to 2007 there was the Virginia Tech massacre in which 32 people were gunned down in the 6th deadliest rampage killing by a lone perpetrator on record (well, at least according to this list, already linked to above). So maybe 2011 wasn't so bad after all? Hmmm, that doesn't really make me feel any better!

But maybe there is a pattern, or at least a trend, and not a good one. Mark Kopta, chair of the Department of Psychology at the University of Evansville in Indiana (link), has tabulated the rate at which mass killings occur in the U.S., going back to the 1930s. According to Kopta, the frequency of these events has been on the increase at least since 1970. Here are his numbers (according to media reports, such as this one from abc):

3 mass killings from 1930-1970 (.075 per year)
3 mass killings from 1970-1980 (0.3 per year)
10 mass killings from 1980-1990 (1.0 per year)
17 mass killings from 1990-2000 (1.7 per year)
25 mass killings from 2000-2008 (3.1 per year)

Of course numbers like these once again raise the question of how these events are counted, and especially what definitions and criteria are used. Consider, for example, the fact that the FBI actually changed their official definition of "serial murder" in 2008 (link). And, so far as I know, although he has been widely cited in the media, Kopta has not actually published his results, although he did present them in a paper to the Midwestern Psychological Association in Chicago in 2009.

And now here is a listing of the various acts of spree killing that I know of from the year that was 2011:
  • January 8 Jared Lee Loughner opens fire in a supermarket parking lot in Tuscon Arizona, killing six and wounding 14.
  • February 11-12 Maksim Gelman kills four and wounds at least five others in New York City.
  • April 9 Tristan van der Vlis kills six and wounds seventeen in a shopping mall in the Dutch town of Alphen aan den Rijn.
  • July 7 Rodrick Shonte Dantzler kills seven in a shooting spree in Grand Rapids Michigan.
  • July 22 Anders Behring Breivik slaughters 69 people on the Norwegian island of Utøya after first killing 8 people in downtown Oslo with a car bomb.
  • August 7 Michael E. Hance kills seven (and wounds one) in Summit County, Ohio.
  • December 9 Tyler Brehm opens fire at the intersection of Sunset and Vine in Hollywood California, killing one and wounding at least two others.
  • December 13 Nordine Amrani, armed with grenades and an automatic rifle, kills five and wounds 125 in the Belgian city of Liege.
  • December 13 Gianluca Casseri kills two and wounds three in a shooting spree in the Italian city of Florence.

Wednesday, February 8, 2012

Hinduism, Paganism, & Polytheism

There has been a sudden flurry of interest in two very closely related questions about Hinduism:

1. What, if any, relationship exists between Hinduism and Paganism?
2. Is Hinduism polytheistic?

One of the main reasons for the current go-round on these two recurring topics is that the upcoming Pagan gathering, PantheaCon 2012, will feature a highly anticipated panel discusion entitled Hindus and Pagans Together: One Billion Strong (see the official schedule of events here). This panel will include two members of the Hindu American Foundation (link), Mihir Meghani and Raman Khanna, as well as Big Name Pagans Patrick McCollum and T. Thorn Coyle, and also Amadea, who has played a pivotal role in facilitating the newly blossoming relationship between Hindus and Pagans.

Another catalyst for the renewed discussion was an article by Huffington Post contributor Arvind Sharma with the provocative title Is Hinduism a Pagan Religion?, in which Sharma "defends" Hinduism against what he sees as the double slur that Hindus are both Pagans and polytheists. Sharma very nicely sums up his whole argument in a single sentence: "It is true that there are many gods in Hinduism and that it abounds in image worship, but while these various gods are considered different gods in paganism as traditionally represented, in Hinduism they represent the various forms of the one and same God."

Star Foster, a Pagan blogger at the religion megasite Patheos, took note of both the upcoming Pantheacon panel discussion and Arvind Sharma's article in her own contribution to the discussion: When Hinduism Confuses and Frustrates Me, which in turn sparked a lively and wide ranging exchange of views in the comments section.

What I would like to do now is to draw attention to some articles that I believe help to shed some light on these thorny issues. The first two of these are very recent and can be considered important contributions to the current round of discussion. The next four are less recent but still highly relevant. Following that there are some links to posts from this blog that also relate to the topic of Hinduism, Paganism, and Polytheism.

Vedic monotheism? 1. The dawn of monotheism
by Koenraad Elst, Feb. 7, 2012
[excerpt:]
Monotheism is not merely the cult of a single god, which would be called henotheism, but also implies the active rejection of all other gods. The recipient of monotheistic worship is not Heis Theos, “one god”, but Ho Monos Theos, “the only god”. Thus, Hindus worshipping an ishta devata, “chosen deity”, selected from among many, are henotheists but not monotheists. A Hindu who never worships any god except Shiva, but doesn’t object to his neighbour’s worshipping Krishna or Durga, fails the test of monotheism.

De-Monotheising the Human Mind the Hindu Way
by Ranbir Singh, Feb. 8, 2012
[excerpt:]
Almost a thousand years of cultural onslaught have left Hindus apologetic about their beliefs. They are keen to mould them into the framework dominated by a monotheistic mindset which holds sway even when it is mutated into terms such as rational, scientific and even atheist. Such is the power of monotheism that it infects even ideologies which purport to be antagonistic to any form of religious belief and it does so without most of us even realising.

Polytheism and Monotheism: A Hindu Perspective
Ramdas Lamb, Mar. 31, 2011
[excerpt:]
Today, the two most popular theological beliefs in the West are monotheism (the belief in a single all-powerful divinity) and atheism (the belief that there is no divine entity). The Abrahamic religions of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam preach the former, while those who base their world view exclusively on material or scientific rationality tend to adhere to the latter. Yet, in much of the rest of the world, polytheism, or a belief in multiple divinities, has been a long held and popular conviction. Atheists and Western monotheists together denigrate polytheists and their beliefs as either ignorant or pagan. The more conservative monotheists even equate them with evil and demonism. Such narrow minded views and biases have hampered many who adhere to western thinking from understanding the value and validity of polytheistic beliefs for the people who hold them.

Pagan Power in Modern Europe
by Hughes Henry & Ram Swarup (from Hinduism Today magazine, July, 1999)
[excerpt:]
"Pagan renaissance is overdue. It is necessary for Europe to heal its psyche. Under Christianity, Europe learned to reject its ancestors, its past, which cannot be good for its future also. Europe became sick because it tore apart from its own heritage, it had to deny its very roots. If Europe is to be healed spiritually, it must recover its spiritual past--at least, it should not hold it in such dishonor." [Ram Swarup]

Hindu Spirituality Versus Monotheism

by Sita Ram Goel, from his book Defense of Hindu Society (1983, revised 1987)
[excerpt:]
It is an intuition ingrained in the Hindu psyche to inhabit our entire environment - celestial, physical, vegetable, animal, and human - with innumerable Gods and Goddesses. Some of these divinities are installed in temples as icons, and worshipped with well-defined rituals. Some others are worshipped as and where they are invoked. Hindu shastras, saints and sages have paid homage to many Gods and Goddesses in many sublime hymns.

Hindus as “Indian Pagans”
by Koenraad Elst (from his book Who is a Hindu?, 2001)
[excerpt:]
All Indians who were not Parsis, Jews, Christians or Muslims, were automatically Hindus. So, the original definition of Hindu is: an Indian Pagan. Since the earliest use of the term Hindu in India, a clear definition has been given with it, and of every community it can easily be decided whether it fits that definition or not. It does not matter if you do not like the name-tag: if you fit the definition, you fall within the Hindu category. The Hindus have not chosen to be called Hindus: others have conceived the term and its definition, and Hindus simply found themselves carrying this label and gradually accepted it.

And here are a few things I have written in this blog on related topics (including a little something on Zoroastrianism, an appreciation of Arab polytheism, and my two recent posts of excerpts from Plotinus, among other things):