The Jewel of Medina, Freedom Of Speech

I nearly forgot about this story, but it would be remiss of me not to mention the story of the book that nearly never was .....

The Jewel of Medina

"The Jewel of Medina" is a novel supposedly based loosely upon the life of the 'child bride' of Muhammad, A'isha. 

As usual, the followers of the religion of peace, have immediately issued threats and tried to commit acts of violence, with three men arrested for attacking the 'publishers' in the UK. The book looked to have been dropped in the UK, because all the publishing houses are terrified of the lunatics, who claim that we should treat Muhammad and his life as sacred ..... however one brave publishing house Gibson Square lifted 'again the tattered flag it found lying on a stricken field'. 

The Americans followed a very similar route, with a Professor of Islamic studies Denise Spellberg, allegedly starting the controversy, which she refuted, but once again after initially being ditched, the book was picked up by Beaufort Books who pushed through the publication. 

However just when it looked as though that was that, and freedom of speech had been defended, came the news that the publication in the UK had been 'postponed' after attacks on the staff and offices of Gibson House ..... sad news for free speech and just a sign of the grip of the censorship by fear that Muslims now instil into the western societies. 

The Muslims who treat Muhammad and his life as too sacred to touch, should actually look to their holy book the Quran (18:110), where, it's said, God instructed Muhammad to tell others: "I am only a mortal like you." ..... even Muhammad didn't think his life was part of the religion! You can still be a radical Islamic person without violence and threat .... 

Sami_Moubayed

Sami Moubayed a Syrian political analyst, writes in the Washington Post about a controversy over 80 years ago, which I will loosely retell. 

"In April 1928, a 20-year-old girl named Nazira Zayn al-Din wrote a book called "Unveiling and Veiling", saying she had read, understood and interpreted the Holy Koran. Therefore, she claimed that she had the authority and analytical skills to challenge the teachings of Islam's clerics, and that in her opinion 'the veil was un-Islamic'. If a woman was forced to wear the veil, then she should go to court to get her rights. She also said that men and woman should mix socially because this develops moral progress, and that both sexes should be educated in the same classrooms. 

Men and women, she said, should equally be able to hold public office and vote in government elections. They should study the Koran themselves (not via an old Mullah), and finally, Zayn al-Din compared the "veiled" Muslim world to the "unveiled" one, saying the unveiled one was better because reason reigned, rather than religion.  

Her book apparently caused a thunderstorm in Syria and Lebanon. It was the most outrageous assault on traditional Islam, coming from Zayn al-Din, who was also a Druze (and therefore suspect as a Muslim, according to many Sunni scholar's). However the book went into a second edition within two months, and was translated into several languages. 

The Muftis of Beirut and Damascus, wrote against her, arguing that she did not have the authority to speak on Islam and dismiss the veil as un-Islamic. Nobody, however, accused her of treason or blasphemy. They accused her of bad vision resulting from bad Islamic education. Some clerics banned her book but others, such as the Syrian scholar Mohammad Kurd Ali, actually promoted it, buying 20 copies for the Arab Language Assembly and writing a favorable review.  

However, and this is the important point, despite the uproar, which lasted for over two years, the Muslim establishments did not let the issue get out of hand. They did not lead street demonstrations for weeks, and Zayn al-Din was still free to roam the streets of Syria and Lebanon, without being harassed or killed by those who hated her views. 

The leaders of Islam in 1927-30 were by far too busy to occupy themselves, and the Muslim community at large, with the ideas contained in a book. They had to attend to their mosques, run their charity organizations, answer theological questions, cater to Muslim education, lead political issues, and fight the French." 

In other words oh Muslim world, grow up, embrace discussion and debate, and win the argument by logic, not violence, threats, and intimidation. Mr Moubayed also went on to say that "After all, we in the Muslim world have not contributed anything to human progress in the past 500 years. We should write and promote our history, then concentrate on science, arts, literature, and freedom of the mind. We should learn to talk to, rather than demonstrate against, those who think and act differently, and those who wrong us." 

It's a pity that his voice seems to be crying in a wilderness of ignorance and illiteracy, that so often surrounds any so called debate with Islam.