 |
Al-Ahram Weekly 18 - 24 May 2000 Issue No. 482 
|
||
Published in Cairo by AL-AHRAM established in 1875 |
| ||
|
Al-Ahram Weekly 18 - 24 May 2000 Issue No. 482
|
||
| Published in Cairo by AL-AHRAM established in 1875 |
| ||
Egypt Region International Economy Opinion Culture Focus Features Heritage Travel Living Sports Profile People Time Out Chronicles Cartoons Letters A crusade of the mind
By Omayma Abdel-LatifEl-Sayed Abdel-Fattah Khodeir, who heads the Translation and Publication Committee at the Islamic Research Institute of Al-Azhar, is a member of the committee appointed by the Sheikh of Al-Azhar to assess the novel. The committee's verdict will be reviewed by the Higher Committee of the Islamic Research Institute, which comprises 35 members, ten of whom are scholars from Islamic countries other than Egypt. How does he assess the controversy between Islamists and secularists?
"I would place the current controversy within the framework of cultural hostility generated because the understanding of the sanctity of Muslim symbols and texts seems to have slipped beyond the grasp of some intellectuals. Such derisive attitudes towards all things Islamic arise from a sense of cultural superiority on the part of secular intellectuals. In fact, some of the writings in defence of the novel are religiously and culturally insensitive. A pertinent question to ask would be why they should have enough courage to defame the Prophet and the word of God yet cannot criticise the rulers and defame them in the same way... None of them can do that. The reason for the uproar is rooted in a kind of religious illiteracy, and the illiteracy in manners that permeates our everyday discourse. The consequence of this is a complete ignorance of each other's rights, an ignorance that has come to constitute a serious social malaise.
"If we try to understand the mechanisms by which prejudices against Islam were formed in Europe, we find that many distorted images of Islam were invented and reproduced in European culture primarily through fictional forms in the 16th and 17th century. Fiction is a form of knowledge, and is treated by many as a repository of true stories.
"I am in no position to prevent anyone from thinking as freely as they want. You can think and talk as much as you want but don't infringe upon the territory of my beliefs and sacred symbols, don't hold them in contempt or give malicious misrepresentations of the Prophet. Acknowledge the universal principal that your freedom ends where mine starts. Not to do so undermines any etiquette that might govern the value of freedom of thought. One can also sense in the discourse [of secular intellectuals] a residue of hatred and blind prejudice against Islam. And what is, if anything, even worse, is that in their narrative they let slip occasional stereotypes of Muslims who -- according to them -- are the embodiment of irrational fanaticism. And of course they reserve a special place in their demonisation for the Sheikhs of Al-Azhar.
"Errors about Islam have grave consequences. Al-Shaab, of course, does not represent Islam, and their campaign was not without its own agendas, including the settling of personal accounts and conflicting political interests, made in the name of Islam. But Islam is in no need of anyone to defend it. The book has been around since 1983. The main reason for the uproar is that the state decided to publish it at the taxpayers' expense. Why should these kinds of books be published at the state's expense. If they are delegated to select novels for publication, surely one criteria of the novels they select should be that they accord with our social values.
"Perhaps there could have been other ways of dealing with the issue, ways that might have better brought the facts of the case to the fore. Who, after all, are we defending Islam against? These intellectuals are Muslims too, but they have failed to engage themselves with Islam. They live in their ivory towers, failing to understand that any attack on the tenaciously held sacred symbols of our society carries with it a social stigma. They lack tolerance, or the desire for mutual understanding, and their implacable hostility to Islam precludes even the possibility of intellectual rapprochement between the two camps. But what is most saddening is that there is a tendency on the secular intellectuals' part to judge Islam by Western criteria. They act in a culturally arrogant manner.
"Let me state the case clearly. We were the ones who came under attack, it was our symbols and sacred text that were called into question, our Prophet that was defamed, our religion demonised. They write as they want. We are the ones being terrorised by their deliberate destruction of our symbols in the name of breaking taboos. Freedom of opinion is not a synonym for being scornful of religion. This attack on us amounts to a crusade of the mind, a crusade against all those who hold views different to theirs. And in all fairness, it must be admitted that such freedom must be conditioned by the social and political context in which arguments are conducted."
