“Muslims have a choice to not be offended by a cartoon” is an opinion that I wholeheartedly disagree with.
Firstly, it’s not just about the cartoon. It’s about the action and intent to disrespect our Beloved Prophet ﷺ.
Reducing it to “just a cartoon”...
means denying the feelings Muslims have when they see the honour of our Prophet ﷺ desecrated.
Because it implies that it’s irrational for Muslims to feel angered with lowly caricatures of the Prophet ﷺ.
Secondly, is there really a choice in not feeling anger towards it?
Even in the second chapter of Sahīh Bukhārī, in the Book of Faith, there are already two hadīth on the necessity of loving the Prophet ﷺ.
One of them being:
The Prophet ﷺ said: "None of you will have faith till he loves me more than his father, his children and all mankind."
Imām ibn Hajar al-Asqalānī when commenting on this hadīth in Fath al-Bārī mentions what Imām al-Qurtubī said:
“Each person who believes in Prophet Muhammad ﷺ with true faith will never be divorced from feeling love to him ﷺ, even though their loves differ in intensity...”
Do people realise that Muslims love the Prophet ﷺ more than any other human being—more than life itself?
So, no. There is no choice in not feeling anger towards those that insult him ﷺ. There is also no compromise in upholding the honour of our Prophet ﷺ.
However, there is a choice in how to respond to these attacks on our Prophet ﷺ.
While we condemn terrorism and violence, it is not enough to remain silent to those that openly insult our Beloved ﷺ.
Instead, we should respond with the manners and wisdom that he ﷺ taught us.
Some people are also responding by boycotting French products, calling out France’s hypocrisy and criticising its laïcité value.
If you don’t like it, there’s really nothing to be said to you except:
موتوا بغيظكم
Thirdly, some people are saying “criticism of Islam is allowed in freedom of speech”.
Okay, but if you think downright mockery of Islam is the pinnacle of criticism, then it makes sense why critics of Islam never have anything intellectually substantive to present against Islam.
Wallāhu a’lam.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Utilitarianism as an ethical system might be unpopular to many people but the effect of reviving the attention given to pleasure has had considerable influence even until today.
This is a thread on 'happiness' and 'pleasure', inshāAllāh.
By equating (or even replacing) happiness with pleasure, the modern man is everyday stripped down to an animal obsessed with fragmentary sensations fueled by the culture of consumerism—that promotes this very profitable lifestyle—and a kind of individualism.
Individualism, as Charles Taylor says in The Ethics of Authenticity, leads to relativism as a moral position where one cannot challenge another's value.
And since one cannot appeal to some higher value or system to rectify the situation...
This is from one of my favourite poems written by Hamzah Fansuri, a 16th century Sufi who wrote Malay poetry on mysticism, and is considered the first known poet of the Malay world.
He was said to be the first person who introduced the genre of ‘syair’ and influenced the entire Sufi poetry of the Malays.
Original text:
‘Ajab sekali akan gajahmina
Tempatnya dā’im di laut Cina
Mencari air ke Tūr Sīnā
Olehnya itu kerjanya hina
Laut Cina terlalu dalam
Itulah bangsa sekalian ‘ālam
Merupakan jan malak dan Ādam
Di laut itu kita nin karam