ON ISLAM: A REPLY TO RICK BROOKHISER
Andrew Bostom
The National Review
ZlOWU2ODVjMmU4YjA3YjBiZGQ4ZGE3MWUwOWI3Mjk=
Nov 11 2009
Responding to an e-mail query I posed to him about a Corner post on
October 26, Rick Brookhiser (on November 3) claimed: "My correspondent
[Bostom] and the Islamists say that Islam is unchanging, because the
Koran says so."
First, let me point out that Mr. Brookhiser has equated me with the
wrong "Islamists." Through at least the mid-1950s, dedicated students
of Islamic doctrine and history — such as myself — were still
referred to as "Islamists." This "Islamism" helped me to understand, in
detail, the other "Islamists" somewhat better than Mr. Brookhiser does.
In 19th-century parlance, "Islamism" and "Islam" were synonymous,
and meant to be equivalent to "Catholicism," "Protestantism," and
"Judaism" — not to "radical" or "fundamentalist" sects of any of
these religions. Sir Henry Layard, the British archeologist, writer,
and diplomat, described an abhorrent spectacle of such "Islamism"
(i.e., Islam) that he witnessed in the heart of Istanbul, during the
autumn of 1843:
An Armenian who had embraced Islamism [i.e., Islam] had returned to his
former faith. For his apostasy he was condemned to death according
to the Mohammedan law. His execution took place, accompanied by
details of studied insult and indignity directed against Christianity
and Europeans in general. The corpse was exposed in one of the most
public and frequented places in Stamboul, and the head, which had been
severed from the body, was placed upon it, covered by a European hat.
[Early Adventures in Persia, Susiana, and Babylonia, London, 1887, pp.
454-55.]
Mr. Brookhiser’s glib November 3 post replying to my e-mail omitted
mention of a published essay I had included that covers the historic
nature of punishment for blasphemy under Islamic Law. This detailed
piece debunks his assumption that the desire to impose Islamic
blasphemy law is somehow limited to a present-era "radical" version of
Islam. According to Brookhiser, "the practice of Islam changed during
the twentieth century, and even in her [i.e., Ayaan Hirsi Ali’s]
lifetime, thanks to the evangelizing of the Muslim Brotherhood, and
the agendas of Saudi Arabia and post-Shah Iran." Here, from my February
2008 essay, is an explanation of how much, sadly, has not changed:
Even in that purely mythical paragon of Islamic ecumenism, Andalusia,
Charles Emmanuel Dufourcq, a pre-eminent scholar of Muslim Spain,
observed that the myriad religious and legal discriminations suffered
by non-Muslim dhimmis (i.e., the non-Muslim Iberian populations
vanquished by jihad, and governed by Islamic law, Shari’a), included
lethal punishments for "blaspheming" the Muslim prophet, or the Koran:
"[For] having insulted the Prophet or blasphemed against the Word of
God (i.e., The Koran)-dhimmis were executed."
At present, these views are not held merely by small groups of
sectarians; they are mainstream Islamic understandings today, most
evident in the contemporary application of blasphemy law in Pakistan.
Citing al-Qayrawani’s 10th-century treatise on Islamic Law (the
Risala), which was applied in Muslim Spain, Pakistan’s Sharia court
has accepted the argument of a modern champion of Islamic blasphemy
law, the esteemed Pakistani scholar Muhammad Asrar, that anyone who
defames Muhammad — Muslim or non-Muslim — must be put to death. Dr.
Patrick Sookhdeo has documented how this orthodox Islamic doctrine —
incorporated into the Pakistani legal code (Section 295-C, "defiling
the name of Muhammad") — has wreaked havoc, particularly among
Pakistan’s small Christian minority community:
The blasphemy law is felt to be a sword of Damocles and has developed
a huge symbolic significance which contributes substantially to the
atmosphere of intimidation of Christians. The detrimental effect of the
law . . . is most dramatically illustrated by the incident at Shanti
Nagar in February 1997 in which tens of thousands of rioting Muslims
destroyed hundreds of Christian homes, and other Christian property,
following an accusation of blasphemy. Furthermore the blasphemy
has engendered a wave of private violence. Equating blasphemy with
apostasy and influenced by the tradition of direct violent action
and self-help which goes back to the earliest times of Islam, some
Muslims feel they are entitled to enforce the death penalty themselves.
Thus the doctrinal and historical context for modern Islamic attitudes
towards the Danish cartoons — including the recent lethal threats
to Kurt Westergaard and Flemming Rose by Chicago-based Muslims —
far transcends what Brookhiser terms "Islamism." Perhaps Brookhiser
designates as "Islamists" the entire religious and political leadership
of the Organization of the Islamic Conference — fierce contemporary
advocates of Islamic blasphemy law (as chronicled for over two decades
by historian David Littman), and representative of over a billion
Muslims from 57 nations identified as "Islamic." Or where else will
Brookhiser’s Diogenes-like search for moderate Islam take him?
— Andrew G. Bostom is a professor of medicine at Brown University
and author of The Legacy of Jihad.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress
