[Music]
uh the relevance of the topic that we're
going to talk about I think is
self-evident in particular and
especially in light of the re recent
Danish cartoon controversy of
2005 and what I'm going to do uh before
getting to the actual gist of my topic
is to give a little bit of a long
introduction talking about miscellaneous
issues the first of these issues before
moving on to the academic side of things
many people mistakenly presume that this
is an issue of free speech that what is
at stake is the freedom of speech and
the right to say what whatever you want
to say but I want to State quite clearly
that this is not the case the issue of
insulting the prophet sallallahu alaihi
wasallam really has absolutely nothing
to do with the freedom of speech even
from a western perspective and this is
because every single Society in the
world every single
Society has certain issues that it
considers taboo it considers
unmentionable sometimes that taboo is
legally enshrined that the government
says you cannot talk about that and
every single country on the face of this
Earth has laws directed against certain
types of speech Lial slander hate speech
Etc sometimes it is not the government
that sets these laws it is societal
norms and cultural values every single
Society has certain issues that are
simply taboo you don't talk about them
or if you do you must pay a price maybe
not going to jail but you will pay a
social stigma you will pay a price of
your value being lost in society for
example in the country that we live in
North America United States of America
racist diet tribes speaking ill of
African-Americans for example it's not
illegal you're not going to go to jail
if you're a racist but what is going to
happen if you open your mouth and you
start criticizing
African-Americans stereotyping them
using the nword what would happen if any
self-respecting
politician dignitary media person use
that word he wouldn't go to jail it's
not against the law but such a person as
you all know what happened to that radio
show host when he used a very vulgar or
a very evil term he was stigmatized he
was considered socially ostracized the
company had to fire him how about the
actor that that plays Kramer on Seinfeld
uh Michael Richards when he in in a
certain uh conf in a certain um uh
comedy show that he was at he just went
into a diet tribe against
African-Americans said something
downright vulgar and evil it's not
illegal he didn't end up going to jail
but socially he was stigmatized to the
level that he had to come forth and
boldly and and and unabashedly say I was
a racist I made a mistake he had to
basically admit that he made a very evil
error nobody stood up to defend him and
said oh you know what he had the right
to say that why don't you allow him to
express his freedom of of thought nobody
did that because socially culturally it
is simply Taboo in North America to
speak speak about these topics similarly
anti-Semitism is Taboo in many countries
you simply cannot speak bad about Jews
without facing the social consequences
Holocaust denial Holocaust denial
ridiculing the Holocaust in fact in 13
Western countries that openly claim to
be Democratic they're not dictatorships
in 13 European countries Holocaust
denial is a crime that that is
punishable by being put in jail you all
know a few years ago when the famous uh
band The Dixie Chicks when they were
performing I think it was in Germany I
forgot where when they were performing
and they ridiculed President Bush and
they said we're really embarrassed and
the Sham that we're from the same state
as President Bush is they didn't go to
jail for that but what happened their
entire career was literally destroyed
overnight to this day there's a stigma
attached to them
again it's not that it's illegal it's
that every society every culture has as
I said a line that you don't cross now
it just so happens that the honor of our
Prophet sallallahu alaihi wasam doesn't
exist beyond that line for them they
have other issues that is beyond that
line but the honor of our Prophet the
sanctity of our religion the Holiness of
what we deem to be sacred is not beyond
that line other things are
and so I want to say it's not an issue
of freedom of speech and I found it very
very ironic that one of the main
standard newspapers of America when the
Danish cartoon controversy broke and I
was following this with uh a lot of
meticulous care I found it very ironic
that in one day on the front cover they
were criticizing they were criticizing
the fact that Muslims had a problem with
this that they need to get up and wake
up and and smell the coffee and
understand our values and on the second
page there was another story of a
certain person who had uttered racist
remarks and how evil he was and how he
should be banned from public speech and
how he had lost his whole face in
society nobody stood up to call for
freedom of speech for that person even
though he was offending a lot of people
so I want to just emphasize as my first
introduction that we need to be very
blunt about this we are not asking for
such things to be made illegal I
understand that in this country it's not
going to be possible but what we are
asking is that they become culturally
taboo self-imposed we call it
self-imposed silencing not legal
silencing and I want to give you another
example and this happened ironically
after the Danish cartoon controversy by
a few months David Irving how many of
you have heard of David Irving not too
many this is a name we need to know as
Muslims not to support I don't support
this person at all but to demonstrate
the double standards that exist in the
society and culture that we live in
David Irving is a famous or I should say
Infamous historian used to teach at
Oxford he has a long resume and he
became Infamous because he wrote many
books talking about the Holocaust and
saying that this figure of 6 million is
too many it wasn't six it was lesser
than that he wasn't denying the
Holocaust what he was doing was
questioning the history of the Holocaust
now I stand here today and I say
unequivocally I do not support David
Irving and I am not a holocaust denier I
am not but what I find amazing was that
nobody not one single person stood up
and said you know what he's a historian
he should have the right to write his
books and papers nobody did that and in
fact laws were passed against him as I
said there are 13 countries that have
anti Holocaust laws not just to deny to
question the Figure 6 million if
somebody says no there were in fact 55
million some countries would put you in
jail for that and so it so happened that
the Jews of all of these countries took
David Irving to court even though he
wasn't living there and and the court
all ruled with the Jews of those
countries so much so that when David
Irving visited the country of Austria a
democratic a secular a Western Country
Austria had already passed a law against
him the court case had already been
closed and shut he was guilty and so as
he stood up to deliver his speech in
Austria lo and behold the police came
he's a British citizen the police came
and arrested him and put him in jail
where he remained for almost one year
for what crime for what crime for daring
to question the figures of the Holocaust
once again I State unequivocally I am
not supporting David Irving in what he
said I am not but what I I am
questioning why is it that not a single
Organization no major media outlet from
The New York Times to the Washington
nothing stood up and said hey look guys
it's just something he said allow him
the freedom of speech why isn't he
allowed to say what he wants to say he's
being put in jail in a foreign country
as a British citizen being jailed in
Austria simply because he wrote an
academic book about the Holocaust
and he remained in jail for almost one
year until finally when he was released
he learned his lesson and now he's
hiding in his house not saying anything
at all he doesn't want to go back to
jail again again we're not supporting
somebody like that neither are we
supporting racists neither are we
supporting anybody of their ilk but what
we are pointing out is something called
double standards why is it then when we
criticize those who make fun of our
Prophet wasallam we're labeled
intolerant we're labeled backward we
labeled this that and yet all of these
people when they say things that are in
all honesty less insulting to the people
who follow those religion the prophet no
matter how much we all of course are
against the Holocaust but it's not
making fun of
M it's not making fun of their prophet
and no doubt for the yahood their
prophet and their God is more sacred to
them than any historical event similarly
for us our Prophet Our God our book is
more sacred and holy for us than any
historical incident and so this person
is put in jail and nobody supports him
everybody is for the fact that he should
be punished every single person so the
double standards are quite clear and I
think that if we want to get involved in
this area in this Arena we need to be
very aware that every society has its
Zone that they feel comfortable poking a
few jokes here and there and then there
are self-imposed lines that respectful
respectable members of any society
simply cannot cross and if they do cross
it they have to they have have to face
the consequences if not legally at least
socially and I just want to point out
before I move on that 50 years ago or
100 years ago it was possible to say
things about African-Americans that you
can't say now it was possible to say
thing about our theological cousins of
the yehud that you cannot say
now what happened they worked they
stried they made it such that those
issues become
taboo a 100 years ago what did
politicians say about African-Americans
not even 150 years ago the governor of
Alabama when Martin Luther King was
giving his his freedom speech 45 years
ago the governor of Alabama was an open
racist open
racist nobody can do that anymore why
because the African-Americans worked
hard they made sure that these issues
become culturally taboo even if they're
legally permissible the same applies to
the Jews 100 years ago 50 years ago
Henry Ford said some things about the
Jews that are considered very
anti-semitic and he published books and
magazines about them this is 50 60 years
ago look what happened to him hardly
anything because the time was different
what did the Jews do what did the yahood
do they they fought they strove they
educated the people and they made these
issues culturally taboo so we as Muslims
need to do the same thing it's not we're
not asking for laws to be passed at
least I am not because I understand the
the the freedom of speech as it works in
this country you're not going to get any
laws passed what we are asking is
cultural
sensitivity be that as the case is the
question arises what do we do in the
light of such harsh attacks I think that
every one of us sitting here today I
think that we all understand that
reacting emotionally is not just an
Islamic it's counterproductive I think
that none of us here justifies what
happened in the wake of the Danish
cartoon controversy in Pakistan in
Lebanon in Syria I think none of us
justifies that we all know bombing a
McDonald's no matter how bad their Fries
Are You Don't Have To Go bomb them you
know we all understand that burning the
Danish EMB Embassy down is not going to
get you anywhere so I'm not going to
talk about that because we all on this
in this room we're all on the same
wavelength that is too extreme that is
ridiculous that is
counterproductive the issue comes about
economic boycott and that is something
can be discussed but that's not again
the point of this particular uh panel
session I'm ambivalent about this I know
that many Middle Eastern countries
boycotted Danish products they said that
it had an impact again uh that's another
topic uh that we need to think about the
issue of reacting in the media these are
all areas that need to be discussed but
that's not the discussion of this panel
the discussion of this panel is the
academic response there are multifaceted
responses Please be aware of that what
we're talking about right now in the
next 40 5 minutes or so is the academic
response so I'd like to begin by
islamically contextualizing such attacks
and these attacks by the way are called
ad hominum attacks ad hominum means
you're attacking the messenger instead
of the message you're attacking the
Persona rather than what he says these
types of attacks realize my fellow
Muslim brothers and sisters that this is
the general trend of all all the
prophets before our prophet sallallahu
alaihi wasallam and including our
Prophet sallallahu alaihi wasallam that
they were rejected they were ridiculed
they were mocked they were made fun of
by their own peoples before other
peoples the famous story
inah which all of you know when the
person is killed by his own people and
he
says oh w to these Servants of God why
is it that every time a messenger comes
to them they have to ridicule and mock
him never does a Prophet come except
that they end
up making fun of him cracking jokes at
him mocking him in other verses in the
Quran Allah subhanahu wa'ta'ala consoles
our Prophet sallallah wasam by telling
him that many were the prophets that
came before you and all of them were
ridiculed and mocked in many verses
including verse 10 Surah 13:32 Surah
21:41 Allah subhanahu waala consoles our
Prophet sallallah alaihi
wasallam we have sent many prophets
before you many were the men that came
before you and what happened to them
is they were mocked and ridiculed they
were talked about in a very mean and
contemptuous fashion and the reason that
I began the academic uh uh talk with
this point is to remind ourselves that
this is not a new phenomenon rather it
goes back to the earliest of times the
very first messenger of
Allah he was mocked severely by his
people he was building something they
had never seen in their lives he was
building a ship in the middle of a
desert he was building this structure
that he claimed could float on water and
they had never seen a ship remember Al
was the first human being to build a
ship and so Allah tells
us every time a person went by
him he
mocked every single time any person went
by he laughed at him and he joked him at
him and this happened for knows how many
hundreds of years similarly Allah
subhana wa tala tells us that the
prophet was called a Madman a lunatic
that the prophet HUD was mocked because
his people said all of your followers
are nothing but Shepherds your followers
are the lowest of the low why should we
respect you every single Prophet was
mocked in a unique and specific way and
that is why Allah subhanahu wa'ta'ala
told our Prophet Sall
wasam in Surah 15 verse
95 we will take care of those who
ridicule and mock you we will take care
of them we will deal with them no matter
what you do you will not be able to
counter their effects leave it to us we
will take care of them and the Quran
tells us that even in the lifetime of
the Prophet sallallah alaihi wasallam a
number of charges were laid against him
that he he was a liar that he was a
Madman that he was a poet that he was
taught by others these are the four main
charges by the way that he was a liar
that he was a Madman that he was a poet
and that he was taught by others the
four main charges that the Quran
mentions and just as a footnote it is
absolutely amazing to me as a researcher
in orientalist institution studying uh
with uh with non-muslim academics it is
absolutely amazing that to this day the
OWN only things they can say about our
Prophet are one of these four they
cannot go beyond this to this day they
cannot invent something other than these
four things to discredit his message and
Allah mentioned it from day one Allah
mentioned it in the Quran and defended
him against these four charges so Allah
subhanahu wa ta'ala tells us that this
is something standard in the past and
you know what he also tells us it will
happen in the future Allah tells us it's
happening in the past it happened in the
past and Allah warns us in the Quran oh
Muslims it's going to happen in the
future it will happen in your time Allah
says in the Quran inah verse
186 verse 186 Allah
says he is addressing us and he says and
of assurity you will
hear you will hear he from the Jews and
Christians and the pagans I.E the rest
of mankind who's left all other
religions you will hear from them much
that will cause
you hurt and grief it's going to cause
you a lot of hurt and pain what is the
response if you are patient and you have
piety of Allah if you are patient and
you have piety of Allah
that is the best
methodology that is the best way to
proceed so contextualizing these attacks
it's nothing new it will happen just
like it happened in the past moving on
cat categorizing these attacks We
contextualize Them point two
categorizing these
attacks realize that there are many
Avenues of attacking our prophet
sallallah alaihi wasallam and we are
concentrating in this talk on attacks
against his character and Persona there
are other ways of attacking Islam to
attack the Quran to attack theology to
attack Shar all of them have their own
defense in this panel we're
concentrating on attacks to the Persona
to the nature to the character of our
Prophet sallallahu alaihi wasallam such
attacks can generally be characterized
in one of three
categories the first of these categories
number one outright lie
sheer
Fabrications absolutely no historical
basis whatsoever and there are many
examples of this for example the charge
that the prophet sallallahu alaihi
wasallam suffered from epilepsy that he
would go into seizures and fits when the
W came down this is utter fabrication
that was started in the Middle Ages by
uh the Spanish Christians another
example that the prophet Sall alaihi
wasallam died in the year 666 of the
Christian era and this was propounded by
amongst other people Peter the venerable
uh the the Abbot of Clooney who was very
active in spreading false information
about Islam and the first person to
think of translating the Quran into a
western language Peter uh the Peter the
venerable was the first person to find
others to translate the Quran into Latin
not to defend it not to give dawa but to
critique it and of the things that he
spread is that the prophet died in the
year 666 what is this gu to tell
anything who tell me what is
666 the Number of the Beast and so he
claimed that the prophet sallai wasallam
was uh was the
Antichrist another outright lie which
was very common in much of uh the Middle
Ages is that the Muslims worship the
prophet sallallahu alaihi wasallam that
his name is not Muhammad but Mah and in
fact in many books written even by
famous English and British Bri writers
in the 13th 14th century we find that
the prophet is referred to as Mah
because Mah is the name of a devil and
so they distort in Christian theology so
they distort the name of Muhammad
sallallahu alaihi wasallam and they say
his name is mAh another outright lie
which has become so common it is now an
expression in the English language which
people use to this day that expression
is if the mountain does not come to
Muhammad the Muhammad will go to the
mountain this is is a common expression
meaning that if the situation doesn't
work out the way I wanted I will adapt
to the situation that's expression now
what is the basis of this expression
there is a lie that was fabricated first
by uh the famous Francis Bacon uh the
famous British author who wrote in 1625
uh where basically he said that the
prophet challenged the quray that the
mountain will come to him and so he
issued the challenge and the mountain
didn't move and so the began to ridicule
and mock him and so he said very well if
the mountain will not come to me I will
go to the mountain and beat the
challenge in that way of course this is
a sheer fabrication no such story ever
happened but it has become legendary in
many books until as I said it is an
expression uh in the English language so
the first category outright lies and
this category was very common in the
Middle Ages in the 17th 18th century but
with the Advent of uh the mod
universities with the Advent of more
interaction with Muslims these types of
lies are getting rarer and rarer and for
those of you who are interested there's
a very interesting book by uh minow
Reeves m i n o u re e v s uh called
Muhammad in Europe a thousand years of
Western myth making Muhammad in europei
wasallam a thousand years of Western
myth making uh published by the NYU
press in 2003 and it gives you a lot of
these uh lies the second category of
attacks are distorted truths they are
not lies but something is factual and
then certain elements are read in
certain things are added certain flavors
are put in which twist the entire thing
around and realize that there is always
a negative way of representing the same
fact the glass is half empty or half
full both are true how do you want to
look at it and the best examp example of
this in our own sources is that of the
woman who came to complain about her
husband to the prophet sallallahu alaihi
wasallam famous story famous had the
woman comes and complains and she
says my
husband beats me when I
pray he forces me to break my fast
doesn't allow me to fast and he misses
fud
regularly so the prophet sallallah
alaihi wasallam called him called the
husband he didn't just base his verdict
on what the wife said act actually if
the husband is just like that it's like
is like doing I mean he doesn't want his
wife to pray or fast just to pray for
himself so the process him call the man
and the man said Yol Allah I am a young
man I come home from the fields and my
wife is standing in prayer I want the
dinner to be ready I want this and that
there so I I tell her to shorten the
prayer and she's fasting every single
day and I would like to be a husband to
her on these days and she doesn't have
to fast enough fast she can fast in
Ramadan so that's why I don't want her
to pray long I don't want you to do
extra Na fasts and so the prophet said
yes okay na fast are your husband's
right he can let you fast he can prevent
you from fasting and you don't have to
pray in your Salah you can read as well
no big deal so the prophet sided with
the husband the third issue of the
husband said we are a family known for
having a sleep problem in other words I
try to wake up but it's something we are
known that we don't wake up uh with
except with great difficulty and so the
prophet said if you really slept
overslept F pray as soon as you wake up
in other words if it's something you try
to wake up and so basically the prophet
sided with the husband in all three
issues now the question arises did the
wife lie the response is no the wife was
truthful the wife was absolutely
truthful but it is a matter of
perspective and so similarly if this can
happen with good Muslim couples as we
all know who are married here definitely
happens all the time if this can happen
with good Muslim couples how about when
somebody doesn't have IM and they read
into the S of course they will distort
of course they will change and twist not
that they're going to lie they will
simply look at it in a Twisted angle and
there are once again many examples here
for example it is a common claim that
the prophet sallallahu alaihi wasallam
in the early Medina phase resorted to
highway robbery that he would stand on
the road or not or basically hide
himself with the sahaba on the road and
every time a caravan went he would just
attack and Rob them and take their goods
and belongings now initial response this
is totally false but you go and you look
up and you find out no it's not totally
false it's just distorted the prophet s
wasallam and the sahabah never attacked
Caravans unconditionally they attacked
the qur there's a big difference there's
a big difference to say that he used to
attack Caravans all over Arabia and he
used to attack the qur the qu yes
definitely the sahabah would definitely
find out where they're heading and
attack their Caravans why because of 133
years of Oppression because of being
expelled from their own countries and
lands because of confiscating their
property The quray Expelled the Muslims
took over all their money the sahabah
had no money when they left for Medina
the mun these people wronged us we have
the right to do this back to them only
the sahaba never attacked Caravans of
other tribes only the qur so it's a
factual statement that has been
distorted another example that the
prophet Prophet sallallah alaihi
wasallam orchestrated a mini Holocaust
of the Jews of Medina specifically the
Banu once again yes indeed it is true
that these Jews of the ban were executed
but nobody gives you the details why
they were accused of treason they were
accused in the battle of theab the
battle of the trench of trying to plot
within the city to overthrow the Muslims
that is treason when they're surrounded
by 10,000 of the quray 10,000 of the
Pagan armies and within Medina all of a
sudden the the the Banu revolts and the
Banu tries to instigate a an internal a
fifth column and they almost succeeded
if Allah had not shown their
plot of course treason in almost every
country has extremely harsh punishments
and so the punishment given to them was
not because they were Jews it was
because they committed treason had
nothing to do with their ethnicity with
their religion so this is true but the
way it's distorted the way it's
presented is a half-truth likewise the
claimed that the prophet was initially
very fond of the Christians and Jews but
later on scorned them factually this is
true initially the prophet wasam was
fond of the Christian jjws but why
because he was hoping that because they
are people of the book they would
recognize him as a prophet and so he was
optimistic that these people will follow
me instead when they tried to kill him
on more than three occasions the yah
tried to kill him when they rejected his
message with the utmost severity when
they sided with the pagans when they
said to the pagans and the idol
worshippers as the Quran tells us they
told the idol worshippers you are more
rightly guided than these monotheists
the the yahood said to those who
worshiped Idols this is a verse in the
Quran you are more rightly guided than
those who worship Allah alone this was
their animosity so yes of course
eventually the prophet sallam cut off
all ties with them all of this are
distorted truths half lies it's a matter
of perspective so when you hear
something like this our job becomes like
the job of the husband when the wife
come came and complained you
contextualize you give a frame of
reference and the third critique we said
there is two right number one outright
lies number two distorted truths number
three and this is perhaps the most
difficult attacking the cultural norms
of the time attacking societal values
that might have been acceptable in 7th
Century Arabia but are not acceptable in
21st century America and this is really
the most difficult uh this is the most
difficult type of uh uh of critique to
defend because the average human being
is not an expert in sociology in history
in ethics the average human being simply
thinks the cultural norms of his or her
civilization are the correct cultural
norms and values and they don't realize
that cultural norms and values change
from time to place the values of of uh
post Victorian England are radically
different than the values of 21st
century America the sexual Moors of
America 200 years ago radically differ
from the sexual Moors of the 21st
century of America these things change
and so 7th Century Arabia had its own
issues which were considered permissible
by Muslims and non-muslims back then the
most classic example slavery the Quran
no doubt gave a lot of rulings for
slavery but let's be honest it didn't
come and totally ban it it did ban
alcohol it banned many things but it
didn't banish slavery it merely gave
conditions now in my humble opinion the
word slavery in the English language
cannot be used in a positive sentence
and the Arabic concept of of of of of
servitude of slavery is radically
different than the Western concept of
slavery and so I think we are fighting a
losing battle if we go into this tangent
and try to defend it for example we just
gloss it over and say that was something
that happened in the past Islam doesn't
require slaves to exist it's not a
necessary condition so these are
cultural values another thing which we
don't have time to talk about but is
definitely something very important
marrying AA at a young age at the age of
nine for example okay and I firmly
believe by the way that was 9 years old
I know that there are other opinions out
there and there's people trying to say
that she was 18 19 I think that
historically speaking it's quite clear
that she was 9 years old and if we open
this door of trying to change our
history uh we're getting into other
problems which I might talk about in
question answer in any case the fact
that the prophet married at the age of n
none of the enemies of Islam found this
problematic Abu J Abu Talib if they was
alive I mean none of the enemies of
Islam found this problematic it was
culturally acceptable just like 200 300
years ago it was absolutely acceptable
for a 14-year-old girl to get married
Romeo and Juliet do you know how old
Juliet is in the play She's 14 years old
Romeo is 15 this is in Shakespeare's
time in Shakespeare's time Romeo and
Juliet are 14 and 15 years old and to
him this is something culturally
acceptable in our times that's something
it's taboo you just don't do that
imagine if in Shakespeare's time it was
14 and 15 backtrack another Thousand
Years the age of n the age of 10 was a
mature age for those climates for those
cultures it's a cultural value that has
changed when she was 9 years old was
very similar to what we would consider a
16 17y old of Our Generation
intellectually mentally uh and so forth
so this is a cultural value that they
are attacking and it is very difficult
to defend because you usually need a
little bit of intelligence in the person
you're talking to the person you're
talking to needs to understand that
culture changes and many people don't
understand that so that is definitely
one of the biggest challenges uh that
happens um I wanted to conclude these
are the three primary uh modes of attack
I wanted to conclude by giving some
examples some lengthy examples we only
have 10 minutes I'll try to summarize
them the first example and by the way
I've given three tactics I'm not being
exclusive these are the primary three
tactics also most of the time an attack
about the against the honor of our
Prophet wasam is a combination of these
three it's not that only one is used a
story is invented
bits of fabrication bits of distorted
truths bits of cultural values and then
presented and so an example of this one
example in a little bit of detail the
story of
Z and the prophet's marriage to Zab now
z b jash was the cousin of the prophet
sallallahu alaihi wasallam and she was
married to Zade and
Zade was the adopted son of the prophet
sallallahu alaihi am as you all know he
had adopted Zade and so he was called ZB
Muhammad and just like in our culture in
our culture American culture adopted
children and biological children are
considered the same morally I'm saying
morally if you try to say no no there's
a difference morally Society will say oh
you're being so mean you're being so
unfair cultural values once again
islamically islamically in the beginning
period of Islam it was the same adopted
children by ological children are the
same and so when the prophet adopted
Zade his name became ZB Muhammad and the
wife of Zade I.E Zab became the
daughter-in-law of the prophet
sallallahu alaihi wasallam and as you
all know daughter-in-laws are permanent
M even if the marriage breaks between
the Son and the wife the father-in-law
always remains a mam this is a strange
thing Subhan Allah the husband becomes a
nonaham after the divorce the husband
becomes a nonaham because after the
divorce is over but the father-in-law
remains a Maham forever so in this case
when Z when Zade and Zab were
married the prophet eventually ended up
marrying Zab what is the orientalist
version the orientalists all agree there
is pretty much IM unanimous consensus
amongst them that the version of events
goes as follows the prophet allegedly
fell in love with Zab uh he went to
visit her in her
house and he opened the or she opened
the door and she was wearing clothes
that typically she would wear when she's
sleeping in other words not fully
dressed up and that the prophet saw her
beauty and was impressed by that and
fell in love with her and when Zade
heard about this then he divorced his
wife so that uh the prophet could marry
uh could marry her and Allah
conveniently revealed according to them
verses that talk about adopting to
children are not real children and you
can marry their wives this is the
non-muslim version of events that the
prophet saw Zab dressed in dressed
inappropriately fell in love with her at
first sight and wanted to marry her so
he concocted these verses to say that uh
adopted children are not biological
children the problem with this sequence
of events is that it is presented as
Undisputed fact from within the Islamic
tradition it's as if this is the only
version of events yet the fact of the
matter is that this version is only one
version of the story and let us call
this for lack of a better term The Love
Story version there are other versions
that exist in classical and medieval
texts which are generally considered
more acceptable and more
authentic in
fact or
the all of the standard references
present a very different picture before
we get into who's right and wrong don't
you think it's hypocritical for a
non-muslim to come and pounce on the
most sensationalist story and ignore all
the other versions and then not even
tell you the other versions exist not
even question the fact that there are
other versions of the story let me give
you for example the earliest T is
written of ABD in 2011 of in 327
the the of the earliest books written of
is the earliest Hadith books written the
thei ofari all of these books give a
radically different story what is the
story there the story there is that the
prophet sallallahu alaihi
wasallam was informed by Allah that
eventually Zab would be his
wife and Zade and Zab began having
arguments and disputes Zade did not want
to remain married to zanab
so Zade came to the prophet wanting a
divorce and the prophet wasam felt
awkward because he knew that when that
divorce takes place and the is over Zab
would become his wife and he himself did
not like the cultural taboo of marrying
a supposed daughter-in-law so he told
Zade fear Allah and don't divorce her he
told Zade not to divorce her and he
feared men's criticism of this cultural
taboo not that he had love of Z rather
he was embarrassed at marrying a
supposed daughter-in-law so he wanted to
stall it Zade wanted a divorce this is
the version of and the prophet says no
you stay with her don't divorce her and
Allah then revealed verses inah why were
you scared of the people the Prophet
this is a verse in the Quan why were you
scared of the
people it is more befitting that you are
scared of Allah shouldn't be embarrassed
at the people's statements there is no
love story
in all of these books the question
arises where does this love story exist
response again we're getting a little
bit academic here but it exists in a
called
M and M by unanimous consensus is not a
scholar he's not a historian he is a
Storyteller he is a Storyteller in other
words he's a tabloid paper he's not the
New York Times literally is a tabloid
paper so the orientalists Imagine and I
I said this at an academic conference
when I was defending the story uh in a
certain context I said imagine walking
into uh a bookstore walking into a
supermarket and ignoring the New York
Times ignoring you know the Washington
Post ignoring every single reputable the
Times magazine Newsweek and getting your
news from the daily Inquirer for example
this is the equivalent of what these
people are doing they ignore every every
single authentic legitimate book and
they go to the most obscure references
how many of you have even heard
of yes it exists it's not a fabrication
meaning the book is not a fabrication
what's inside it might be but the book
itself it exists how many of you are
aware of it nobody but these guys hunt
down these stories extract them and
popularize them so this is one example
there are many other examples as well
which we don't have time to get into
just one sentence about the second
incident is that of the Satanic Verses
the the infamous Satanic Verses firstly
even the name Satanic Verses it is a
western invention it is not found in the
Islamic sources by this name the the
name in Islamic sources is or the story
of the birds and Sir William mu who's
one of famous Scottish orientalists died
1905 he was the first person to give it
the name Satanic Verses and he
popularized it and it is now considered
a fact in non-muslim circles to DARE
deny this fact it's considered to be
you're just being an overzealous Muslim
you're not academically Fair they've
already made up their minds about it
even though once again this story is not
found in any of the famous books of
Hadith it's not found in any of the
reputable sources of our history it's
found in obscure works and it is now
considered to be a complete fact and
I've talked about this in more detail uh
in a CD of mine I don't have time to
discuss it now in conclusion and to
summarize before I hand it over to uh my
dear and esteemed mentor and friend the
key points that I'd like to leave you
with are three
firstly there is a general Trend in the
history of not just our umah of all UMAS
that prophets and righteous men are
ridiculed in one way or another and it
is psychologically gratifying for those
who reject the message to reject it
based upon rejecting the messenger
rather than the message when you cannot
attack the message you begin to attack
the messenger it is something that is
intellectually easy psychologically
gratifying and to be honest
intellectuals don't use this attack you
you deal with the
message this is what you deal with but
to attack the messenger instead of the
message is a tactic that has always been
used by the riffraff by the people by
the masses it's nothing new so realize
this secondly the general rule of the
Quran is that we respond to such
vitriolic attacks with kindness and
intelligence and piety this is the
general rule we respond by showing we
are the better of the two we respond
like Allah
says argue with them in the best Manner
and if you cannot respond with nobility
then my advice is do not respond period
if you cannot respond with nobility and
then do not respond and that is exactly
what Allah says when the average Muslim
is uh offended when the person comes and
tries to ridicule
him when the foolish come and they try
to argue with them they say Sal peace I
have better things to do with my time if
you cannot respond academically
intellectually if you cannot respond
with and manners don't respond just
say and console yourself with the fact
that when you hear these things your
blood boils indeed but it wasn't just
your blood that was boiling the prophet
do you not think he was affected do you
not think he was affected by what people
said Allah said to in the Quran to him
verses 97 to
100 we know that your heart is
constricted because of what they say the
prophet he felt narrow he felt a
constriction in his heart what was the
response praise your lord and prostrate
to him get involved in the worship of
Allah and worship Allah until death
comes to you you're not going to respond
to every single Riff Raff you're not
going to respond to every Barking Dog
let them bark you have better things to
worry about this is what our Prophet is
told so don't let it dishearten you to
the level that you you you close your
productivity you do what you can and you
aim for Higher Goals and the last and
final point if you do respond do so with
academic Integrity don't change the
religion don't distort our own history
because not only is this impermissible
and unethical you're opening up a very
very dangerous door if you cannot defend
except by distorting your own own
religion then in all honesty you are
opening up a more evil door than what
those people said if you cannot defend
except by distorting or denying what is
true then you are not qualified to
defend and leave it to those who are
qualified in conclusion the final point
I'd like to stress that responding to
orientalist critique is merely one way
of defending the honor of the Prophet
sallallahu alaihi wasallam there aren
many many many ways of Defending his
honor and to be brutally honest the best
way to defend the honor of our Prophet
Sall alai wasam is not through academic
debates it's not through fancy rhetoric
it's not through meeting people and
discussing things with them but rather
through simple and sincere action
through humility through humbleness
through sincerity through good the best
way to defend the honor of the prophet
sallallahu alaihi wasallam is to follow
his Sunnah and to show and to
demonstrate to people that indeed our
messenger was nothing
except that is the best way to defend
the honor of our Prophet Muhammad