Tuesday, May 30, 2006

Adakah Pengikut Awal Yesus sengaja Mengisytiharkan keTuhanan-Nya?


Adakah Pengikut Awal Yesus Mengisytiharkan KeTuhananNya?

Kita telah pertimbangkan dakwaan The Da Vinci Code bahawa Yesus pernah berkahwin dan adanya kekurangan serius dalam dakwaan itu. Mark Roberts memerhati, “Kebanyakan orang yang menyokong thesis bahawa Yesus pernah berkahwin mempunyai satu agenda iaitu menafikan keunikan Yesus, terutama sekali keTuhananNya.”

Ini sememangnya benar dalam The Da Vinci Code. Ia bukan sahaja mengatakan Yesus pernah berkahwin, malah ia mempersoalkan sama ada pengikut-pengikutNya yang paling awal percaya Yesus adalah Tuhan.

Menurut Teabing, doktrin keTuhanan Kristus adalah keputusan hasil dari undian dari Majlis Nicaea. Dia menegaskan lagi, “Sehingga ketika itu dalam sejarah, Yesus hanyalah dilihat sebagai nabi manusia … seorang yang berwibawa dan berpengaruh, tapi hanyalah manusia semata-mata.” Benarkah pengikut-pengikut awal Yesus hanya percaya yang Dia hanyalah manusia? Jika kawan kita yang bukan Kristian bertanyakan soalan begini, marilah kita ambil peluang ini untuk menjelaskan siapakah Yesus sebenarnya!

Pertemuan Majlis Nicea diadakan pada tahun 325 T.M. Selama 3 abad sebelumnya, pengikut Yesus telah lama mengisytiharkan keTuhananNya. Sumber penulisan paling awal kita mengenai riwayat Yesus dijumpai dalam Perjanjian Baru. Dokumen-dokumen abad pertama berulang kali mengesahkah keTuhanan Kristus. Contohnya dalam surat Paulus ke jemaat Kolose, Paulus menyatakan, “Sebab dalam Dialah berdiam secara jasmaniah seluruh kepenuhan keTuhanan” (2:9; lihat juga Roma 9:5; Fil. 2:5-11; Tit. 2:13). Yohanes juga bertulis, “Pada mulanya adalah Firman… Firman itu adalah Tuhan … Firman itu telah menjadi manusia dan tinggal di antara kita" (1:1,14).

Banyak juga pengesahan mengenai keTuhanan Yesus dalam penulisan tokoh-tokoh utama gereja sebelum Majlis Nicea. Pada awal abad kedua, Ignatius dari Antioch menulis “Tuhan kita, Yesus Kristus.” Begitu juga dengan pengesahan lain yang serupa dijumpai dalam karya tulisan ini. Ada juga kesaksian dari yang bukan Kristian pada abad kedua bahawa umat Kristian mempercayai Kristus adalah Tuhan. Pliny the Younger dalam tulisannya kepada maharaja Trajan pada tahun 112 T.M. mengatakan umat Kristian awal “mengamalkan perjumpaan pada hari tertentu … mereka nyanyi lagu pujian syukur kepada Kristus, seolah-olah kepada seorang Tuhan.”

Jika kita berkongsi maklumat ini dengan rakan bukan Kristian berbekalkan rasa rendah diri, kita dapat membantu mereka untuk melihat bahawa umat-umat Kristian mempercayai keTuhanan Yesus berabad-abad sebelum tibanya Majlis Nicea.

Kita boleh menjelaskan kenapa mereka begitu yakin bahawa Yesuslah Tuhan sehingga mereka lebih sanggup terkorban daripada menafikanNya. Kita juga boleh membantu kawan kita menaruh kepercayaan kepada Yesus bagi diri mereka sendiri.

“Kerana Allah bgitu mengasihi manusia di dunia ini, sehingga Dia memberikan AnakNya yang tunggal, supaya setiap orang yang percaya kepadaNya tidak binasa melainkan mendapat hidup sejati dan kekal” (Yohanes 3:16)

Friday, May 19, 2006

Zainah Anwar : Change of mindset

http://www.nst.com.my

Zainah Anwar: Changing the Muslim mindset *19 May 2006*


IN a seminal speech on Islam Hadhari and women's rights at the Women's Institute of Management last year, the Prime Minister said the biggest stumbling block to women's progress and development in the area of rights and equality relates to mindsets and attitudes towards women.

To an audience of high- achieving women, he admitted that there were "elements within our society who are uncomfortable with the advancement of women. They try to obstruct the progress of women through barriers and strictures legitimised in the name of religion or culture."

In making a plea for ijtihad (reinterpretation), he stated that "the problems confronting contemporary Muslim societies today are not the problems of the sixth century, and the solutions do not lie with the notion of a Syariah purportedly final and complete 1,400 years ago, particularly in the case of women".

"The notion that the Islamic concept of law is absolute and hence immutable has resulted in intellectual inertia among some scholars, noticeably on the subject of women and, sadly, in a continued injustice towards them.

"When the history of the 21st century is recorded," he said, "let Malaysia be mentioned in the context of not only progress and achievement for the country but also the advancement, empowerment and emancipation of women."

We in the women's movement could not have asked for a stronger, clearer policy statement from the Prime Minister. The challenge remains in how we translate these words into deeds. This is a tall order for Malaysia.

The statement last week by the Mufti of Johor, Datuk Noh Gadut, that it is forbidden for Muslim men to be house-husbands is a reflection of the mindset the Prime Minister was talking about.

Changing realities stare us in the face and our religious leaders and Islamist ideologues are stuck in an understanding of gender roles and Islamic knowledge constructed within the social context of the mediaeval age. They do a disservice to Muslims and the country.

Many Muslim scholars, whether from this region or from the Middle East or South Asia, are puzzled how Malaysia could be so modern and progressive in many ways when the many Muslims they meet at academic meetings and international conferences are so conservative theologically and ideologically.

For those who admire Malaysia's success story, the absence of academic rigour and the dogmatism displayed are painful and embarrassing. They are beginning to question the international assumption that Malaysia is indeed the model progressive Muslim country it is touted to be. At the economic development level, yes, they say, but at the Islamic scholarship and ideological level, it is a perilous no.

A member of a team of Islamic officials sent by the Government to visit several Arab countries to look at their laws on apostasy said he was surprised to find the ulama there far more enlightened than ours, and that not a single country he visited prescribed the death penalty for apostasy.

He said every single Arab scholar he met was unequivocal about the Quranic injunction that there can be no compulsion in religion. A personal change of faith does not merit any form of state punishment.

Dr Hiba Rauf, the well- known Islamist woman leader from Egypt, asked me at a meeting in Cairo two years ago why Malaysian students at al-Azhar University were so closed-minded.

She was surprised as she had thought Malaysia was modern and progressive. This same observation was made by an Indonesian activist who studied at al-Azhar. He said every single Malaysian student he met there, "down to the last 8,000th", was "ultra-conservative".

He took it as a personal challenge to engage with them, spending hours in long debates on women's rights, democracy, human rights, differences of opinion, all using arguments drawn from Islam's rich theological and juristic heritage.

Some of them, he said, did change their opinions, or were at least willing to debate and think more critically on these issues. He observed that the closed- mindedness of the Malaysian students was not so much ideological but largely because they were exposed only to conservative traditionalist thinking in Islam.

He said they had never read the more enlightened works of Islamic scholars, from the classical period, let alone contemporary times, that he had been exposed to as a student of Islam in a Nahdlatul Ulama pesantren and later at the State Islamic University in Jakarta.

The students' mindset, he said, made them easy targets for recruitment into Pas and Islamist movements pushing for the supremacy of Syariah rule. While the Islamic institutes in Indonesia are already producing the second generation of enlightened progressive scholars, policymakers and activists who are challenging and resisting demands for a hardline understanding of Islam and calls for an Islamic state and Syariah rule by newly established militant and conservative Islamist groups, Malaysia is hard-pressed to find such progressive individuals educated within our Islamic education system.

The failure of the Government's Islamisation project to produce enlightened thinkers and activists, or Islamic laws and policies is largely due to the absence of the intellectual capital needed to spearhead the agenda.

In pushing his Islam Hadhari project, a modern and progressive Islam, Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi must search for the enlightened software — the first- class mindset — that is so necessary to drive the change.

In the wrong hands, his Islam Hadhari agenda — just as with Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad's Islamisation policy — could be hijacked by the Maududi and Syed Qutb ideologues and the traditionalist ulama who still dominate the Islamic establishment here.

There are lessons to be learnt from Indonesia and Morocco, in education reform, and from Iran, where an Islamic revolution has failed to deliver on its promises of justice, freedom and prosperity.

So too from among the many Islamic scholars who have been forced to live in exile in the West because their lives were endangered and their houses firebombed by fellow Muslims back home.

Many of these scholars are now at the forefront of the new Islamic scholarship emerging in the last 15 years or so, generating new possibilities of meaning in our engagement with the Text and the Tradition in the light of the realities of our lives today, the circumstances we live in, and the challenges we face.

In Indonesia, besides the abundance of progressive scholarship by their own thinkers, new writings by Muslim scholars in English, French, Arabic and Persian, are translated into Bahasa Indonesia within months of publication.

They are consumed voraciously by students, scholars and activists, huddled together in numerous "diskusi" (discussion) groups on campuses, in pesantren and in the community.

The writings of feminist Islamic scholars such as Amina Wadud, Ziba Mir-Hosseini, Asma Barlas, Leila Ahmad, Fatima Mernissi and Riffat Hassan, and even Sisters in Islam's letters-to-the-editor and Question and Answer booklets are among student reading materials in courses on Islam and gender, contemporary Islamic thought, Islamic jurisprudence and Quranic Interpretation.

Gender studies are integrated into every discipline. The Gender Studies Centre in the Islamic universities in Jakarta and Yogyakarta train teaching staff and students in gender and Islam.

The undergraduate and graduate programmes offer courses in Gender and Theology, Gender and Islamic Jurisprudence, Family and Gender in Religious Perspective.

A new Master's programme in Gender and Religion has been introduced at the State Islamic University in Jakarta. In courses taught by these progressive scholars, a diversity of opinions from a diversity of sources and periods are studied and debated.

Students are taught to understand critically and analytically the methodology and processes of textual and legal interpretation within historical and contemporary social and legal contexts.

Law is not taught as dogma, but as socially constructed within particular times and circumstances. The source may be divine, but the knowledge produced is a human construct to serve the cause of justice of that period.

None of the Islamic studies or Islamic law faculties in Malaysia comes close to this pedagogy, even in offering a basic course on Contemporary Islamic Thought.

This is not surprising. An ideological battle is taking place between those who demand an Islamic state asserting different rights for men and women, for Muslims and
non-Muslims and those who believe in a democratic state with equal rights,
fundamental liberties and justice for all, and who celebrate the blessings
of this multi-ethnic and multi-religious country.

Where Islamic studies in Malaysia is concerned, the Islamic state ideologues
are in control.At the street level, the mob rule displayed in Penang last Sunday took this ideological battle to another level.

The police, in asking law- abiding citizens engaged in a rational and peaceful discussion on constitutional matters to consider aborting their meeting, set a dangerous precedent. Those who threatened peace and public order were allowed to prevail over those who believe in dialogue and the Constitution.

Thursday, May 18, 2006

Is this the death of religious tolerance?

From Outlook India

Malaysia demolishes century-old Hindu temple
KUALA LUMPUR, APRIL 21 (AFP)
Malaysian authorities have demolished a century-old Hindu temple in Kuala Lumpur, bulldozing the building as devotees cried and begged them to stop, Hindu groups said today.

The Malaimel Sri Selva Kaliamman Temple was reduced to rubble after Kuala Lumpur's city hall sent in bulldozers, they said.

In a complaint to police the temple's vice president, Subramaniam Ragappan, said about 300 devotees were praying Tuesday when the machines arrived, accompanied by police and city hall officials.

"We were forced to stop our prayers and (rituals) halfway as they proceeded to tear down the temple," he said in a copy of the complaint obtained by AFP.

A copy of a letter from city hall to a local lawmaker, who had asked for the temple to be left intact, said the demolition was going ahead to make way for a building project.

City hall officials were not immediately available for comment.

Subramaniam said city hall tried in 2001 and again in 2004 to tear down the building, which was on government land, but had been dissuaded by politicians.

"Everybody was crying and saying how could the government do this, but they still broke the temple," he told AFP.

"For 100 years we prayed there. How could they come to remove the temple?" he said, adding that they were given just one day's notice of the demolition.


--

The police report lodged by Subramaniam A/L Ragappan, from Klang:

Hindu Temple breaking criminal act by DBKL

NAME : SUBRAMANIAM A/L RAGAPPAN
ADDRESS : --NO I/C : -- AGE : --
OCCUPATION : ENGINEERING EXECUTIVE
DATE : 18.4.2006 Pantai No:3356/06

Telephone : --

This is my Police Report lodged against Dato Bandar (Mayor) of Kuala Lumpur Dato Haji Ruslin bin Abd Rahman and the Director of En.Rolan forcement DBKL En.Rolan. This report is as a result of the "cleansing" and demolishment of Kuil Malaimel Sri Selva Kaliamman Temple by the Kuala Lumpur City Hall(DBKL).

On the 29th March 2006 a notice was served on a foreign laborer working at the temple premises by the Enforcement Office of DBKL giving notice to the Chairman Mr.Subramaniam a/l Kanniah to demolish the abovementioned temple within 14 days.

On behalf of the temple we had made various representations to DBKL appealing against their decision.

Our Member of Parliament for Lembah Pantai who is also the Women,Family and Community Development Minister, through her special officer had written to DBKL appealing on the "cleansing" (demolishment)of our temple. A similar
appeal was lodged by the ruling United Malays National Organization(UMNO)Division leader for Lembah Pantai.

On the 16th April 2006 at about 11.30am we were served with a letter dated 14th April 2006 by DBKL at the temple premises addressed to the Service Centre of the said Lembah Pantai member of Parliament and Minister informing
that their appeal for stay of demolishment were rejected.

Today 17th April 2006 about 300 devotees of Kuil Malaimel Sri Selva Kaliamman Temple had been performing prayers and yagam (rituals) in the temple premises since 6.30 am. At about 9.30 am a group of about 40 Police officers, 50 DBKL enforcement officers, 20workers from TNB and JBA
(electricity and waterworks) and numerous unknown individuals who were behaving suspiciously came with bulldozers and excavators to demolish our temple.

The devotees were in complete shock when the authorities gave us 15 minutes to leave the place or else we would be arrested for public disorder. All the devotees pleaded and most of them were in tears trying to persuade and beg
the Police and DBKL enforcement officers from demolishing our temple. Our pleas fell into deaf ears as the Police threatened to use high handed tactics (arrest) if we don't leave the premises. Mr.Arumugam our Treasurer
immediately contacted our Lawyer Mr.Uthayakumar who had requested to speak to the Head of the enforcement unit at the site but the officer refused to speak to our lawyer. Mr.Uthayakumar then asked us to inform the officer to
hold on until he arrives as he was attending to a matter at the Shah Alam Session Court but that too fell onto deaf ears. We even pleaded for a one(1) day halt to the demolishment but our pleas were ignored when they started
tearing the temple and defiling the 90 steps leading to the temple which was
situated on a hill top more that 300 feet hill.

We were forced to stop our prayers and yagam (fire ritual) half way as they proceeded to tear down the temple and demolish temple structures. Our lives were in serious danger as their violent demolishment of the temple using
excavators, bulldozers and other heavy machines was a threat to us as we risked being bulldozed from the hilltop ourselves. We could have also fallen more than 300 feet to the ground. Senior citizens and children slipped in the mud which was caused by the defiling of the 90 steps leading to the hilltop temple.

Persistent begging by some senior citizens who were in tears and horrified by the inhumane acts of the authorities saw some fruits when the officers
assured us that they will not deface the deities but the buildings and structures. However when they completed their mission of "cleansing the temple" which took about 1 ½ hours, they told us that they will come back in
3 days to demolish and destroy/deface the deities if we don't do it ourselves.

This temple has its history of more than 100 years when the Indian Laborers began settlement in Malaya during the British Colonial time and the current temple was part of a rubber estate known as Latex Estate. Over the last 30
years this temple has been managed by the Long House (Rumah Panjang) settlement community and has more than 10,000 devotees who frequent the temple weekly.

The action by DBKL in demolishing our temple is an inhumane, violent, degrading act and against our peaceful and quiet practice of our religion. This ancestral worship which has been going on for more than 100 years has
come to an abrupt end as a result of the unlawful act of the Mayor and DBKL.

The Mayor and the Director of Enforcement failed to look into the history of this temple and suddenly proclaimed this temple to be sitting on Government land illegally.

I now lodge this report against the Mayor of KL and the Director of Enforcement of DBKL for criminal offences committed under section 295 (Injuring or defiling a place of worship with intent to insult the religion
of any class) Section 296 ( disturbing a religious assembly) and section 298A of the Penal Code (causing disharmony disunity or feelings of enmity,
hatred or ill-will or prejudicing ect, the maintenance of harmony or unity on grounds of religion) and against Article 11 of Federal Constitution .

I urge the Attorney General of Malaysia to immediately prosecute the Mayor of Kuala Lumpur and the Head of Enforcement Unit DBKL and all other criminals and prevent them/their agents from making their second trip to
destroy and deface our deities which is still on the hilltop.

SUBRAMANIAM A/L RAGAPPAN

____

Wednesday, May 17, 2006

The Reconciliation Walk

"The Reconciliation Walk is an interdenominational grassroots movement of Western Christians,...retracing the route of the First Crusade, apologizing to Muslims, Jews and Eastern Christians for the atrocities of the Crusades -- foremost among them, the misuse of the name and message of Jesus."

The organizers of the Reconciliation Walk are unaware of any previous, " serious effort to repair this damage" caused by the crusades. The first crusaders set off for Jerusalem in 1096-APR, from the cathedral in Cologne. Exactly 900 years later, on Easter Sunday, about 150 walkers departed from the same cathedral. Their first stop was a Turkish Mosque and teaching center. Their leader explained that the walkers had come to apologize for the atrocities committed in the name of Christ during the Crusades. Then they read a letter of apology in German, Turkish and English. They were "greeted with loud, sustained applause." The Imam responded: "When I heard the nature of your message, I was astonished and filled with hope. I thought to myself, 'whoever had this idea must have had an epiphany, a visit from God himself.' It is my wish that this project should become a very great success."

During the Crusades, the entire Jewish population of Cologne was destroyed. In remembrance of this, the walkers went to the local synagogue. Since it was a Jewish holy day, the walkers did not go inside; they prayed and moved on.

Individual walkers joined the group for as few as 10 days or as much as many months at a time. Following the ancient routes of the Crusades, one team passed through France, Switzerland, Austria, Italy, Slovenia Croatia, Montenegro, Albania, Macedonia and Greece. A second team set out from Germany and passed through Slovakia, Hungary and Bulgaria. The teams met at Istanbul, Turkey on 1996-OCT-10. The Deputy Mufti of Istanbul, the Chief Rabbi, the Representative of the Ecumenical Patriarch (head of the Orthodox church) and the Deputy Mayer welcomed the team with warmth and appreciation. "In towns and villages, people spilled out of their houses and applauded the team as they passed." They visited countless cities, towns, and villages in Turkey during 1996 and 1997.

In mid-1998, a team arrived in Antakya, Turkey (once called Antioch) on the 900th anniversary of the conquest of that city. By 1998-SEP, they had reached Syria and Lebanon. About 500 participants reached Jerusalem on 1999-JUL-15, the 900th anniversary of the killing of about 60,000 Jerusalem residents and the destruction of the city.

About 2,000 Christians from 27 countries have participated in this walk. Most are Evangelical Protestants. They have worn T-shirts and caps that say "I apologize" in Arabic or Hebrew.

The Reconciliation Walk statement of apology reads:

"Nine hundred years ago, our forefathers carried the name of Jesus Christ in battle across the Middle East. Fueled by fear, greed and hatred, they betrayed the name of Christ by conducting themselves in a manner contrary to His wishes and character. The Crusaders lifted the banner of the Cross above your people. By this act they corrupted its true meaning of reconciliation, forgiveness and selfless love.

On the anniversary of the First Crusade we also carry the name of Christ. We wish to retrace the footsteps of the Crusaders in apology for their deeds and in demonstration of the true meaning of the Cross. We deeply regret the atrocities committed in the name of Christ by our predecessors. We renounce greed, hatred and fear, and condemn all violence done in the name of Jesus Christ.

Where they were motivated by hatred and prejudice, we offer love and brotherhood. Jesus the Messiah came to give life. Forgive us for allowing His name to be associated with death. Please accept again the true meaning of the Messiah's words:

'The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because He has anointed me to bring good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim release to the captives and recovery of sight to the blind, to let the oppressed go free, to proclaim the year of the Lord's favor.' "

Sunday, May 14, 2006

Adakah Injil sumber sejarah yang sahih?

Bagaimana pula jika ada tanggapan bahawa sumber-sumber Al-kitabiah ini tidak boleh dipercayai?

Walaupun tiada asas sejarah untuk dakwaan Constantine mengubahsuai Injil-injil Perjanjian Baru, kita kena tanya, “Adakah Injil-injil Al-kitab itu sumber yang boleh dipercayai berkenaan dengan informasi Yesus sejarah?” Menurut Teabing, sejarahwan novel fiksyen, “Hampir kesemua yang diajar oleh bapa-bapa kita mengenai Kristus adalah palsu” (235).

Adakah ini benar? Jawapan ini banyak bergantung kepada kesahihan biografi-biografi Yesus yang paling awal – Injil Matius, Markus, Lukas dan Yohanes.


Setiap Injil ini ditulis dalam abad pertama. Walaupun secara teknikal, nama penulisnya tidak diumumkan, ada bukti kukuh dari penulis-penulis dari abad kedua seperti Papias (125 T.M) dan Irenaeus (180 T.M.) yang menghubungkan setiap Injil itu kepada pengarang tradisinya. Jika kesaksian mereka benar (dan tiada sebab untuk kita meraguinya), maka Markus, sahabat Petrus, menulis khutbah-khutbah Petrus. Dan Lukas, sahabat Paulus, yang mengkaji secara mendalam biografi yang tertera namanya. Akhirnya Matius dan Yohanes, dua daripada pengikut Yesus, menulis buku menurut kesaksian mereka. Jika ini benar, maka segala perkara yang direkodkan dalam Injil-injil secara langsung atau tidak langsung berdasarkan testimoni saksi.

Adakah pengarang-pengarang Injil berniat untuk memastikan kesahihan rekod riwayat Yesus? Adakah mereka ini berminat dengan fakta sejarah atau agenda teologi membayangi tujuan mereka dari mengisahkan segala yang benar-benar berlaku?

Craig Blomberg, seorang sarjana Perjanjian Baru membuat komen bahawa prolog Lukas (Lukas 1:1-4) “ditulis sama seperti prolog pengajian sejarah dan kerja biografi lama lain yang diterima umum”. Memandangkan genre kedua-dua Matius dan Markus sama dengan genre Lukas, maka adalah munasabah niat mereka untuk menulis sejarah yang tepat akan menyerupai tujuan Lukas juga. Akhir sekali, Yohanes memberitahu kita bahawa tujuan dia menulis Injil ini agar orang akan percaya bahawa Yesus ialah Penyelamat, Anak Tuhan dan kalau mempercayaiNya akan hidup dalam namaNya (20:31). Walaupun pernyataan ini melihatkan agenda teologi, Blomberg menunjukkan bahawa “jika anda ingin kepercayaan yang menyakinkan, teologi itu hendaklah mengalir dari sumber sejarah yang benar”.

Yang menariknya, sejarah dan arkeologi banyak membantu dan meyokong kesahihan pengarang Injil. Apabila penulis menyebut tentang orang, tempat dan peristiwa sejarah yang boleh disemak dengan sumber purba lain, hasil pemeriksaan itu mewajarkan keyakinan kita terhadap mereka.

Wednesday, May 10, 2006

The followers

The followers

MUSINGS
By MARINA MAHATHIR
http://www.thestar.com.my

A FRIEND was relating how after her daughter had read the Da Vinci Code, she had wanted to read the Bible. Which is not in itself a bad thing except that she was concerned that an impressionable young mind would not be able to differentiate fact from fiction. Also it seemed that perhaps what was needed is a Da Vinci Code-type book for Muslims to spark off the same level of interest in young people in their own religion.

Except that if anyone tried to write a similar thriller based around Islam, they’d be hounded and pilloried and threatened with death, thousands would riot in protest and people who would never have been able to read the book either because they are illiterate or can’t afford it would have died.

Such is the difference between our religions. While there are many Christians who are upset about the book and movie, they are countering it with seminars and other educational events to balance what is being said in the book, even if the book is only fiction. There have not been Da Vinci Code-related riots or deaths thus far. Which speaks volumes for the adherents of the faith.

It would be nice if everyone could brush off similar challenges and say “we are strong enough to withstand any attack”. Even if a book or a movie becomes a runaway hit, compared to the total number of any faith’s followers, the numbers sold can never match it. Books are by nature, in a world where illiteracy is still common, a luxury item. As are American movies, no matter what arguments people make about cultural imperialism.

I remember when there were riots over Salman Rushdie’s book The Satanic Verses, President Benazir Bhutto commented wryly that the people who were dying over the book were those who would never have read it, or possibly even heard of it if someone hadn’t whipped them into a frenzy. A similar situation arose with the cartoons. As insensitive as they were, they were still not worth dying over.

The point is that people’s impressions of a religion are often related to the behaviour of its adherents. Some religions are thought of as simply kooky because its followers behave strangely. Some are viewed as benign and peaceful because its followers resolutely will not harm a fly.

But when people, supposedly in the name of religion, riot, burn and kill, it can’t help but give the impression of a religion that advocates this, no matter how much we point out that nowhere in religious texts itself does it say you should do this. And unfortunately we get the whole spectrum, from men who publicly insult women on a daily basis without censure to the real crazies.

Recently in New York I had to suffer the embarrassment of having to listen to a Muslim man say to a non-Muslim woman at a forum, “Don’t mess with Muslims, we have nuclear weapons!” There I was trying to dispel stereotypes about violence-prone Muslims and in one fell swoop, this nutcase confirmed every stereotype there was.

I think the only people who can dispel stereotypes about Muslims are women. While there are certainly some conservative women, even when these speak out they will naturally change perceptions because in a world where Muslim women are perceived to be perpetually hidden behind curtains, their sheer presence and articulateness will be noticed. What more if they are able to argue rationally in a calm manner.

Thus far there have been very few Muslim men in the international media who give a good impression. We might argue that the Western media selects who they interview in order to perpetuate stereotypes, which is true and that is a problem for all of us. A man or woman who looks like the archetypal wild-eyed conservative is far more telegenic than someone who looks like everyone else. Channel surfers are far more likely to stop at the sight of someone they think of as alien to their culture than if they see someone too similar to them. To stop this means having to make a concerted effort to come together as one community and decide on a sophisticated media strategy. But sadly coming together as one united community is a challenge in itself.

If we do manage as a global community to change other people’s perceptions of us, the benefits would be many. Our own people might think more kindly of each other so peace would reign within. And because within ourselves, we respect diversity, we can do the same with others. Then peace would truly have a chance.

Tuesday, May 09, 2006

Something to ponder

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YhEl6HdfqWM

Wednesday, May 03, 2006

O Sacred Head



O sacred Head, now wounded, with grief and shame weighed down,
Now scornfully surrounded with thorns, Thine only crown;
How pale Thou art with anguish, with sore abuse and scorn!
How does that visage languish, which once was bright as morn!

What Thou, my Lord, hast suffered, was all for sinners’ gain;
Mine, mine was the transgression, but Thine the deadly pain.
Lo, here I fall, my Savior! ’Tis I deserve Thy place;
Look on me with Thy favor, vouchsafe to me Thy grace.

Men mock and taunt and jeer Thee, Thou noble countenance,
Though mighty worlds shall fear Thee and flee before Thy glance.
How art thou pale with anguish, with sore abuse and scorn!
How doth Thy visage languish that once was bright as morn!

Now from Thy cheeks has vanished their color once so fair;
From Thy red lips is banished the splendor that was there.
Grim death, with cruel rigor, hath robbed Thee of Thy life;
Thus Thou hast lost Thy vigor, Thy strength in this sad strife.

My burden in Thy Passion, Lord, Thou hast borne for me,
For it was my transgression which brought this woe on Thee.
I cast me down before Thee, wrath were my rightful lot;
Have mercy, I implore Thee; Redeemer, spurn me not!

What language shall I borrow to thank Thee, dearest friend,
For this Thy dying sorrow, Thy pity without end?
O make me Thine forever, and should I fainting be,
Lord, let me never, never outlive my love to Thee.

My Shepherd, now receive me; my Guardian, own me Thine.
Great blessings Thou didst give me, O source of gifts divine.
Thy lips have often fed me with words of truth and love;
Thy Spirit oft hath led me to heavenly joys above.

Here I will stand beside Thee, from Thee I will not part;
O Savior, do not chide me! When breaks Thy loving heart,
When soul and body languish in death’s cold, cruel grasp,
Then, in Thy deepest anguish, Thee in mine arms I’ll clasp.

The joy can never be spoken, above all joys beside,
When in Thy body broken I thus with safety hide.
O Lord of Life, desiring Thy glory now to see,
Beside Thy cross expiring, I’d breathe my soul to Thee.

My Savior, be Thou near me when death is at my door;
Then let Thy presence cheer me, forsake me nevermore!
When soul and body languish, oh, leave me not alone,
But take away mine anguish by virtue of Thine own!

Be Thou my consolation, my shield when I must die;
Remind me of Thy passion when my last hour draws nigh.
Mine eyes shall then behold Thee, upon Thy cross shall dwell,
My heart by faith enfolds Thee. Who dieth thus dies well.

At­trib­ut­ed to
Ber­nard of Clair­vaux, 1153 (Sal­ve ca­put cru­en­ta­tum); trans­lat­ed from La­tin to Ger­man by Paul Ger­hardt, 1656 (O Haupt voll Blut und Wund­en), and from La­tin to Eng­lish, James W. Al­ex­and­er, 1830.