Tag: Prophet Muhammad

Charlie Hebdo Has Long Been Targeted By Hardliners For Their Continued Flippant Depiction Of Islam

PARIS: The massacre Wednesday (Jan 7) at French weekly Charlie Hebdo took place after years of confrontation between the satirical publication and Islamists infuriated by what they see as its attacks on their religion.

Its offices were fire-bombed in November 2011 when it published caricatures of the Muslim prophet Mohammed but there were no casualties in that attack.

Its latest issue’s front page highlighted yet another polemic about Islam, with a focus on controversial French author Michel Houellebecq and his latest book, “Soumission” (“Submission”), which imagines a France in 2022 under Muslim rule.

The weekly publication, which seeks to provoke, amuse and inform mostly through irreverent cartoons, was under police protection when Wednesday’s assault happened because of the constant threat it was working under. Two policemen were among those killed.

The weekly started in 1970, taking inspiration for its name from the American comic book character Charlie Brown and with the aim of mocking celebrities, political leaders and religions. It never changed course, even as the threats piled up.

In 2006, Charlie Hebdo became a major target for Islamists when it reprinted 12 cartoons of Mohammed published by the Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten in a statement for freedom of expression. The cartoons, including one which showed a bomb in place of a turban, prompted violent protests in Muslim countries.

“There have been constant threats since the Mohammed caricatures were published,” Richard Malka, Charlie Hebdo’s lawyer, told RTL radio after the deadly attack. “We’ve lived under the threats for eight years. There was protection. But there is nothing that could be done against savages who come with Kalashnikovs.”

Malka, clearly shaken, said it was “madness” to be targeted with violence “simply for making cartoons”. “The newspaper only defended freedom of expression, freedom quite simply… and today journalists, cartoonists – simple cartoonists – paid a heavy price for that.”

THREATS, HACKS

In 2008, France’s courts acquitted Charlie Hebdo of a charge of “insulting Muslims” with the Mohammed cartoons, saying the images were “clearly” aimed at extremist Islamists and not the entire Muslim community.

The 2011 cartoon – for which Charlie Hebdo changed its masthead to “Sharia Hebdo” – depicted Mohammed laughing. The day that edition came out, the paper’s offices were set alight by what the government claimed were “fundamentalist Muslims”.

The 47-year-old editor-in-chief of Charlie Hebdo, Stephane “Charb” Charbonnier, also one of its cartoonists, was among those killed. He had been assigned police bodyguards for the past three years. The newspaper lost three other cartoonists in the attack.

The newspaper’s website was also hacked several times. In 2011, its home screen was replaced with a photo of Mecca with the message “No God but Allah”. In 2012, more caricatures printed by Charlie Hebdo sparked fierce criticism in many Muslim countries, forcing the French government to react. Charlie Hebdo sells 30,000 copies in an average week, and recently appealed for donations to stay afloat.

Source: www.channelnewsasia.com

January 8, 2015
Saudi Arabia: Plans to Move Tomb of Prophet Muhammad May Spark Unrest

One of Islam’s most revered holy sites – the tomb of the Prophet Mohamed – could be destroyed and his body removed to an anonymous grave under plans which threaten to spark discord across the Muslim world.

The controversial proposals are part of a consultation document by a leading Saudi academic which has been circulated among the supervisors of al-Masjid al-Nabawi mosque in Medina, where the remains of the Prophet are housed under the Green Dome, visited by millions of pilgrims and venerated as Islam’s second-holiest site. The formal custodian of the mosque is Saudi Arabia’s ageing monarch King Abdullah.

The plans, brought to light by another Saudi academic who has exposed and criticised the destruction of holy places and artefacts in Mecca – the holiest site in the Muslim world – call for the destruction of chambers around the Prophet’s grave which are particularly venerated by Shia Muslims.

The 61-page document also calls for the removal of Mohamed’s remains to the nearby al-Baqi cemetery, where they would be interred anonymously.

There is no suggestion that any decision has been taken to act upon the plans. The Saudi government has in the past insisted that it treats any changes to Islam’s holiest sites with “the utmost seriousness”.

But such is the importance of the mosque to both Sunni and Shia Muslims that Dr Irfan al-Alawi warned that any attempt to carry out the work could spark unrest. It also runs the risk of inflaming sectarian tensions between the two branches of Islam, already running perilously high due to the conflicts in Syria and Iraq.

Hardline Saudi clerics have long preached that the country’s strict Wahhabi interpretation of Islam – an offshoot of the Sunni tradition – prohibits the worship of any object or “saint”, a practice considered “shirq” or idolatrous.

Dr Alawi, director of the Islamic Heritage Research Foundation, told The Independent: “People visit the chambers, which are the rooms where the Prophet’s family lived, and turn towards the burial chamber to pray.

“Now they want to prevent pilgrims from attending and venerating the tomb because they believe this is shirq, or idolatry. But the only way they can stop people visiting the Prophet is to get him out and into the cemetery.”

For centuries Muslim pilgrims have made their way to Mecca in order to visit the Kaaba – a black granite cubed building said to be built by Abraham, around which al-Masjid al-Haram, or the Grand Mosque, is built, and towards which every Muslim faces when they pray.

This pilgrimage, or hajj, is a religious duty that has to be carried out at least once in a lifetime.

Many go on to make their way to the nearby city of Medina to pay their respects at the Prophet’s tomb.

Al-Nabawi mosque around the tomb has been expanded by generations of Arabian rulers, particularly the Ottomans. It includes hand-painted calligraphy documenting details of the Prophet’s life and his family. Dr Alawi said the plans also call for these to be destroyed as well as the Green Dome which covers the Prophet’s tomb.

The Prophet is venerated by both branches of Islam, Sunni and Shia. The strict Wahhabi sect is a branch of the Sunni faith, however, and removing the Prophet could further inflame tensions between the two groups .

The current crisis in Iraq has been blamed on the Shia former Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki’s sectarianism, which alienated the Sunni, leading to the uprising. Isis, also known as Islamic State, which holds swathes of Iraq and Syria, and which murdered the American journalist James Foley, is a Sunni organisation.

Mainstream Sunni Muslims would be just as aghast at any desecration of the tomb as the Shia, Dr Alawi said.

The Independent has previously revealed how the multibillion-pound expansion of the Grand Mosque has, according to the Washington-based Gulf Institute, led to the destruction of up to 95 per cent of Mecca’s millennium-old buildings. They have been replaced with luxury hotels, apartments and shopping malls.

King Abdullah has appointed the prominent Wahhabi cleric and imam of the Grand Mosque, Abdul Rahman al-Sudais, to oversee the expansion project – necessary to cope with the huge number of pilgrims who now visit each year.

Dr Alawi says the consultation document for the al-Nabawi mosque in Medina, by the leading Saudi academic Dr Ali bin Abdulaziz al-Shabal of Imam Muhammad ibn Saud Islamic University in Riyadh, has been circulated to the Committee of the Presidency of the Two Mosques.

Several pages of the consultation document have just been published in the presidency’s journal. They call for the destruction of the rooms surrounding the tomb – used by the Prophet’s wives and daughters, and venerated by the Shia because of their association with his youngest daughter, Fatima.

The document also calls for the Green Dome, which covers the tomb and these living quarters, to be removed, and the ultimate removal of the Prophet’s body to a nearby cemetery.

The al-Baqi cemetery already contains the bodies of many of the Prophet’s family, including his father who was removed there in the 1970s, Dr Alawi said. In 1924 all the grave markers were removed, so pilgrims would not know who was buried there, and so be unable to pray to them.

“The Prophet would be anonymous,” Dr Alawi added. “Everything around the Prophet’s mosque has already been destroyed. It is surrounded by bulldozers. Once they’ve removed everything they can move towards the mosque. The imam is likely to say there is a need to expand the mosque and do it that way, while the world’s eyes are on Iraq and Syria. The Prophet Mohamed’s grave is venerated by the mainstream Sunni, who would never do it. It is just as important for the Shia too, who venerate the Prophet’s daughter, Fatima.

“I’m sure there will be shock across the Muslim world at these revelations. It will cause outrage.”

The Independent was unable to contact the Saudi Arabian embassy, but it said in a statement last year: “The development of the Holy Mosque of Makkah al-Mukarramah [Mecca] is an extremely important subject and one which the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, in its capacity as custodian of the two holy mosques, takes with the utmost seriousness. This role is at the heart of the principles upon which Saudi Arabia is founded.”

Source: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/saudis-risk-new-muslim-division-with-proposal-to-move-mohameds-tomb-9705120.html

YOUTUBE: youtube.com/user/rilek1corner

FACEBOOK: facebook.com/rilek1corner

TWITTER: twitter.com/Rilek1Corner

WEBSITE: rilek1corner.com

EMAIL: [email protected]

FEEDBACK: CONTACT RILEK1CORNER

September 2, 2014
Why Sikhs Can Keep Beards But Muslims Cannot in SAF?

Meet 3SG Jagrnjeet Singh, a regular Infantry specialist who just graduated from the 15/13 Specialist Cadet Course. As a junior commander, he is looking forward to leading his men and giving them a positive time in the SAF. He elaborated, “I am in this not for the money but for my passion. I want to give a different experience to my men and show them that there is much more to National Service than the two years. Having been a trooper before in 4 SIR, I understand how troopers feel and want to make a positive impact on their time in NS”. Very inspiring words, 3SG Singh! — with Jagrnjeet Singh Sidhu.

During my 4th ICT, I have a corporal posted into my unit. He’s a Muslim with facial hair just like our Sikh friend in this picture. Not trying to stir any racial/religion issue here. But upon in pro, he was asked to rid of his facial hair without any second chances.

In Islam, Muslim men are encouraged to keep beards. But how is it that our dear Sikh brothers are allowed to keep facial hairs but our Muslim brothers are not allowed. This shows that the SAF is cultivating double standards.

The organization is being biased towards Muslim practising their rights in the SAF. As a Muslim, I am upset that after 40years of developing Asia’s best army, this MAJOR issue has yet to be ironed out.

Also, the serviceman has a letter from MUIS to allow him to wear track pants instead of the standard issue PT shorts. Sadly, he was not allowed to perform his IPPT due to his attire. Reasons were compromise of safety/possible heat injuries etc. We all know that it can be done but they just want to suppress our rights.

Harap maaf kerana mengguna bahasa english. Serviceman tersebut adalah FCruz. Saya adalah CSM beliau.

Authored by Izzat

EDITOR’S NOTE

Followers of the Sikh religion are allowed to keep beard, and wear a turban while still donning military uniform. They do not need special permission in the SAF.

MINDEF explained the allowance for Sikhs was passed down from British colonial times.

What is your view on this beard issue and what do you think is the best way to resolve this matter?

June 18, 2014
Film ‘Noah’, Blockbuster Starring Russell Crowe Banned in Arab Countries

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_OSaJE2rqxU

God’s messenger: Noah, said to have built an ark (pictured) which saved the human and animal worlds from a great flood, features in Christianity, Judaism and Islam, but depicting Allah’s messengers is banned

One of the world’s most respected Islamic institutions has issued a fatwa against a Hollywood epic about Noah’s Ark because it ‘contradicts the teachings of Islam’.

Russell Crowe’s £75million film Noah has also been banned in three Arab countries after religious leaders complained that it depicted the Biblical figure – who is also a holy messenger in the Koran.

Due to premiere later this month, the blockbuster will not show in Qatar, Bahrain or the United Arab Emirates and several other countries are expected to follow suit.

Islam forbids representing holy figures in art, instead using conceptual line patterns and lettering to adorn the walls of mosques.

A whole chapter of the Koran is devoted to Noah, who legend tells built an ark which saved himself, his family and many pairs of animals from a great flood.

He also features prominently in the Biblical book of Genesis and is revered by Christians and Jews.

Fatwa: Cairo’s al-Azhar (which includes the mosque pictured left) issued a fatwa, which is a ruling under Islamic law, saying the film starring Russell Crowe (right) as Noah was a ‘clear violation’ of their teachings. The film is due to premiere in the U.S. on March 28 and was due to air in Egypt in the near future.

The fatwa – a ruling or injunction under the laws of Islam – was made by the influential Al-Azhar institution in Egypt’s capital Cairo, a centre of Sunni Islam thought which was founded in around AD970 and includes a university and a mosque.

‘Al-Azhar… renews its objection to any act depicting the messengers and prophets of God and the companions of the Prophet (Mohammad), peace be upon him,’ it announced in a statement.

The fatwa added that the depictions ‘provoke the feelings of believers… and are forbidden in Islam and a clear violation of Islamic law’.

The film also stars Anthony Hopkins and Emma Watson and will premiere in the U.S. on March 28.

Depictions of the Prophet Mohammad in European and North American media have repeatedly sparked deadly protests in Islamic countries over the last decade, fanning cultural tensions with the West.

The worst riots were triggered after the Prophet Mohammad was depicted in a Danish newspaper in 2006. It sparked protests in the Middle East, Africa and Asia in which at least 50 people died.

A spokesman for Paramount Pictures said: ‘Censors for Qatar, Bahrain and the UAE (United Arab Emirates) officially confirmed this week that the film will not release in their countries.

‘The official statement they offered in confirming this news is because “it contradicts the teachings of Islam”,’ the representative said, adding the studio expected a similar ban in Egypt, Jordan and Kuwait.

Noah, whose trailer depicts Crowe wielding an axe and computer-animated geysers swamping an army of sinners hoping to board his ark, has also stoked religious controversy at home.

Stars: Russell Crowe as Noah with Jennifer Connelly, who plays his wife Naameh and won an Oscar for best supporting actress for her appearance alongside Crowe in A Beautiful Mind.

Last year angry reactions at test screenings reportedly stoked tensions between the studio and director Darren Oronofsky.

Perhaps wisely the filming took place nowhere near the Middle East, instead being carried out in New York State and in Southern Iceland.

Harry Potter star Emma Watson plays the adopted daughter of the prophet, while screen legend Anthony Hopkins stars as his sagely grandfather.

Jennifer Connelly will play Naameh, Noah’s wife. She won an Oscar for best supporting actress for her appearance alongside Crowe in A Beautiful Mind (2001).

The title role was reportedly offered to Michael Fassbender and Christian Bale – both of whom declined.

Jerry A. Johnson, president of a conservative National Religious Broadcasters (NRB) group, said last month he wanted to ‘make sure everyone who sees this impactful film knows this is an imaginative interpretation of Scripture, and not literal.’

Paramount responded by agreeing to issue a disclaimer on advertising for the film.

‘While artistic license has been taken, we believe that this film is true to the essence, values and integrity of a story that is a cornerstone of faith for millions of people worldwide,’ it reads.

The film is not the first to stoke controversy among Muslims.

Mel Gibson’s 2004 film The Passion of the Christ, showing Jesus’s crucifixion, was widely screened in the Arab World despite objections by Muslim clerics.

A 2012, an amateur Youtube video deriding the Prophet Mohammad which was produced in California stoked protests throughout the region, and may have contributed to a deadly militant raid in Libya which killed the U.S. ambassador and three other American staff.

Source: Daily Mail

March 10, 2014
The Idolisation of Tolérance & Its abuse
By Muhd Noor Muhd Deros.

Recently our esteemed brother, Prof Syed Muhd Khairudin Aljunied, courageously wrote a couple of short postings that state the truth about homosexuality. It caught the attention of some LGBT students from the NUS whom later wrote a petition against him.

This short writing of mine seeks to address one of the central argument that they and their likes have never failed to summon while trying to defend homosexuality, it is none other than the idea of Tolérance, or its new form; Recognition, as used in the petition.

1. We have seen the idolisation of the word Tolérance and the destructions it brought during the French Revolution where it was given the status of a dogma and endowed with the sanctity of a religion together with its share of fanaticism and blind herds. During that time, those who were intolerant of their brand of tolerance were sent to the guillotine. It was and never is a neutral word nor does it bear any positive connotation in itself. Of course it can be and was already used as a tool for oppression.

“It is preferable that we use the term (Tolérance) in its French orthography, since it was consciously conceived as one of the power instruments of the emerging atheist state following the French Revolution. It is a significantly irrational doctrine, while it poses as being the opposite. If examined, it is clear that it is a power instrument aimed at one group to subvert them to the value structure of the opposing group. In other words, it has a uni-directional dynamic. We mean by that, a doctrine of tolerance orders the accused group, “Tolerate us!” It contains in it no possibility of a reverse process by which the group demanding tolerance offer tolerance to the accused group.” – Shaykh Abdal Qadir As-Sufi.

Hence, the act of tolerating or ‘recognising’ something in itself is not necessarily good. The main issue lies in the object of your tolerance. What are you tolerating?

2. The dangerous appeal and the control power of the word Tolerance lies in its deep and subconscious attachment to the basic need of the human self, and that is the need to be accepted, which – like tolerance – is not necessarily good in itself. But whenever the word is summoned today, you can almost see its spell breaking through any defense mechanism of the mind and leaving it defunct.

We need to break its spell by being aware of its neutrality.

3. We must know that it is perfectly fine to be intolerant of certain things and ideas. The health of the society is in danger when it becomes tolerant of everything as the body breaks down when it loses its ability to be intolerant to sickness. Even those who idolised tolerance or ‘recognition’ never failed to be intolerant towards those whom they perceive as a threat to their idol.

But when I say that I can’t tolerate the idea of homosexuality it does not mean I can’t have a coffee with a homosexual while calling him to heterosexuality. We just need to grow up and leave either-ors to kids.

4. As a person who believes in a Higher power who is conscious of Himself and all of His creations, free from any physicality and humanness, and that He sent prophets to guide human beings to spiritual happiness till the end of time, I would like to reiterate that The Islam of the Prophet Muhammad s.a.w – not the Islamic “Islam” – views homosexual inclination as a sickness that must be treated. It is no different from incestual inclination, and that act of homosexuality itself is one of the most abhorrent sins.

Some general suggestions from a Muslim’s perspective:
- Re-inculcate the belief in The higher power that is Most Merciful and Compassionate yet Majestic in the same time. And that we are the created not The Creator, we are here not by ourselves nor are we a product of a random activity of an unconscious cosmic soup.
- Punish child molesters severely.
- Make marriage easy to those who are ready.
- Women must be allowed to be women and men to be men. Homosexuality will emerge in a society whenever the economy forces the majority of the women to take up the responsibilities of men.
- Protect the institution of marriage with the Divine law.
5. Homosexuality is a cancer to the society, yes it surely is. This is an objective and unemotional statement. Unlike the term ‘hate speech’ used in the petition, it seeks to convey the scale of threat and destruction brought about by the homosexual lifestyle. Whereas the term ‘hate speech’ is a direct accusation to a person. If we are serious for a healthy debate we should avoid such jerky misconstructions.

6. What we want is a healthy and a harmonious society, a society that is free from the stench of moral relativism and is built upon the firm belief that truth is not subjected to time & context, instead it is the other way round. Therefore we should stop demanding people to be tolerant of immoralities such as homosexuality.

God knows best.

Benjamin Seet

Khairulanwar Zaini

Melissa Tsang

Source: Muhd Noor Muhd Deros

Read the ENTIRE chronology of saga here:
March 1, 2014