Fitna: From Where I Stand

Geert Wilder had thrown a ‘bomb’ into the Islamic world by producing Fitna. Many reactions were aired, written and even demonstrated. There were conflicts within and without the Islamic communities around the globe.
Some damned Wilder for his abused of human rights. Though he confessed his fears and had given various reasons to justify his deed, nothing of what he said could do just to the Muslim community. He had crossed the red line and must be given the hardest punishment any government could muster.
Some took a more tolerant stand, taking into consideration that Wilder might not be aware of how serious his deed could be in the Muslim world. I personally did not agree with this opinion as it had been long and well established that any religion in this world deserved to be respected. It was a basic human right. And for Wilder to exercise his right for speech or expression, he should be aware that the right comes with responsibilities.
And unfortunately there were some who did not know anything about the issue least aware of it.
Having watched Fitna, analyzing it as rational as possible, I found many flaws in it and in a very misleading and cunning way. The objectives were questionable and if like Wilder had claimed it was purely his expression on how he saw Islam that it had been unjustly produced. The intention was fishy.
First, he was quoting verses from the Quran Surah al-Anfaal verse 60, Surah an-Nisa’ verse 56 and 89 and Surah Muhammad verse 4. The verses were not read in full but only excerption of them giving the wrong idea to the audience. He was picking the verses without understanding first the context in which the verses were sent down by Allah and Wilder did not care to read the verses before and after the verses he had quoted when these before and after verses, if read and looked at, would have given him the justified answer and helped him better understand Islam in a well manner.
In Surah Al-Anfaal verse 60 the Muslims were asked to prepare themselves for battle in terms of artillery. They were not asked to attack unless they were first attacked and in verse 61 it was clearly stated that if the non-Muslims had opted for peace then the Muslims too must choose peace!
Wilder then quoted two verses from Surah an-Nisa’. Beginning with verse 56 in which Allah reprimanded the people of the books, the Jews rabbi who had rewrote the Torah and concealing the appointment of Muhammad as the last prophet and Islam as the true religion from the Jews. This verse had nothing to do with the provocation or motivating the Muslims to burn the non-Muslims. It only served as a strong message that one should always speak the truth unless he/she was ready to accept such torment from Allah. Why not look at the verse 57 when Allah was telling about all the luxurious and comforting life in heaven for those who had done good deeds on earth?
Again when Wilder quoted verse 89 from Surah an-Nisa’ he was out of context. If he had taken the time to read from verses 88 up to verses 90 he would have had a clear view that the 89th verse was for the transgressors, the munafiqoon. Muslims never discard non-Muslims unless those non-Muslims had bad intentions towards Muslims or Islam itself. This type of non-Muslims was called kafir harbi. If they attacked, the Muslims were sure to fight back. If the non-Muslims had no such intentions they are the kafir zimmiy and it was a duty on a Muslim to protect them. Look at verse 90, if the deal was sealed that the non-Muslims would not harm the Muslims, they deserved protection to the point that the Prophet Muhammad said protecting their blood was an obligation to the Muslims!
Then Wilder had quoted Surah Muhammad verse 4. He did not quote it in full but partially. If he had in sincerity quoted the whole verse, straight away the peaceful teaching of Islam would have popped out so clear that the supporting visual cannot cover it any more. This verse pushed the Muslims to slaughter any enemy they met in the battlefield. Situation: battlefield. What do you expect? Yet the kindness of Islam never left. After the battle, such aggressive actions were immediately put to stop. The captured enemies were either released without conditions or under certain conditions. In the history of Islamic wars, the captured were never treated badly. If conditions were termed onto them they were what was beneficial to the Muslim community without degrading the captured person, the Muslims simply tapped the enemy specialties such as asking them to teach the Muslim children how to read and the like.
Second, a picture can tell a thousand words. Unfortunately Wilder had used the wrong pictures to express how he felt about Islam. He used the 9/11 bombing visual, the visuals of Shiite leaders giving firing speeches, pulling out and charging their swords and the visual of a group of Muslims holding blood covered blades and knives in their hands; jumping and screaming like a bunch of blood-thirsty maniac.
It was well established that the Muslims had been cleared from involvement in the 9/11 tragedy. The Shiite had been well-known for their passion in joining the Jihad because that was one of the pillars that they held strongly to if one wanted to be a Muslim beside the shahadah, solat, fasting, paying alms and performing the hajj. Wilder must know that the largest portion of Muslims were the Sunni and the Muslims regards the Shiite as digressing from the true path of Islam though not referring them as kafirs or non-Muslims.
The blood covered blades were from the celebration of Karbala when the Shiite moaned on the passing of the Prophet Muhammad’s grandchild, Hussain. During this celebration the Shiite used balades or knife to hurt their selves by hitting the blades on their forehead and temple in regrets that they were not able to save him and to show how sad were they about the tragedy. The Sunni never supported this celebration and never considered it as part of Islamic traditions.
Third: an unfair interview with a young girl. Let put ourselves in an Israelites oppressed country such as Iraq. Having our country destroyed, our home banished, our family and friends killed, having our life threatened continuously 24-7 and our childhood robbed from us. Then came any one asking us about our opinion towards the Israelites what would have been the straight answer? Swine! Yes, that was the girl’s answer. The Israelites were like swine because of what they had done onto her. They were barbaric!
The following question was not really meant to link to the first one but more on to cunningly cornered Islam as teaching the wrong things even to a young child. The second question did not ask her who tell her that Israelites were swine but from where she knew about the Israelites? The poor girl answer she knew it (about the Israelites according to the question asked) from Allah. And it was furthered mislead by asking where did Allah tell you (about the Israelites)? And she said the Quran. The interview was a trick and that girl was emotionally unstable and distracted to have any positive opinion towards the Israelites. Allah Himself had raised the Israelites above all nations as He mentioned in Surah al-Baqarah verse 47. Allah never referred to them with other names than the children of Israel, the most honourable name to them.
Finally Wilder was demeaning Islam when he had a shot of ripping away the quoted verses from the Quran. That was too much! He had crossed the human right border line.
Well, the third Newton Law stated that for every force there will be another force of the same magnitude only in a different direction. I asked, what had force Wilder to produce Fitna? Why did he do it at all? Without considering the possibility of Wilder being used by any third party, I saw two things. One gave me much comfort while the other strikes my conscience so hard I felt like dying.
Following the Quran as well as the sunnah, I will start with glad tidings. The comforting point that I get from the production of Fitna and the aggressive and almost unanimous reactions from the Muslim world towards Geert Wilder was that Islam is the true religion because each and every Muslim holds dearly to its sacredness.
In other beliefs it was not unusual for us to find their believer making jokes about their scholars, their messengers and even on God himself! For example I came across these many years back and as I wonder why were them making fun of these things.
A thief entered a house to steal and heard a voice as he approached the door to run away with the stolen things, “Jesus is watching.” The thief turned his back and saw nobody. He tried to go out again. “Jesus is watching,” came again the voice. Tired of the situation the thief blurted, “Who the hell is Jesus?” and the answer came, “A 120 pounds rotweiler.” The thief was shocked. “Who would name a dog ‘Jesus’?” he asked and the answer came, “The same who name a parrot Moses.”
A teacher was teaching in a kindergarten class and asked if anyone can tell her where God is. Little Lulu put up a hand and wanted to give her answer. “Yes, Lulu. Where is God?” And Little Lulu answer, “He is in the toilet.” The class was surprised but the teacher stayed calm. “How did you know He’s in the toilet?” Little Lulu answer, “Every morning my father knocks the bathroom door and said ‘God, you are still in there?’”
I did not find these two jokes funny least appropriate but the writers obviously did not find it wrong to mock their messengers as they believed them and God too. Muslims do have faith in Jesus (pbuh) and Moses (pbuh) but you can be assured that no Muslim would joke on the messengers like that. Muslims did not even have the heart to criticize on the prophets personal traits least demeaning them to such a low level as animals. Na’uzubillah. If a religion is true and sacred, why would you want to joke about it? If you really love a person (you love Jesus and you believe he loves you) would you have called improper name on him/her or put that person in similarity with something very low? Why make fun of your beliefs when you would not even make fun of a company’s policy.
Wilder was brought up in the culture that allowed such disrespect towards religion. But this time he misjudged when he chose Islam as a subject thinking the Muslims would look at it simply as a personal expression. The kind that stem from what- I- see- and- how- I- feel- about- it right to voice one’s opinion as freely as one wanted to in anyway he deemed rightful.
The derivation from this fact was a table turning question to me. As a Muslim, what had I done or where had I done wrong that people like Wilder think of Islam as no different from any other beliefs and stand equally to be joked about likewise?
Wilder had quoted four verses without understanding the context of any either. So Wilder had no idea whatsoever about asbab an-nuzul, the reason or situation that made Allah revealed the verse to Rasulullah. What about us Muslims?
How strong was our faith in Islam, how deep did we understand this deen, this way of life? Did we practice what was not Islamic so well that people understand Islam as such? As this issue broke into the community, did we have the right explanations to the non-Muslims? Did we understand how wrong Wilder was when he wanted to rip off the four verses from the Quran or our anger was just a reactive response?
O ye who believe! Enter into Islam wholeheartedly; and follow not the footsteps of the Evil One; for he is to you an avowed enemy (Al-Baqarah: 208)
In Islam, not believing in any part of the Quran and the teachings and practices of Rasulullah can lead to blasphemy. How many of us Muslims were aware of that? And how many were practicing otherwise?
We must be aware that we are the ambassadors of Allah on this earth. We are not doing it for Allah but for ourselves for Allah is Perfect and He needs not us to make Him better. We should follow His guide to be better. It is time for us to check ourselves and our way of conduct and clean them from anything that might give a different definition of Islam to the world.