In the light of
Mubarak Bala’s case, it has become pertinent to take a critical look at this
idea of insulting prophets. This is because persons of a particular religion
have always exercised the prerogative of making allegations of insulting their
prophet and consequently threatening violence as if their prophet is the only
prophet.
As a standard for
inter-religious interaction and communication, killing those who are adjudged
to have insulted a prophet is unacceptable. It is not justifiable and does not
reflect positively on any religion. This ritual of bloodletting is incompatible
with basic humanity and common moral decencies. So, why glorify violence and
murder in the name of religion? Why stoke up flames that typify radical and
vicious religiosity?
Look, threatening to
kill or murder anyone for insulting a prophet is an ill wind, a savage habit by
any stretch of religious imagination in this 21st century. The idea of
murdering persons assumed to have insulted a prophet should not even be
discussed, considered, or implied as an option or a form of sanction because
this punitive tendency only yields chaos, impunity, and conflict in any human
community.
Such a horrific
proposition ends up tarnishing the image of any religion and stains the
representation of the prophet(s) in question.
For the sake of this
argument, let us define insulting a prophet as making any statement, expressing
a viewpoint or designation of a prophet in ways, which adherents of a religion
deem disrespectful or offensive. So, insulting a prophet is relative to the
believers, not the prophet. Insulting is not in the statement but its
interpretation.
In a society such as
Nigeria, various religions exist. And these religions propagate diverse,
conflicting, and contradicting notions of a prophet and prophets. It is
difficult to comprehend how one can make sense of ‘insulting’ a prophet in a
situation characterised by varied and shifting perceptions and representations
of prophet and prophethood. This is because any teachings of these religions
could easily be seen and interpreted as a form of insult to one prophet or
another. Now imagine adherents of the various religions holding rigidly to the
idea of killing those who insult their prophets. That means nobody would be left alive in the
world. Or better humans will be nearing extinction.
In Nigeria, three
main religions, traditional religion, Christianity, and Islam exist. And
strictly speaking, all these religions are blasphemies or insulting systems. By
implication, all religion its -- traditionalists, Christians, and Muslims-are
blasphemers and insulters of the prophets. The teachings of Christianity and
Islam ‘insult’ the prophets of traditional religions. Those of the traditional
religion and Islam ‘insult’ the prophets of Christianity and vice versa. Whilst
the doctrines of Christianity can be interpreted to be fundamentally
disrespectful of the prophets of traditional religion and Islam. Thus religions
exist and co-exist in a situation of mutual disrespect and scorn. Religious
relationships are predicated on the profanation of the other. To peacefully
coexist, profane talks about other religious personalities are imperative.
So, proposing to
kill anybody who insults a prophet lacks moral justification and foundation.
There is no intelligibility in sanctioning or shedding the blood of those who
disrespect the prophet of a particular religion because every religion is an
exercise in profanation.
Traditional
religions predate Christianity and Islam in Nigeria. These two foreign
religions do not recognise the ‘prophets’ of traditional faiths. They do not
consider Jesus and Muhammad as prophets. Adherents of traditional religions
entertain notions of the prophets of Christianity that differ or are scornful
of the prophetic ideas of those who belong to these religions. Part of the ways
Christianity and Islam are propagated is by profanely talking about traditional
religious icons-gods, shrines, and rituals. If adherents of traditional
religions designated Christian and Islamic beliefs as insulting to their
prophets and made a religious habit out of killing Christian and Islamic
insulters of traditional deities as Muslims in Northern Nigeria are doing
today, there would likely be no religions such as Christianity or Islam in the
country.
Furthermore, Islam
contains teachings that insult or could be deemed as insulting to the prophets
of Christianity such as Jesus. By the way, Christianity does not teach that
Jesus is a prophet. Christianity maintains that Jesus is God. Now Islam teaches
that there is no other god but Allah and Muhammad the messenger. From a
Christian perspective, this is insulting and blasphemous to Jesus Christ. And
Muslims rehearse this line over and over again as a statement of faith. Now
Christians believe that Jesus Christ is God, not a god, the savior of the
world, not a messenger. Christians can deem this basic statement of Islamic
faith scornful, annoying, and provoking because Islam demotes Jesus and
designates him as a prophetic inferior to Muhammad.
Now Islamic clerics
are in many parts of the Christian dominated sections of the country preaching
and propagating provoking ideas. Muslim scholars try to convert Christians in
these places, telling them to discard Christianity and embrace Islam. Islamic
clerics openly and publicly declare that Jesus is a prophet, not God, that
Muhammad, who is not even mentioned anywhere in the Christian text, is the
greatest messenger of God. Now imagine if Christians in these places begin to
accuse Muslim preachers of blasphemy. Think about what would happen if
Christians start petitioning Islamic ‘scholars’ for insulting Jesus Christ as
Muslims have done in the case of Mubarak Bala.
Imagine if
Christians start issuing death threats against anyone who says that Jesus is a
prophet, not God, or that Jesus is prophetically inferior to Muhammad; that
Jesus is not the saviour of the world. There will be no peace in this country.
From a Christian
perspective, Muslims should understand that Islam is a form of blasphemy. For
Christians, a religion that calls Jesus a prophet is anathema. And if Christians and traditional
religionists including atheists have learned to tolerate those 'provoking' and
'annoying' statements of faith; if they have learned to live with the ‘insults’
from Muslims, and Islamic preachers and scholars, Muslims should learn to do
the same. Muslims should not threaten violence against those who insult the
prophet in Kano and expect others in Abia or Cross River to tolerate the
insults to prophets of other religions by Muslim preachers and teachers.
Muslims should use
this period of Ramadan to seriously reflect on this vicious practice of killing
or sanctioning death for those who insult the prophet. This practice is not
compatible with the idea of an enlightened Islam and the notion of a religion
of peace. I mean how can Muslims say that Islam is a peaceful religion when
there is zero tolerance of dissent, disbelief, other belief, and unbelief. How
can Muslims claim that there is 'no compulsion in religion' when Muslims as a
matter of habit kill or are ready to kill those who insult the prophet. This
blood-thirsty form of Islam needs to be rooted out. Muslims should consider
discarding and abandoning this despicable idea and practice that has left a
dark and bloody stain on the history of Islam in Nigeria and the world. Free
Mubarak Bala.
0 Comments