The Economist welcomes your views. Please stay on topic and be respectful of other readers. Review our comments policy.
You must be logged in to post a comment. Log in to your account.Don't have an account? Register
The aniconism and iconoclasm of the (Sunni) hadith, like those of early Christianity and some later periods, were outgrowths of biblical imperatives in the Ten Commandments, in Deut. 4:16-19, and elsewhere. For example: "These are the statutes and the ordinances which you shall observe to do in the land which the Lord, the God of your fathers, has given you to possess it. You shall surely destroy all the places wherein the nations that you are to dispossess served their gods, upon the high mountains and upon the hills and under every leafy tree. You shall break down their altars and dash in pieces their pillars and burn their Asherim with fire; and you shall hew down the graven images of their gods, and you shall destroy their name out of that place" ( Deut.12:1-3).
Jewish aniconism was observed in antiquity even at the potential cost of Jewish lives, as Pilate learned when he tried to introduce into Jerusalem Roman military standards with the emperor's bust attached. And iconoclasm was ruthlessly practiced during the century of Hasmonean rule. Millennia of political powerlessness, however, caused these episodes to fade from Jewish memory -- except among those who still read Josephus, Maccabees I and II, and Philo. But Islam has wielded the sword and the political power it conferred for over a thousand years, so it has never forgotten these values. And unlike Christianity, it has not been significantly influenced by the values of the eighteenth-century Enlightenment.
Daisy Khan’s effort must be encouraged, at a time when the crimes of a few ignorant so-called believers are used to justify the passions of many haters. Both seem to be encouraged by political or financial interests. In her just battle, Ms Khan could use a recent essay. It starts with an archeological find indicating that matricide, along with rape and femicide, were the weapons used 6.000 years ago to subdue the Civilization of the Woman and establish Patriarchy. That new Order that came long, long before Abraham. Such behaviors were taught from one generation to the next through mythology: “tales about something that never happened but is happening every day, everywhere”. Every day, Perseus slashes the throat and severs the head of “Medusa”, which means “Protectress” in Greek, i.e. “Mother”. Ulysses is a gang rapist and Hercules is a femicide, like Saint George. These "Heroes" live in ourselves in many ways but we can fight them if we know them. All this and more in “Our Lady Goddess & The Femicide of the Heroes” (free on a San Francisco academic site.
. . . . and, in other news, Islam is a religion of Peace and only those who are not true Muslims employ violence against others. ISIS, Al-Queda, the Taliban and Hezbollah and ,their countless adherents with monetary support from Iran and Saudi Arabia, are "fake news" who besmear the Lassie-like kindness of the followers of the Prophet. And, don't take that Sunni/Shia thing too seriously. Protestants and Catholics also killed each other -- until the Treaty of Westphalia put a stop to all that -- back in 1648.
And, yes, there was a terrible iconoclast movement in Christianity -- it was in tenth-century Byzantium.
A statue of Mary is, most of the time, just so much plaster. It isn't Mary and it isn't "us." Anything that can be cleaned-up with a whisk broom and a dust pan is no Big Deal. It IS vandalism but Muslims generally abhor "graven images" (quick -- try and name the Muslim Rembrandt!) and so overcame their peace-loivng natures to spite the Christians and so honor God.
It is, on the other hand, pleasant and courteous to show a little respect. During the worst of WW II, Secretary of War Stimson refused to allow the Air Force to bomb Kyoto out of respect for Japanese culture and religion (s.) When Rome was bombed for the first time by the Americans in 1944, the air force commander informed Catholic crewmen that they were under no compulsion to man the bombers -- out of respect for the religious feelings of those crewmen (nearly all flew the mission.)
I am a sort of Catholic and as far as I am concerned anyone can smash all the plaster they want. The art work (usually pretty lousy) is not the thing itself.
But, I DO wish that for once TE would stop making excuses for the egregious conduct of so many who pursue the Religion of Peace. It is not just here and there -- it is pretty widespread.
Try to understand intolerance?
Does that understanding change the text in the Koran, which is where this action came from?
How is that different from asking us to show tolerance for Paedophiles?
Raping littl boys in Pakistan and Kashmir is allowed
Beating women (wives) is expected by the Koran
Should we be tolerant of this attitude of slavery?
Why not include all this for us to be tolerant to?
Why just include one small act of terrorism?
Should you have ever be tolerant of the intolerant?
As for me, when this Kahn sex-Slave ( and that s all she is according to the Koran )starts to talk about the genocide and atrocities committed by a Muslims everywhere, including then none-presence of infidels in many Muslim lands, then I will be abl to talk to her rationally
Th Prophet was intolerant - and he made sure that all his UMMA are as well
Let me correct her lie
This khan woman is a liar
The Kashmir Muslims - in unity - started a campaign of ethnic cleansing of Hindus in January 1990
The Sunni Mosques and Sunni newspapers put up a banner demanding that all Kashmiri Hindus should , and these Hindus would be killed if they stayed
Marauding gangs of Of the religion of peace went around killing whole families of Hindus over a period of 3 months
In Pakistan, most cities had at least 30% Hindus - and some even had over 50% - before the ethnically cleansing started.
Now they have 1%
All this is never mentioned ny this Khan woman
Remember when people got riled up over the burning
of an American flag?
Same mindset with the smashers.
Just trying to get attention.
Just trying to get a drone's attention.
As were the true Muslims - I.S - as they killed many Yahidi/Christian men and sexually enslaved their women,
Silly me - I thought that this action came from the Koran. The flag burning does not come from the bible
Let's do a hypothetical experiment. The Economist likes to do "what ifs" in its journalism at times. For experimental control let's assume this all takes place in the UK (or Germany, France, Belgium, or the EU nation of your choice, excepting places like Hungary or Bulgaria).
Let's do some find and replace on the perpetrators of such an act.
Let's do some find and replace on the desecrated objects of the religion represented and reverse the roles of the hypothetical perpetrators.
Then let's have Erasmus make a similarly worded "try to understand them" rationale as to why this hypothetical attack should be shrugged off, as he/she argues here.
Then let's gauge the difference in the reactions from the offended parties.
Under this hypothetical rendering the editorial offices of "this Newspaper" would have already had to pay for extra security, have its staff alter their routes home, and would have already received darkly worded phone calls.
Maybe you'll get some angry remarks here from the predictable voices in the US in Europe. There's a difference; most, if not all of these parties, know when to stop. Virtually all Westerners, even those in private agreement with their more zealous brethren, would condone no violent reprisals (as we have here).
I guess we are missing a key point here. In our quest for understanding, we are putting it all into pot of relativism.
Yes, this is The Donald wasting another news cycle for to deflect the gaze from his 55%-39% polling averages. Yes, this is The Donal stirring the pot--to diminishing marginal gains, and diminishing political capital--for his hardest of hard-core supporters, as independents rethink his presidency.
However, let's play out the scenario. Let's see the difference. Then we will know, regardless of where you stand on culture and religion in the West, why "we are having this conversation."
Play it out? It's gonna take another 7 years!
I should think the words used by Erasmus - "defile", "desecrate" - are 100% apropos and appropriate, whoever smashed the statues of Mary.
I think the perpetrators, picking on the statue of Mary, in the most twisted manner the human mind can imagine, wish to live and relive the act of rape, blow by blow, symbolically. Why pick Mary? What did she ever do, by all accounts, in OT or NT, in Islam or Christianity, Lutheran or Roman Catholic?
And, for the first time, I read on Erasmus, the word “RESPECT” [Second sentence, final paragraph]. Thank you. (It was a bit like pulling tooth, an impacted wisdom tooth. Took 10 years.)
As well testimony that it is a REALITY, not anyone’s fantasy or imagination, that in many corners of the world, people of many different religious faiths “rubbed along quite happily” [Last sentence, final paragraph].
Not just in Kashmir does this happen.
Last time I said the same, an UGLY AMERICAN, self-declared “Roman Catholic”, told me - yes, ad hominem attack is his specialty - for bearing testimony to that FACT, I was a “warehouse of fortune cookies”.
The man defiled not me, not even the Roman Catholic Church, but himself.
One more thought: I hope no one will ever dare to smash the Piéta in Saint Peter's Basilica, Rome. Even though I am not a Christian, the work deeply moved me and always will. That work, among many other artistic imponderables, was created by a homosexual man.
In the event the weird American returns and attacks me again to discredit and insult me by his trademark epithets and ad hominem attacks, here's to repeat my testimony -
I know many Christians, Roman Catholic and Protestant alike (within Protestant - Episcopalian, Anglican, Presbyterian, Lutheran, Methodist, Baptist, and one 7th Day Adventist, a physician I met in Doctors Without Borders - who are kind, treat other people with politeness, and view the world with all the people in it with a perspective of genuine care.
Lol, oh no! You've just destroyed your nice comment. What has homo or hetero sexuality got to do with one's work? Has it ever been heard that sexual orientation influences ones work? Imagine, the pilot is homo or hetero, who cares, just fly the damn plane well. Besides, there's only one legitimate space for sexual acts both for hetero and homo orientations, and that is, in stable marriage, private and open to new life. Any other sexual expression or practice is sin (i.e. causes grave disorders).One can feel like killing the whole world but as long as one does nothing no probs. The problem begins when one translate that feeling into action.
I wonder if there is evidence that sexual orientation DOES, in fact, affect one's attitude toward art. Both Michaelangelo and DaVinci were rumored to be homosexual and the gay population does seem to produce an outsized proportion of significant artists. It is sort of like the Jews -- why are there so many great thinkers among so numerically small a population? In both cases, I am darned if I know.
It is possible that gays have a slightly different artistic sensibility. I do not say "inferior" and mean merely that there is a lot of human physiology and aesthetic awareness of which we are ignorant. In fact . . . how is it that ANY human being appreciators that which is beautiful?
My own, purely subjective, experience is that gays actually are a little more responsive, and certainly more creative, when it comes to art. But, that is just what one person has noticed and I do not suggest that all others have noticed the same thing.
This "desecration" business is pretty "iffy." The same magazine (TE) that seems a bit reserved over the smashing of Marian statutes was rather eager to see statues (of Confederates) destroyed only a few months ago. And, the Confederate flag . . . . !
A representation of a thing is not the thing itself and we make ourselves unhappy if we act is if it were. It may offend one but, as Jefferson said regarding religious differences, "it neither breaks my leg nor picks my pocket."
Christophobia manifests itself in many terrible ways. In the west, the people who smash statues of Jesus, Mary and Father Serra, are most likely Antifa types looking to put forth an agenda. In the muslim world, they just blow up or machine gun the entire church. Unless, like the Pali terrorists in Bethlehem, they cower inside it for protection against IDF, use it as a urinal, loot it, then are granted free passage to western secular democracies.
Thanks TE. Good job. Keep plugging.
A hate-filled imam destroys a statue of a sacred Christian figure and the Economist presents the story by interviewing a liberal Muslim who reassures us that this has nothing to do with the real interpretation of Islam. Did it occur to the author to interview someone of the Christian faith? How do millions of Christians feel about this? Will this video not whip up hatred of Christians by Muslims? Who is this odious Imam?
I can't help contrasting this with TE's coverage of events when a mosque is desecrated, statistically a very rare occurrence in our tolerant society.
The story here is not that Christians in the West need "education" about the nature of Islam. The story is that this Wahabi brand of Islam, exported worldwide by Saudi Arabia, has almost wiped out the Christian presence in this part of the Middle East and is the sworn enemy of the West.
small but important correction for you
- An Imam is from the Shia sect.
_ A Mullah etc comes from the Sunni sect. My bet would be that the person who did this had to be a Sunni Muslim.
It is very rare for a shia to be involved in terrorism - including this type of terrorism.
My personal opinion is that this Khan woman is an apologist for terrorists. She will never mention the atrocities committed by Muslims.
I was not aware of that. Thanks for the correction. The man who smashed the statue was indeed Sunni. He was a supporter of the "moderate" rebels in Idlib but did eventually join ISIS, according to reports on alternative media.
This Khan woman needs to remind people of the terrorism conducted by ALL the Muslims in Kashmir.
January 1990 - every Muslim newspaper and every Sunni Mosque announced that they wanted the hindus out of Kashmir
And of course over the next few weeks, marauding gangs of Muslims went around Sri-Nagar killing whole families
The result was conservatively estimated at around 400,000 Hindus ethnically cleansed out.
Before she lies about Muslims not being terrorists, she has to discuss this issue
* The ethnic cleansing of Hindus from West Pakistan - Most of the cities there used to have a minimum of 35% hindus in each city - some actually had over 50%
* The killing of 3 million Hindus by the Pakistani army in 1971 - inside East Pakistan
* And of course the ethnic cleansing of all those hindus during January 1990 by the Muslims of Kashmir
If she cannot discuss all this - she is living a lie
Smashing statues that aren't your property is still a crime however. So those muslim terrorists still ought to get no passes on this one.
It could have been a case of mistaken identity. Perhaps a tour bus of American Liberals thought they were attacking a statue of Robert E. Lee.
it is a pity that so many believe the lies put out by these Sunni Muslims.Most Sunni Muslims would not have the guts to do what the Koran tells them to do.
However The real believers will do as they are told
Assad and Putin have done much more for Christians in Syria than the West ever did. The West was busy being blinded by greed and power, supporting a whole host of head chopper fanatics in Syria for short term gains against Assad, willing to throw anybody under the bus who got in their way. America, supposedly a Christian nation, did nothing for the Christians in Syria under attack from Wahhabi fanatics. No, no, instead they opted for backing those very Wahhabis. When Aleppo was liberated in late 2016, the putrid Western press ran headlines lamenting this event. Meanwhile, the people of Aleppo could go outside for the first time in a long time and openly celebrate Christmas. The happy celebrations were overwhelming, even for Muslims. These images and videos were NOT covered at all by the Western propaganda machine.
The fake rescue jockeys like the White Helmets, glorified so much by the British, turned out to be terrorists. And lets not forget Nour al Din al Zenki, part of the laughable "moderate rebel" list, who's members beheaded a Palestinian boy. Then we had the emotional propaganda in Aleppo, with Bana and the boy in the rubble. There was even a case of a European film crew busted filming with props to staging scenes.
Is The Economist here trying to vindicate terrorists again? It would not surprise me. The moral and intellectual bankruptcy of the West was well documented during this failed regime change fiasco in Syria.
Thank the SAA, Hezbollah, Russia and Iran for saving Syria.
More of your standard, vile, psychopathic, anti-Western venting and lying. To take just one example: Your claim that the "putrid Western press" and "propaganda machine" failed to cover the 2016 Christmas celebrations in Aleppo is egregiously false. They were extensively covered in Time (by Suleiman Al Khalidi), The Daily Mail, and The New York Post, among many others, along with evocative photos.
The quite prominent role of Jesus in Islam, and in particular in Islamic eschatology, is an interesting point largely unknown in the West.
If nothing else, it's amusing to contemplate what the likes of Steve Bannon would do if the End Times really did come and Jesus, son of Mary (yes, that guy) descended from Heaven... in Arabia, to greet the Faithful and lead the followers of the Mahdi against al-Dajjal, the Antichrist?
Hell on Earth - for Steve Bannon?