Islam and freedom of expression
By Intizar Husain
From its very beginning, Islam has been, according to Taha Husain, averse to the freedom of thought and expression. He argued that in the early phase of our faith, restrictions had been imposed on Christian and Jewish poets lest they should say something injurious to it. It was, according to him, something like a censor on poetry.
Amir Shakaib Arsalan, who had fought under the command of Anver Pasha, vehemently refuted Taha Husain and asserted that a censor on poetry was unknown in the early period of Islam, and that the freedom of thought and expression enjoyed by the poets, Muslims and non-Muslims, lingered on in later periods, too.
Mohammad Kazim chose to translate Shakaib Arsalan's article in Urdu and include it in his newly-published collection of articles titled Ikhwanussafa. So now we can have a peep into the controversy between Taha Husain and Arsalan.
Arsalan has quoted a number of couplets where a non-Muslim poet is seen showing disrespect to the Holy Prophet (Peace be upon him) and criticizing Islam. The Christian and Jewish poets were very fond of expressing pride in their faith. In spite of that, no restriction was imposed on them. Arsalan asserts that poets in the early Islamic period enjoyed the full freedom of expression, that lingered on even later.
So far Arsalan is convincing, but he has advanced in favour of his stand some strange arguments, that are hardly convincing. He quotes some couplets from Yazid who, on seeing the head of Imam Husain, blurts out that he has settled his account with the Holy Prophet (Peace be upon him). He further quotes a couplet from Walid Bin Abdulmalak, in which he addresses the Holy Quran, saying that it is free to tell Allah on the Day of Judgment that Walid had torn it into pieces.
It is naive to draw the conclusion from these couplets that the Ummayad period believed in the freedom of thought and expression. Arsalan seems bent on granting a licence to every despot in the history of Islam to say and do anything in the name of freedom of expression, forgetting that these despots had reserved every kind of freedom for themselves alone.
However, at times, suppression of expression appears to him, justifiable. He grants the possibility of imposing restrictions on certain poets during Khilafat-i-Rashida. He assumes that it must be in cases of the misuse of poetry. He goes on to explain this misuse by saying that poetry was being made to serve the purpose of fomenting trouble instead of providing pleasure. Strangely enough, Arsalan sees no misuse of the medium of poetry in the hands of Yazid and Walid Bin Abdulmalak.It is with a sense of approval that Mohammad Kazim has chosen to translate this article into Urdu and accommodate it in his collection of originally written articles. Ironically, his two articles on Ikhwanussafa included in this volume are unwittingly in contradiction to Arsalan's assumption of freedom of thought in the later periods of Muslim history. The very movement of thought known as Ikhwanussafa is enough to expose the freedom of thought supposed to be enjoyed by intellectuals during the Abbasid period.
Mohammad Kazim tells us that in the mid-years of the Abbasids, a group of intellectuals deeply involved in philosophical thought had chalked out a programme to meet secretly on the twelfth day of every month and discuss philosophical issues in a purely intellectual way. The whole discussion recorded in the form of an epistle was to be circulated secretly among those who were interested in a philosophical exchange of ideas, but could not manage to participate in such a meeting.
This movement had taken care to keep the names of its leading members secret. As Mohammad Kazim tells us, it was because of the fact that for a hundred years, the Caliphs had imposed heavy restrictions on philosophy and liberal thinking. So when these epistles gained circulation and attracted the attention of serious-minded people, the state and the orthodoxy took serious note of them. The orthodox clerics held these epistles to be blasphemous. On the orders of the Abbasid Caliph Mustanjid, all such epistles were set on fire.
Intellectuals and thinkers associated with this movement aimed at an Islamic revival through the promotion of philosophic thought. They were of the view that philosophical truth is not very different from religious truth. They had delved deep into Greek philosophy. At the same time, they saw no harm in benefiting from the books of wisdom written by Christians and Jews. With their liberal thinking, they accommodated all ideas without prejudice to creed or religion.
Such were the people known as Ikhuwanussafa. Kazim's two articles about them may be seen as an introduction to their movement.
Other articles included in this volume have their own value and make good reading. For instance, we have here two articles about Abdullah Moarri who, as Mohammad Kazim tells us, was a poet as well as a thinker.
By Intizar Husain
From its very beginning, Islam has been, according to Taha Husain, averse to the freedom of thought and expression. He argued that in the early phase of our faith, restrictions had been imposed on Christian and Jewish poets lest they should say something injurious to it. It was, according to him, something like a censor on poetry.
Amir Shakaib Arsalan, who had fought under the command of Anver Pasha, vehemently refuted Taha Husain and asserted that a censor on poetry was unknown in the early period of Islam, and that the freedom of thought and expression enjoyed by the poets, Muslims and non-Muslims, lingered on in later periods, too.
Mohammad Kazim chose to translate Shakaib Arsalan's article in Urdu and include it in his newly-published collection of articles titled Ikhwanussafa. So now we can have a peep into the controversy between Taha Husain and Arsalan.
Arsalan has quoted a number of couplets where a non-Muslim poet is seen showing disrespect to the Holy Prophet (Peace be upon him) and criticizing Islam. The Christian and Jewish poets were very fond of expressing pride in their faith. In spite of that, no restriction was imposed on them. Arsalan asserts that poets in the early Islamic period enjoyed the full freedom of expression, that lingered on even later.
So far Arsalan is convincing, but he has advanced in favour of his stand some strange arguments, that are hardly convincing. He quotes some couplets from Yazid who, on seeing the head of Imam Husain, blurts out that he has settled his account with the Holy Prophet (Peace be upon him). He further quotes a couplet from Walid Bin Abdulmalak, in which he addresses the Holy Quran, saying that it is free to tell Allah on the Day of Judgment that Walid had torn it into pieces.
It is naive to draw the conclusion from these couplets that the Ummayad period believed in the freedom of thought and expression. Arsalan seems bent on granting a licence to every despot in the history of Islam to say and do anything in the name of freedom of expression, forgetting that these despots had reserved every kind of freedom for themselves alone.
However, at times, suppression of expression appears to him, justifiable. He grants the possibility of imposing restrictions on certain poets during Khilafat-i-Rashida. He assumes that it must be in cases of the misuse of poetry. He goes on to explain this misuse by saying that poetry was being made to serve the purpose of fomenting trouble instead of providing pleasure. Strangely enough, Arsalan sees no misuse of the medium of poetry in the hands of Yazid and Walid Bin Abdulmalak.It is with a sense of approval that Mohammad Kazim has chosen to translate this article into Urdu and accommodate it in his collection of originally written articles. Ironically, his two articles on Ikhwanussafa included in this volume are unwittingly in contradiction to Arsalan's assumption of freedom of thought in the later periods of Muslim history. The very movement of thought known as Ikhwanussafa is enough to expose the freedom of thought supposed to be enjoyed by intellectuals during the Abbasid period.
Mohammad Kazim tells us that in the mid-years of the Abbasids, a group of intellectuals deeply involved in philosophical thought had chalked out a programme to meet secretly on the twelfth day of every month and discuss philosophical issues in a purely intellectual way. The whole discussion recorded in the form of an epistle was to be circulated secretly among those who were interested in a philosophical exchange of ideas, but could not manage to participate in such a meeting.
This movement had taken care to keep the names of its leading members secret. As Mohammad Kazim tells us, it was because of the fact that for a hundred years, the Caliphs had imposed heavy restrictions on philosophy and liberal thinking. So when these epistles gained circulation and attracted the attention of serious-minded people, the state and the orthodoxy took serious note of them. The orthodox clerics held these epistles to be blasphemous. On the orders of the Abbasid Caliph Mustanjid, all such epistles were set on fire.
Intellectuals and thinkers associated with this movement aimed at an Islamic revival through the promotion of philosophic thought. They were of the view that philosophical truth is not very different from religious truth. They had delved deep into Greek philosophy. At the same time, they saw no harm in benefiting from the books of wisdom written by Christians and Jews. With their liberal thinking, they accommodated all ideas without prejudice to creed or religion.
Such were the people known as Ikhuwanussafa. Kazim's two articles about them may be seen as an introduction to their movement.
Other articles included in this volume have their own value and make good reading. For instance, we have here two articles about Abdullah Moarri who, as Mohammad Kazim tells us, was a poet as well as a thinker.
Comment