On conversations that make you think…

Wendy: AD, can I ask you an existential question? Lol yes, I know I just used existential in a sentence for no apparent reason.

Later…

AD: Madam, sorry I’m just seeing this chat

Existential kini?

Wendy: Hey!

Sorry, wasn’t at my desk

AD: Not at all

Wendy: Yes, so I’m reading this book which is really good. It’s called The Sirens of Baghdad, it’s so well done that I didn’t realise until I was halfway that this woman was weaving the story of what happens in the mind of a suicide bomber: how they’re indoctrinated, but not really indoctrinated, more like what makes a person choose that path.

Now, what is curious to me is that a lot of the decision to swing this way or that seems to stem from a matter of honour. Which we see all across the Arab world. What I want to know is if this concept of honour above all has cultural or religious origins? Because we see it across the Arab world and northern Nigeria even… but I don’t really get the same sense from Yoruba Muslims.

Wendy: Lol sorry for making you my Muslim bible of sorts please, no offence intended

Just curious

AD: Not at all Wendy, it’s nice to have these interactions coz they also make me think deeply.  Introspection is a good thing at times.

Wendy: Thanks, that’s a relief

AD: There are a lot of religious commandments that are directed at preserving honour. But most of them direct people to return to piety.  There’s an Arabic word “Taqwa” which translates as piety, fear of God, God consciousness, etc.

Wendy: So let me put this in context a little more

In the book, the protagonist (of sorts) is from a tiny village in Iraq far from the main Occupation, this is at the start of the Occupation when Saddam is still on the run. He grows up non-confrontational and hating violence. Now in a series of events he witnesses the brutality of some American soldiers on some innocent victims due to a misunderstanding, then the bombing of a wedding party with claims that there were terror suspects hiding. Yes, perhaps enough to make someone angry but what really turns the scale is the soldiers come to his village looking for suspects and basically in the course of searching his parents’ house, more or less drag his father out of bed naked and allow his children see his nakedness with no regard for age or the elderly. And this singular act is what sets him off. Now the author understands that the average person reading this book might think that’s an exaggeration and tries to explain this by saying that in the Arab world, disgracing elders, especially a father in front of his children is a stain on family honour that basically must be avenged with blood?

So [what you’re saying is] basically the Quran’s idea of honour is more in line with a god consciousness? Because this other type of honour seems to have a lot to do with personal pride and losing face

Wendy: Comparable only to the African American’s obsession with the word, “Disrespect”. (What does that even mean?! I really hate hearing it)

AD: No, the religion also protects self-honour (I’ll give some examples).  But not with these penalties.

Wendy: Oh ok

AD: 1.  It is prohibited to enter another’s house without receiving permission.  So if I come visit you, you have to invite me into your home otherwise… But what is the prescribed punishment if you stumble inside?  Nothing.

Wendy: So there are no real sanctions per se prescribed? What is the place of violence and how is self-defense described? (because I know a lot of people justify violence as self-defense)

AD: 2. The punishment for adultery (fornication btw married people) is death by stoning.  Harsh is how most people describe it.  But how do you establish that adultery has been committed?  By either a self-admission by the parties, or if 4 witnesses saw intercourse.  Not just two people playing on a bed o!  They have to had seen actual penetration if not, they will be given 100 strokes.  This is to preserve the honour and reputation of the accused until established.

Wendy: So there are checks and balances to avoid injustice. That’s fair

AD: Also, justice has to be administered by a Judge, and not all these funny chauvinists across Eastern Europe that pronounce people guilty and execute their children for “staining the family”.

So one lone ranger going off to kill himself and foreign soldiers for exposing his father’s nakedness has no place in the religion.  Granted things like this touch can trigger emotional responses, but if the person has a good understanding of the religion and his/her purpose here on earth, the immense rewards promised for patience, etc, they will not be carried away and act in a manner that contravenes established (divine) law.

Truth is most humans are lazy and always look for a short-cut to success.

Wendy: Very well put

AD: So if someone promises you paradise with all its attractions by just blowing yourself up, that human weakness takes control.

Wendy: Because this concept of honour is so flawed yet too touted. But it really only suits a personal narrative because the base of it is pride and personal injury and I just don’t see how that can be substantiated by ANY religion. So it’s really more culture than religion based, and a lot of these cultures are chauvinistic, prideful and violent but hide under the guise of religion to sanctify their actions

AD: Now I always ask, if it was that easy to get to paradise, why I waste my time fasting, praying, getting up at night, paying charity, etc. Pride it is! Like the ‘Eid we’ll be celebrating next week is about Abraham and the Islamic narrative on him includes his calling his people to monotheism, but under King Nimrod they had multiple gods and shrines.

When he called his own father who was a celebrated sculptor (idol maker), his father replied angrily that he was rejecting his gods, threatened to stone him, etc.  Why?  Arrogance, self-preservation (his business was booming)

There’s a fine line and Islam doesn’t replace all parts of culture, just the parts that are reprehensible and deviant to some extent but man in his weakness continues to move towards what he wants/likes/desires and tries to validate it by ascribing it to divinity/religion

Wendy: Yes, I agree. I think the confusion is that there is more of permeability in Arab cultures across the world so it’s easy to ascribe it to religion.

Do you see? Because people in Saudi Arabia might have a similar approach to honour killings for instance as people in northern Nigeria or even India, we non-Muslims assume that the reason for this must be the similar religion not that a similar culture has spread across and I guess that’s the beauty of stereotypes as Chinua Achebe says. It allows for mental laziness, so we don’t need to say a thing is this or that, we can quite simply say everything is ‘this’ and avoid tasking ourselves mentally to clarify/specify

AD: Yeah. It’s interesting

Wendy: But are there verses in the Quran that can objectively be construed to avenge what one considers a personal slight with an ‘honour’ killing? I’ve heard people say the Quran says kill Christians and other infidels, but that that was because the Prophet was writing at a time where there was war with Christians?

AD: Not really Christians. The verse says

“…and slay the unbelievers and drive them out of where they drove you out because fitnah (something like trials) is worse than killing”.

But the next verse says

“…and if they stop (fighting), then indeed, God is most forgiving and merciful.”

So two things from these verses.  Christians and Jews are not regarded as unbelievers. They are collectively referred to as Ahl-Al-Kitab – People of the Book which acknowledges the divine origin of the messages sent to Moses and Jesus (asw). It also includes the Zabur that was sent to David

So that’s the first one

The context of the verse was when the Muslims were a minority in the larger Arabian peninsula, and they had a lot of enemies around them, they had been driven out of their homes in Makkah by the idolaters, and some early Muslims had been executed by combing out their skins with iron combs, pulling apart with horses, chaining them on the hot sand face up to die-off in the hot sun and cold nights, etc

The laws for fighting are very clear.

The call to war must be made by a Muslim leader, a Caliph.  That’s why you have most of these groups calling their leaders Amir, Caliph, etc to justify this first point.

Fighting must be against a military enemy and not on the populace

It is forbidden to kill a non-combatant counter party

You must not cut down trees or the elderly

You should not punish/kill anything with fire (some connections to bombs here)

and some others

Wendy: Just imagine that. I’m amazed

…I think it’s important that people understand these things

That’s the only way we can at least achieve tolerance if we can’t get to the point of appreciating each other’s religions

I just have always been surprised at the vast difference between the actual Muslims I know and the ones I hear about, there is no connection and that’s so confusing.

And I know I’m not the only one.

May we think a little more deeply about how much unites us…and how little actually separates us. 

Photo Credit: Darling