MY REFLECTIONS ON CHARLIE HEBDO(first published on wordpress two months ago)

In 1988,the Indian born magic realist writer Salman Rushdie published his fourth novel titled the Satanic Verses which has remained a controversial piece of prose containing several offensive references to the prophet's lifetime. The result was the outrage it provoked across the muslim world;and in 1989 the Iranian supreme leader,Ayatollah Komeini,made a strident call for the book to be banned and even for the author to be put to death. What does this signify? That religious sentiments,once aroused,can spread at a breakneck speed throughout the world. Can we therefore agree that the protest against Charlie Hebdo's maddening depiction of prophet Muhammed(S.A.W)is one intriguing example of sentimental reactions on religious grounds? We all saw the mammoth crowd expressing the general sentiments of the Muslims in the streets of Paris,and the concerned mood of other principle-driven rights groups and individuals.

What does that implant in our minds? That religions play a significant role in peoples' lives by shaping their beliefs,controlling their actions and providing them a tendency to distinguish themselves from other religious groups with whom genuine association seems nearly impossible. Hence,in what appears to be an intentional slander against the reputation of prophet Muhammed(S.A.W),several insinuations have been made not only to distract popular attention from the issue of religious sanctity,but also to give an enormous weight to the rhetoric of liberalism in the spirit of freedom. The questions: Does liberalism promote religious intolerance? Do we find with it the human face its proponents give it ?

I strongly believe in my heart that the foundation for liberalism is the recognition of certain human values and principles that are capable of removing harm from the society and encouraging peaceful co-existence among humans. What,however, became of it when in 1988 Salman Rushdie decided to offend the Muslims through his literary venture? Distorted based on the growing feeling that Islam has no place in the 21st century. Where was its human face when the French cartoonists chose to vent their spleen against our noble prophet? Downplayed by the free-will and spitefulness of ignorant men who were determined to achieve fame through a mission many feared,even when permitted by free speech .

Then,what is the result? That they have become overnight celebrities .Salman Rushdie,67,now a British citizen,relishes the acknowledgment of the British royalty,prides himself in his ability to win plaudits from renowned writers and literary review agencies,and gleefully laughs his way to the bank from his palatial home in London. Come to think of it: Charlie Hebdo,the big name. It has risen from anonymity to legendary heights. The fact that it is now a popular name in the global media industry is worth the popping of champagne in Paris. Whether we like it or not, it now has a big name that is greatly admired by other secularist media houses that may soon follow suit. Also,more enchanting and more contributory is the Je suis Charlie(I am Charlie)slogan that has since been used as an endorsement of press freedom in the Charlie's non-conformist fashion after the January attack. Another evidence of its world wide popularity manifested itself in the Indian journalists' solidarity gathering for the victims in New Delhi. Enormous weights they are,given not only to press freedom in Charlie Hedbo but also liberalism in the context of the West.

However,we have been left with no logical solution or peaceful arrangement in the interest of world peace after the sad event. If not anything,the unclothedness of hypocrisy as evident by France's refusal to protest the Gaza killing and its quick condemnation of a similar violent crime should provide an occasion of the excercise of the critical faculty: Why are Muslims always in the news when they are behind the gun? That there are crude stereotypes of Islam,the types that Western civilization is unwilling to discard. Those very strong misconceptions,we can be sure,have been implanted in the mind of the world to do more than preserve the ideals,culture and values that are central to Western civilization. They are also used to justify the invasion of reactionary muslim lands on the platform of defeating terrorism,for example since the 9/11 catastrophe. Furthermore,by logical insight we are provided the chance for inference that can be largely arrived at through the antagonistic relationship between the West and muslim majority countries in the world. The West is going to preserve its ideals at all cost;the survival of free speech and press freedom is non-negotiable. Then,to ensure the survival,it is compelled to stick to its pattern of hostility which implies indirectly the welcoming of any attempt to ravage religious sensibilities and to maintain through physical force the sources of tension in,for example,the Middle East. But as long as it is worthwhile to ensure the survival of the Western ideals,we must also admit that the Muslims have a sacred duty to maintain those values that are central to Islam without relaxing them. Finally,both sides must move beyond the mind set of perpetual ideological conflicts while guiding their cherished values in the name of peace. In fact it is never too late to forgive each other.