|
Well, the Arabic version of that same Wikipedia article provides the Hadeeth transmitter’s analysis of the Hadith regarding Al-‘Asmaa bint Marian, and the verdict that this hadeeth is fabricated (Mawdoo’). It simply isn’t true. Moreover, the language of the claimed poet - I’m an Arab - is far different from the language of the time, far from being poetic, and the statement claimed that Prophet Muhammad said has a very different tone from his usual tone (He said “Who’d save me from Al ‘Asmaa bint Marwan?” and the Prophet himself mentioned that there is no savior other than Allah. The prophet approach would be something like يريحني (v. make me relaxed) from so and so. It’s a very horrible and easy to spot fabrication, the fabricator almost didn’t put any effort in it and used the language of his time instead. You don’t need to mention a fabricated story to attack Islam’s take on free speech. Free speech is simply not a principle that was ever well-regarded in Islam. “Whomever believes in Allah and the last day should only say good or be quiet” and “Are people thrown into the depth of hellfire except by the sowing of their tongues” and “It is enough for one to be described as a liar is to talk about everything he heard”. The notion of “freedom” is a very western notion that - in its current form - very alien to the sort of freedom that Islam talks about: minimal freedom that is constrained by rules. Free speech certainly isn’t regarded as part of that minimal freedom. More like “constrained speech”, because of the inherent Islamic belief that free speech brings chaos. In times of Fitnah (tribulation, calamity) people are commanded by the Prophet not to speak a word: “Hold your tongue, stay at your home, and abandon the matters of public”; which is absolutely against free speech because people’s opinions are stirred most when there are events, and they’re commanded to be quiet and bottle it in. It is just that we, Arabs, are a radically different culture that values stability and tradition. Something of the sort of “People should mind their own business”. Free speech undermines both. It’s a significant cultural difference that the west has no intent to respect, because they regard it as oppressive. You don’t need to mention a fabricated story to highlight that. |
This is an interesting remark that gave me some new insight into Arabic culture.
That said, free speech wasn't a value in much of the West either, much less in places like Taiwan that are now democratic. Most of Europe was pretty conservative in the 19th century and the revolutionaries who fought for liberal values were mostly educated city folk, a smallish class.
The value of free speech is in the fact that it prevents the country from committing some serious mistakes, or at least reduces chances thereof. Authoritarian systems look awesome from the outside, while democracies with their free speech are obviously messy and chaotic. But in the long run, authoritarian systems tend to commit fatal mistakes like going into an all-out war that they lose (it is happening right in front of us in Ukraine), because no one dared defy the Emperor.
The stability of yesteryear is now gone. With the Internet, any idea can reach any audience in milliseconds, and Arab societies, like those conservative European societies earlier, will have to live with the inherent chaos. IDK what is means for the future of Islam; Christianity in Europe has already collapsed or is (demographically) collapsing. Even in former strongholds like Poland, the majority of young people are no longer religious and this trend, once it sets in, has proven almost impossible to reverse.
I noticed the same trend among youngsters in Turkey, though Turkey isn't an Arab country; but it is an important trendsetter in the Islamic world.