This week, an unusual opinion piece appeared on the Wall Street Journal online. Tawfik Hamid wrote, “Islam Should Prove It’s a Religion of Peace.” Looking back over the past few months, I have noticed that a common theme in articles about religion is “proof.” Specifically, the question is: Who is responsible for proving facts about a particular religion? When and what do Muslims, for example, have to prove about their own beliefs? Hamid argues that Muslims are responsible for the negative perceptions of Islam because they have failed to produce sufficient counter images. This puts all ownership of proof on the holder of the religious belief. Therefore, regardless of any differences from one Muslim believer to the other, all are equally at fault if there is a negative world image of Islam because each Muslim is obliged to prove their peaceful disposition.
Hamid’s specific suggestion is that the Muslim world must immediately produce a religious text that argues against violence. However, the catch is that the book must be widely accepted by the entire religious community, otherwise, it will only be one of many books about how Islam is peaceful. If the circular reasoning is not apparent, it is because there is also a presumption that all Muslims currently follow one or two texts that do espouse violence and hatred. This overemphasis on textual and written influence over Muslim thinking is strange. The way that some extremist Muslims “teach hatred and violence” is less by text and more by acts and spoken words. Nevertheless, Hamid’s response to the Dutch filmmaker, Geert Wilder’s movie Fitna, is that Islamic scholars must produce a new Sharia book. It is hard to imagine that a book will effectively combat the training camps for militants with so-called Islamist agendas. The end result for Hamid is that all extremist verbal rhetoric against Islam is acceptable until “a book” can be published that will be accepted and adopted by 100% of Muslims everywhere.
