[Aman Singh]

Another cartoon has left the Muslim community hurt and horrified, this time it is focused on the niqab worn by Muslim women.
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/islam/29589-another-cartoon-traumatizes-the-muslim-community.html

For centuries women around the world wore veils and covered their heads, even Victorian women were forced to cover up. But today’s western influence sees women going the reverse to their ancestors.
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/showthread.php?t=29589

Muslim women who were the niqab do so to maintain their dignity, but they have been made a laughing stock

During the weekend, Montreal Gazette newspaper published a controversial cartoon by Terry Mosher showing a woman in niqab, covered from head to toe with the slit space for her eyes depicted as prison with jail bars and locks.

The cartoonist, however, contends that he drew the cartoon to encourage discussion over the issue of veil, which started off in Nov 2009 when a Muslim woman refused to remove her veil in a French class in Montreal.

Speaking to Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, Mosher said, "In the (Montreal) Gazette this morning, there is actually an editorial in support of the woman, and yet my cartoon is against it. So that is part of the discussion and I think that's a very healthy thing."

Two weeks ago the Muslim woman, Naima Atef Amed filed a petition with the human rights commission in Quebec province for violations of her religious rights. Amed, a mother of three and a new immigrant to Canada, had reportedly refused to sit with male students around a U-table for conversation skill development classes.

The authorities at CEGEP de Saint-Laurent claim that they did everything to accommodate the woman's demands. The college said that they allowed her to sit in the front row and also made suitable arrangements for her to make presentations comfortably.

While Canadians reacted strongly against the woman's insistence to wear the niqab, Muslim leaders have spoken otherwise. Montreal Muslim Council leader Salam Elmenyawi has opined that the cartoon was 'distasteful' and lashed out at the cartoonist by questioning his intentions.

This is not the first time a cartoon has led to major controversies. Last week, a plot to kill a Swedish cartoonist was foiled when Irish police arrested seven people working on the murder. The cartoonist had invited the ire of his murderers for putting Prophet Muhammad's head on the body of a dog in a cartoon.

In 2005, a Danish newspaper created a huge stir when it printed cartoons showing Prophet Mohammed carrying a bomb in his turban. They were even reprinted in Jan 2010 by a Norwegian daily as the cartoons hit the headlines again after a Somalian man tried to kill the cartoonist Kurt Westergaard.

[kuldeepsb5]

Burqa is a religious symbol for Muslim Ladies and making
comedy of a religious symbol is Bajjar Pap. Who so ever
has made this cartoon, is not a wise and religious person
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/showthread.php?t=29589
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/showthread.php?t=29589
and also does not respect the other proples religious
sentiments.
Waheguru sabh nu sumatt bakhshe.
Waheguru ji ka Khalsa Waheguru ji ki Fateh

[Tejwant Singh]

Originally Posted by kuldeepsb5

Burqa is a religious symbol for Muslim Ladies and making
comedy of a religious symbol is Bajjar Pap. Who so ever
has made this cartoon, is not a wise and religious person
and also does not respect the other proples religious
sentiments.
Waheguru sabh nu sumatt bakhshe.
Waheguru ji ka Khalsa Waheguru ji ki Fateh

Kuldeep ji,

Guru Fateh.

I have a question for you and I would appreciate if you could clarify that.

If Burqua/ Niqab is a religious symbol then is it an optional one because not all Muslim women wear that and secondly. is there anything like an optional religious symbols that all in that religion do not have to adhere to?

Thanks

Tejwant Singh

[Tejwant Singh]

This is not the first time a cartoon has led to major controversies. Last week, a plot to kill a Swedish cartoonist was foiled when Irish police arrested seven people working on the murder. The cartoonist had invited the ire of his murderers for putting Prophet Muhammad's head on the body of a dog in a cartoon.

In 2005, a Danish newspaper created a huge stir when it printed cartoons showing Prophet Mohammed carrying a bomb in his turban. They were even reprinted in Jan 2010 by a Norwegian daily as the cartoons hit the headlines again after a Somalian man tried to kill the cartoonist Kurt Westergaard.

Sadh Sangat,

I am confused by one thing and I hope our Muslim friends who visit this place can clear my confusion and educate me in this field.

A cartoon/caricature of someone can only be drawn if someone knows what the face of this particular person looks like.

As no one knows how Prophet Mohammad looked like then how can one claim that it is the cartoon depicting the Prophet?

The cartoon I saw in the Danish newspaper that have supposed to have depicted Prophet Mohammad with a turbaned bomb looked more a caricature of a Sikh than of anyone else.

Lastly, if Prophet Mohammad is so important that no one even knows his face then why his name is allowed to be used by many Muslims. What happens if a person named Mohammad becomes a rapist, a murderer.

Wouldn't this be more offensive than the face which is unknown?

Just thinking aloud.

Tejwant Singh

[Narayanjot Kaur]

Here is an interesting factoid about "taking the veil" in the realms of Islam. A face-covering was never a requirement in the earliest days of the Muslim faith. It became popularized after Greece was conquered by Turkish invaders. Aristocratic women of Greece covered their faces with a veil as a kind of fashion statement of flirtatious modesty. The veil therefore spread from West to East.

Burqa is not a requirement even in countries that follow both Sharia law and hadeth. Though wearing a head covering is required in countries that follow Sharia law.

Throughout most of the Muslim world women make a choice to wear the burqa as a proof of their religious faith (Of course culture helps this choice along). The burqa is a more symbol of a particular religious culture than the religion itself. Taliban required the burqa of all women using fallacious interpretatons of the Koran. Yet, on the streets of Cairo, or New York City, one can see women in burqa.
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/showthread.php?t=29589

The article is raising the question - is the burqa a prison? Another question -- should governments restrict the religious expression of individuals without showing that there is a compelling reason to do so?

[BhagatSingh]

There are many views on why and how the Islamic purdah started. One view has it that Prophet Mohammed became very poor after spending all the wealth of his first wife. At that time, in Arabia, the poor had to go to the open desert and plains for relieving themselves and even their sexual needs. The Prophet’s wives too had to do the same. He had told his wives that “I give you permission to go out and carry out your natural work”. (Bukhari Hadis first volume book 4 No. 149). And this is what his wives started doing accordingly. One day, Prophet Mohammed’s disciple Uman complained to him that these women were very uncomfortable because they were instantly recognisable while relieving themselves.
Umar proposed a cover but Prophet Mohammed ignored it. Then the Prophet asked Allah for advice and he laid down the Ayat (33:59) (Bukhari Hadis Book 026 No. 5397).
This is the history of the purdah, according to the Hadis. But the question is: since Arab men too relieved themselves in the open, why didn’t Allah start the purdah for men? Clearly, Allah doesn’t treat men and women as equals, else there would be purdah for both! Men are higher than women. So women have to be made walking prisons and men can remain free birds.

Prophet-was-against-burqa article sparks riots, kills two - Aby Tharakan - Gross National Happiness - True/Slant


The taliban are simply trying to imitate the Prophet like most devout Muslims because he is supposed to be the perfect man.

[JustCurious]

I think the fact of the matter is that to Muslims the cartoon villified their Prophet, who to them is seen as a Prophet of God and so should be held with respect. Even though we don't know how he looked, it's what the cartoon portrayed that I think was the problem.
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/showthread.php?t=29589

Also I think the Muslim backlash to the cartoon was a little bit exaggerated, as the media purposely choose sensational images that are designed to sell their newspapers. After all it is a business, and businesses want to make money.

[Tejwant Singh]

Originally Posted by JustCurious

I think the fact of the matter is that to Muslims the cartoon villified their Prophet, who to them is seen as a Prophet of God and so should be held with respect. Even though we don't know how he looked, it's what the cartoon portrayed that I think was the problem.

Also I think the Muslim backlash to the cartoon was a little bit exaggerated, as the media purposely choose sensational images that are designed to sell their newspapers. After all it is a business, and businesses want to make money.

Just Curious ji,

Guru Fateh.

Please read my post which is #3 above and then comment on it which will also respond to your first part of the post.

Regarding the second part of your post, it seems you take things too lightly as far as Muslims' reactions are concerned.

In another incidence the Muslims killed the director of the movie which was based on the true story of the atrocities commited by the Muslims in the name of Allah and was written by an ex -Muslim who also had to escape and come to the US to settle. She was the Member of Parliament.

Tejwant Singh