Final part: The Myth of Muslim Barbarism and its Aims

Salam,

Alright. This is the last and final part of my three-part review (Part 1, Part 2) on this book : The Myth of Muslim Barbarism and its Aims by S.E. Al-Djazairi. For complete details on the book, ISBN number, ratings and so on, please visit here. :D

Finally having reached the end of the book, I would say this is quite an okay book to read. I don't really recommend it per say because I think the subject of the book is almost completely focused on the past. The author reiterates various achievements of the Muslim that have been deleted from history textbooks, diverted attributions of Muslims' accomplishments or making them simply look insignificant, defaming and blatant slander against Muslims throughout the ages and of course depiction of Islam by the 'Crusades' and Pope as the ultimate anti-Christ, devil or satan.

Needless to say, I wasn't aware of a lot of these things. Being raised stagnantly in a scientific educational background, history, philosophy, art and tools of the Abbassid and Renaissance Age never really reached me. Of course, you hear fleetingly about it, but you know, it was something of the past, seemingly insignificant to me now. In that sense, yes, Al-Djazairi's book served its purpose in opening up my blind eyes. And his objective precisely was to show that the pola or pattern of history always repeats itself.

The defaming, he says, is aimed for one purpose only. To justify attacks and occupation. The Red Indians of America were massacred on the justification that they were barbaric cannibals, when evidence of such acts were never produced. Same goes for Algeria, the French colonized the region on the suppossedly honourable objective of civilising them.

Now, in the 21st Century, Iraq and Iran are being attacked by the so-called civilised, democratic people. Let's look at Iraq; first they say they want to get rid of the cruel Saddam, who in fact they gave support to before. Then, they say there was 'weapons of mass destruction' hidden in Iraq. And so they attacked. And now, after the country has been turned upside down, no weapons of mass destruction has been found. And the people are far worst under US military control than they ever were under Saddam. So, basically, the leader of US has lied to us, to the world. And yet, no action is taken against them. Because why? Simply because they have veto power in the United Nations. So, what good now is the United Nations? Now, they are saying Iran is enriching nuclear power for military purposes. Investigators have come and go. And none found illicit actions. The nuclear generator in Iran was well below 5% enrichment, no where near 95% that is required for it to suffice as a weapon. This is clearly another blatant lie. To justify what? War.

This is the utmost precise aim of making Muslims or any people look like barbaric, savage or uncivilised. To justify war.

This is the main premise throughout the book. I think it is a noble effort. I think it is very well-written and professional. But for me personally though, this is quite a heavy reading. I think that the author rightfully gave many examples to prove the main aim of defaming Muslims. Although I think it is necessary, I would prefer more examples to be given pertaining to this and the last decade. Maybe because I am only two decades old :). But honestly, I think too much focus is on the past. Several examples of course should be quoted from beyond two decades ago, but, it would be nice if there are more things I could relate to written.

This is an amazing book though, for fanatics of history and those who love this subject. Personally I think, what's in the past, leave it in the past.

For example, in the 2nd Chapter: The depictions of Muslims Throughout the Ages, it was repeatedly stated that a lot of Muslims' achievements have been discredited or attributed to a false non-Muslim person/entity. I think this is true. The fact that the Islamic Civilisation gave birth to Renaissance is rarely mentioned anywhere. In my course as a medical student, the contributions of Avicenna's Canon was mentioned only once which was is my Essentials of Surgery Lecture. What about his contribution in anatomy? Canon's usage as a medical textbook in Europe for 800 years? And in Biochemistry, its modern origin in the Islamic Civilisation was never mentioned once. Al-Djazairi gave many other examples. And he reiterated the many academic books and articles of the then Europeans that again and again deny Muslim Civilisation's contributions to modern philosophy and science.

I think all this is okay, but more importantly for me personally, names does not really matter. What matters is that the contributions has helped the world today. So what if those Muslim personalities are not mentioned. If people want to deny those names, never mind. Names are just names. Islam has never taught Muslims to be proud of utter names and superficial honour. If our contributions are good ones and has helped the world, then, Alhamdulillah, Praises be to Allah.

Really..., lessons need to be uncovered and excavated from the horrors of the past, and this is what Al-Djazairi is doing, but other than that, just forgive and forget. Learn the lesson, do not repeat it, and move on. Make new history.

Wallahu'alam.
Peace to all! :)