- 27 Sep 2015 12:24
#14604166
Checking my privilege - yep, still good
What would happen if the Sahara became socialist? - For ten years, nothing, then we'd run out of sand.
No, not my words 
This is an interview with Hamed Abdel-Samad in Die Welt:
This is an interview with Hamed Abdel-Samad in Die Welt:Die Welt wrote:"Mohammed was a mass murderer and a sick tyrant"
Author Hamed Abdel-Samad retraces the fatal consequences of a sacrosanct prophet. Fanatics and Moderate able to refer to him. And rightly so.
The German-Egyptian author Hamed Abdel-Samad wants to stir up trouble, he says. He calls on Muslims to critically engage with their religion, to challenge their structures and foundations that are perceived as sacrosanct, to reinterpret and adapt them to their present living conditions. This has earned him a lot of trouble and a lot of enemies. His book "The Islamic Fascism" (Droemer 2014) resulted in a fatwa, a religious legal opinion, which demanded his murder. Abdel-Samad went into hiding. But he did not remain silent. The 43-year-old lives under police protection. His new book goes one step further. This time the subject of his criticism is the Prophet himself. "Mohammed - A Reckoning" (Droemer, 224 pages, 19.99 euros) will be released next Thursday. A conversation about hubris, paranoia, delusions and the gigantic religious influence of a man who has been dead for 1400 years.
Die Welt: You say that you would like to bury the Islamic Prophet Muhammad for good. What do you mean by that?
Hamed Abdel-Samad: Mohammed died while 1,400 years ago, but he was never really buried. He remains one of the most powerful people in the 21st century. He still prevails and is a model for 1.4 billion Muslims, peaceful and violent ones alike. All derive their legitimacy from his texts and traditional acts. Its rules are followed even by non-Muslims: He should not be criticized or drawn. And we comply with that. I do not accept that. Mohammed and his deeds have never been critically examined. Nobody dares to see him as a person of his time, with all his weaknesses, illnesses, doubts and self-doubt. It is time to settle accounts with him and bury him in his time. He does not deserve this devotion, and he does not deserve even this power in the 21st century.
Die Welt: You are very hard on the Prophet, calling him a "pathological tyrant," a "narcissist", "paranoid" and even "mass murderer". Many moderate Muslims won't like this, either...
Abdel-Samad: I'm assuming a multiple disease that resulted from his personal history and that the Muslims absorbed. Narcissism and paranoia originate very often in feelings of inferiority, rejection, failure. Mohammed has often been rejected as a child. His father he did not know, the mother gave him away and died when he was six years old. He had no role models, knew no love, no tenderness, no recognition. Thus was formed a personality who suffered compulsion to control, fear of loss and paranoia. This also explains why Muhammad married so many women and collected them like dolls. His craving for recognition was also causal for receiving a divine revelation. He certainly didn't lie or copy. He really received an inspiration, but he only had it because he was in such a fragile state of mind. He made a virtue of necessity.
Die Welt: But his success in spreading his inspiration among the people was initially modest.
Abdel-Samad: Yes, he was not successful at the beginning, although the first Koran passages have been gentle and peaceful. Coexistence, tolerance, consideration - no one was impressed. Then he changed his strategy - and the language changes. Mohammed forms war alliances, in the shadow of the sword came success. Only when spoils of war were held out in prospect, Islam became an economic project which was becoming increasingly popular. Many warlords that Muhammad had fought earlier, now sided with him, because they wanted to bet on the winning horse.
Die Welt: This is your personal picture of the prophet. But you use and interpret the same sources that you criticize. How does that fit together?
Abdel-Samad: Everything is contained in the sources, some was covered up, some mystified, some added. I'm just trying to separate the wheat from the chaff. There are stories that you can not invent or their invention does not make sense. From this I conclude what concerend, worried, or frightened Muhammad. So a very human picture of the prophet emerges.
Die Welt: Many will accuse you of blasphemy ...
Abdel-Samad: That's fine. The fundamentalists and conservatives call it that. But I call it reason. Historical-critical reading. Others do not dare to do that, they prefer to justify and talk nice. They say: "Yes, perhaps Muhammad has killed 900 Jews in one day, but back then it was quite normal." For real? Which tribe has killed 900 people in one day, back then? None, because it was common practice to release prisoners for ransom. Did Mohammed marry off his daughters when they were six years old? Hardly. I don't believe many of these things. I'm trying to create an overall picture from many puzzle pieces.
Die Welt: At the moment everyone makes their own interpretation the prophet, extracts whatever is useful for them. The terrorist militia Islamic State (IS) have nothing to do with the true Islam, one hears again and again. But is that true?
Abdel-Samad: This assertion is not only misleading but dangerous. That would mean that we can leave Islam the way it is. The IS does nothing that Mohammed hasn't also done himself. It draws a religious legitimacy from the historical texts for each of its actions. Whether beheadings, enslavement, rape, marriage with minors, the expulsion of Jews and Christians - for everything documents can be found either in the Qur'an or in the Hadith (Muhammad's traditions of deeds and statements).
Die Welt: But what about the mass murder of fellow believers? Where we find the in the traditional texts?
Abdel-Samad: Nowhere, but the IS looks at his Muslim victims not as coreligionists, but as apostates who have fallen away from the true faith.
Die Welt: Then everything can be interpreted into the prophet and anything be justify .
Abdel-Samad: I could say that the IS terrorists have misunderstood and misinterpreted Mohammed if one could conclude from the authentic sources and texts that Muhammad had been a monk who has proclaimed his message under a palm tree, then died peacefully, and people have founded a religion after his death, which was then abused. But that's not how it happened. Mohammed was warlord, he did the same things that the IS-terrorists do today.
It is the mindset of Muhammad, who distrusted the people, which has survived until today. The mindset of a megalomaniac narcissist that defines an inner circle of followers and all those who are outside this circle, are regarded as enemies who are extinguished. The IS is the legitimate child of Mohammed, in word and deed. Nobody understands Mohammed as well as the IS. Just like the religious police in Saudi Arabia, the fanatics in Indonesia, Boko Haram in Nigeria, al-Shabab in Somalia and the Hamas in the Gaza Strip. They come from different cultural contexts, but all rely on the same multiple diseases of the Prophet and thus his religion.
Die Welt: You want to break through people's reserve, you already did so with your previous books. But this time you attack the Prophet directly. Do you not fear that you might alienate everyone, including those enlightened Muslims who would perhaps be receptive to your approach?
Abdel-Samad: I have completely different experiences. I have recorded the main theses of the book in several internet lectures and posted them at YouTube. In just the past three months, 1.1 million people have seen them in the Arab world. I'm used to insults and threats. But I was surprised at how much encouragement I got. There is a discourse, and that is a sign that Muslims in the Arab world are ready for an open discussion about their religion and their prophet. In the diaspora, with the luxury to maintain a romanticized image of Islam, the need for discussion is not great. The West is still of the opinion of having to hold a protective hand over the Muslims.
Die Welt: So you want to instigate a revival, reformation, by breaking taboos?
Abdel-Samad: There is the phenomenon of enlightenment by bewilderment. I would like Islam- and Muhammad-criticism to become normal. A Christian writing a book "Jesus - a reckoning" would never be asked these questions. Nobody would ever think to ask the author whether he was not afraid to alienate two billion Christians. The fact that I'm being asked these questions is the best justification for the book. I want to ensure that no author or artist has to fear for his life, just because he criticizes a character who died 1,400 years ago.
Die Welt: Do Christians have an advantage over Muslims ?
Abdel-Samad: Yes, because Jesus invites us to do good, and you can say with complete justification that the Crusaders have abused the teaching of Jesus, because Jesus never conducted a campaign and never beheaded anyone. Three key messages of Christianity are: 1. "The sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath." 2. "He who is without sin, let him cast the first stone." 3. "Render unto Caesar what is Caesar's, and to God what is God's!" From this you can develop a humanistic doctrine without any problems. The religious rules were written by men, they do not have this immunity as in Islam.
Die Welt: Does the reform process need Muslims being able to laugh at themselves?
Abdel-Samad: Yes, but that only happens by challenging people. At the moment, the fundamentalists are setting the rules. They say you mustn't write about Mohammed like that. And we accept that. But I am a free man, and I have paid dearly. I'm serious about liberty. And I don't make concessions. Many hate me for it. But there are also many to whom I give a voice. I'm not looking for allies, I was always alone. And I am not upset about the fundamentalists who want to kill me. I get upset over the supposedly liberal Muslims and Germans who tell me, you're going too far. I live under police protection and I fear for my life - but I go too far? Have we let ourselves be indoctrinated so much by the logic of the fundamentalists?
Die Welt: Or is it fear of the violence of the Islamists, preemptive obedience in view of a new mass immigration to Germany?
Abdel-Samad: Perhaps, but it is wrong. Germany is in danger of repeating the mistake it made with the migrant workers and their children. At that time you didn't dare to intervene out of cultural sensitivity, to not patronize the immigrants. But today you have to ask the question: What are people fleeing? They flee from exactly this Islamic mindset of hatred for dissenters and "infidels", from an ideology that has solidified over the centuries. And then they come here, and we are not able to tell them that they can't revive here the very thing they have fled? There is a reason that people flee to Germany, the land of "infidels" and not to Mecca in the heart of Islam. The reason is that Germany has a free and open society in which people can do research and think freely. That is why Germany now lives in security and prosperity.
Die Welt: What is politics doing wrong?
Abdel-Samad: It hopes to get help from Islam organizations that build - with state funds! - Islamic kindergartens, schools and mosques, and want to indoctrinate the refugee children. Eventually the adolescent Muslims will then have the feeling that in this society, they can not live their faith, in the land of sin, where people drink alcohol. Then they are lost to the ideologues of the IS.
Die Welt: So we should demand the unconditional acceptance of our life style from the immigrants?
Abdel-Samad: Yes. The refugees need support, but also clear rules from the outset. German society is a "participatory society". Dear refugees, dear immigrants: Join, or you will have a hard time. See to it that your children learn German. And if you do not want to learn to swim, at least let your daughter go to the swimming and sports classes, because this country is committed to helping your child in his personal development. If you believe that you do not want to do all this, then get your next train back to Hungary. It's that simple. If they aren't made to understand this now, then it will happen maybe never. The message must be: This country is good, because it is free, its citizens can flourish and faith is a private matter. That makes this country loveable and liveable. And you benefit now! So stop complaining and adapt!
Die Welt: What is your solution for Islam?
Abdel-Samad: It requires honesty. This presupposes depriving Muhammad of his halo. The divine message - that is its immunity, that's the trick. I do not think that Islam can be reformed. But Muslims can reform their thinking, reform their mindset and modernize their relationship to religion by struggling through to the conviction that faith is a private matter. It is necessary to begin the demystification of Muhammad and the religion founded by him. You have to say goodbye to parts of the authentic Islam, to the constraints, to the legitimation of violence. To regard Arabs as the eternal victims of the West is counterproductive. That way the victim attitude is cemented. That's almost racist. Someone has to break the ice. I want to be such an icebreaker.
Checking my privilege - yep, still good
What would happen if the Sahara became socialist? - For ten years, nothing, then we'd run out of sand.
You seem to see denial, in reality it is people avoiding a dull thread. There is no one who knows anything about history who is not already aware Big Mo loved himself a bit of killing and raping and forced conversions etc. What exactly are you criticising people for not doing? 
- By FiveofSwords
- By Pants-of-dog
- By Negotiator
- By Deutschmania