Expression is a mode to convey message or opinion, may it simply be a motion, a verbal, a physical move, an action or reaction.

Expression defines motive as intention.

It is an impression to explain and float notion as thought.

It’s a gesture, dependent upon the mood, environment, place, personality and perception.

It is an act that response as reaction without verbal denomination thereby deciding and curtailing the term in the contest of sign and symbol.

Modes are portfolio which acts as transformer so to deliver the info to the processor for responsible action as expression.

Expression derive its origin from built in and acquired tendencies in the form of traits, habits, senses and factors that governed personalities.

Hence as many as one can consider suitable and appropriate as per his exposure, suitability, required criteria, necessity and circumstances.

In the world of broader spectrum, expression is the only platform which enables the speech to be communicated to the listener intended for, thereby as you said, the message received.

In my opinion the same is the methodology of US law or else, whereby it awards, “free speech” in the contest of expression meaning, freedom to communicate with all forms of expression”.

However such ideas in the confiscated term of free speech and expression as repeated criminal blasphemy episodes, is the point of reservation being Muslim, as intended desire to legalize repeated act of blasphemy under the cover of free speech can not be own or engulf or assimilated by and under the head of courteous and neglecting response.

This disowning has infact similar threshed hold as; we being Muslim and nation condemn the cowardly act of all such happening in the shape and format of suicide bombing or any criminal acts in the name of self interpreted fanaticism based non Islamic principles.

Dear, it’s all, the matter of perceiving and interpreting things.

Perceptions and feel has a very little line of demarcation, and most of the times used inadvertently and interchangeably as synonymous.

Up to the point of definition and synonymous attrition in a vocabulary of books, terminology does not create mess but if we get out of definition and implement the terms on religion and belief, there seems to be a mass difference.

This is the root cause of deranged directions.

You see we feel things through our innate abilities that has been destined by virtue of our god gifted natural tendencies in the shape and format of nature ,as smell, taste, sight and seen, hearing, and touch.

These are the modes by which we appreciate the end result or resultant in the form of good, bad, stink, and etc.

However perception is an integrated phenomenon.

It’s the cumulative effect of feel and associated paraphernalia with element of interpretation.

If observe religion in the light of perception my feelings would be different, as compared to a person who observe religion by his feel, as closed observation would relate element of emotion and attachment with in the domain of definition.

It is this tendency that ignites and retaliate thus deviating the horizon of thoughts.

Expecting response to speech through speech is a misnomer, if we take speech as mode of expression.

It denies the concept of expression as expression is a platform to convey speech which can be through the way and mode, what ever is acceptable, feasible and suitable to the retaliator.

In my opinion this is the legal ground of speech where it should be curtailed as it havoc a new multidimensional attitude of listener to respond ,who shall be expected to utilized any such platform that in his horizon of thoughts is fruitful as retaliation.

Such magnitudes of impulsive reactions again are dependent on multiple factors from, exposures to qualification and broad perspective to courteous tendency, terminating at his assumed or obligatory religious bindings and belongings.

Tendency to react in situation has neither criteria nor protocol hence is always situational.

In such a variant horizon of vast population peoples have different perspective to look in to affairs, whether religious or functionary.

Grooming, exposures, ethnic belongingness, religious bindings and attachments, and grievances against races are all such factors that shoot a new circular of event in any such untoward free speech culminating in to undesirable situation.

It is this point where legal measures need to be initiated so to curtail and avid any new situation, vide free speech and expression.

There are pre set criteria and limitations to respond and react.

Such responses are threshold dependent and variant, exercising individual in to different trait qualities as aggressive, humble, down to earth or offensive etc.

These traits are again dependent on time tested exposures, circumstances, situational, obligatory, bindings, belief, and horizon and perspective of vision.

In other words such limitations are polished with exposures to extreme of environment that breaches the threshold by diffusing its pressure and brunt so that person may become immune or to a limit that his thresh hold to respond increases thus delaying the reaction in retaliation.

The same is the theory of tolerance that person sacrifices his desire over interpreted thoughts ,thus curtailing and abiding and refraining from the untoward behavior and indecent response, morally and socially unacceptable by virtue of law, society, culture or religious abides etc.

Rules are right to the extent that of course one has the right to peacefully protest whatever he want, as the natural human desire to speak up in response to a message if one find hateful!

However, here again discussion enters in to the same methodology of expression, as mode and platform to respond in lieu of speech is in the domain of retaliator, depending on his trait qualities and threshold to accept brunt, and the brunt itself depends on his previous or innate abilities as tolerances.

This tolerance has one other visionary prospect if we scrutinize the subject in the light and methodology of belief and religion.

Tolerance under such perspective resides on principle of obligatory restrictions and belief as attachments.

Hence, sorting, tolerance, in to mode of, preference and priority, on the basis of liability, obligation and restriction as bindings.

It is this restricted liability that is always targeted and floated by such offensive culprits that deliberately utilized the expression of free speech in lieu.

In my opinion, under such diversified domain of responses, again, limited speech with legal implementation become a requirement so to refrain and avoid unfamiliar and offensive behavior.

As to your inquisition, how to stop these offensive people who derogate belief or religion, regardless of their belongings, in my opinion being Muslim ,we have many situational responses of our holy prophet (PBUH)and qoran which clearly ,specify and negate such irresponsible behavior of human response that may hurt ,or derogate or culminate in to grievances.

Islam teaches principle of brotherhood and harmony with peace, and negates and disowns all such elements that sabotage or dismantle scope of Islamic ideology and teaching.

In my opinion, irrational responses under any circumstances should be condemned and disown and as has been cited and advised by intellects, ignoring the event is an option.

This destiny of continuous consequences is the resultant of our iatrogenic distortion of behavior in terms of nation as Muslim.

Qualities as traits and symbols as faith have always been set aside from the emblem of insignia as belonging and bindings.

Perceiving all if and buts within the platform of religious assertions has developed an irrational wave of unaccepted discrepancies among the fake and reality.

One thing people got to realize, no body can threaten Islam, but any body can threaten Muslim.
Belief is a subjugated term, with different perspective and domains of religion among different community, people and nation.

What has been defined as prohibition in Islam can be an integral part of other religion.

Dominancy under such rational and logical diversity can only be countered by excellence ,expertise, knowledge and advancement and with abilities that may counter and restrict the conscience with in the laid down principles of religious practices being Muslim keeping preferences ,priorities and liabilities above and towards the interest of humanity at large.

No body will accept your slogan and signature of dictation as Muslim.

People have their own faithful principle and policy of obedience, practices, loyalties and acceptance as belonging and bindings, within their defined domain of religion as Hindus, Sikh, Jew, Christians etc.

If we as Muslim want to curtail and disembark these culprits from the sight and scenes of maniacal activities we got to compete on every platform of intellect above and about the domain of our ideology of belief .

I agree with both of you. With Dr Alshaer about Muslims becoming better muslims, and A Khokhar for galvanizing the Muslim Intelligentsia. And IMHO both of them are the same thing…

I was listening to a Juma sermon and the speaker rightly said that what we need to do as Muslims is to categorically reject the current Politico-Socio-Economic system, to live with it under protest. If we keep our interests in this system then we can only dream of bringing about meaningful change. And for that the first step is to create a strong bonding with the Quran. It is with the Quran that we’ll be able to answer anyone appropriately, worldly knowledge is all very well, but without a strong bond with Quran, that worldly knowledge is going to lead us astray.

Thanks,
Faraz Beg

International Institute of Islamic Thought

You are very right in your analysis. Effort is being made by Muslim intellectuals today but with the political environment we live in today, those efforts are being derailed. Though you may not agree with these Muslim intellectuals, I would encourage you to visit this site:

International Institute of Islamic Thought

Regards

It was the churning of wheels of wisdom, knowledge, science and technology pursued by the Muslim literates of Iran, Iraq, Turkey and Syria that their endeavour in the light of Quran, took Muslims to the heights and gain recognitions beyond their Islamic borders and started influencing the life of people in Europe, in Spain and beyond. But then we know that what went wrong? [Janetay hain per kiya batlain, kuyoon lag gai perwaz main chup?]

Allah keeps on changing the time for the peoples. A Muslim ought to be a man of knowledge and reasoning; a man who possessing wisdom and fore bearing. Logic and reasoning are his tools. Muslims need to be equipped first, before this that they re-enter the battle zones.

Allah keeps on changing the time for the peoples. A Muslim ought to be a man of knowledge and reasoning; a man who possessing wisdom and fore bearing. Logic and reasoning are his tools. Muslims need to be equipped first, before this that they enter the battle zones.

You have brought-up a lot of issues here. Personally, I do not engage in trying to fight ignorance. Best to just focus on educating Muslims and non-Muslims. These folks will not be the first to start spreading lies and certainly will not be the last.

I am very encouraged by the interfaith dialogues around the world. No matter of what anyone may think of King Abdullah, of Saudi Arabia, the conference in Spain was a great initiative.

My advice to my fellow Muslims is to ignore these issues and focus on becoming better Muslims first. Be kind to your neighbors, no matter what they may believe in.

Regards

Our religion Islam, our book Quran and our Prophet Muhammad (s.a.w) may be the most sacred to us but same is not taken as such by others. Our immediate predecessors; Christian they can’t bear it that Islam is standing there to challenge their concocted myths; like Trinity, Jesus* as a god and a saviour of all the nations.

Possibly No Muslim should be much perturbed on the publishing of caricatures of their Prophet (pbuh). Muslim should know it well that only unpleasant can come out a foul mouth. These publications should be dealt with wisdom and ‘Hikma’. Rest assure; the caricature published and re-published with the intent to create a mischief has also got its own (positive) value. Like all the bad news, this mischief is reaching and stirring even the laziest, couldn’t careless fellows in the far flung corners of this planet. This intimidating exercise of Caricatures may make the common man at least think that there is some thing biger at its play behind all this mischief?

This is another way; how the ‘Word of God’ travels even to the darkest hearts. This may result in pricking their conscious and ultimately bring them closer to God and Islam… and make them kneel to— submit and repent. Caricature may serve; as a tool; where it may makes possibly others to reflect; it also pricks the Muslims that how powerless, destitute and useless bunch they are? There is no forum of their own to turn to; no print or electronic media to counter, neither they have their say in UNO. No Muslim country is even permanent member there.

Like wise lately an Anti-Quran movie ‘Fitna’ produced by Dutch right-wing politician Geert Wilders, (a victim of his own ego) tried to turn it into a media hype. Knowing it that he will be rejected and resisted but with a hope that in turn he may gain some fame in the line of fulfilling his ulterior political motives. I personally think that this Film must be made available for the people to watch. It only shows references of some out of context Quranic verses and clips of waffling and stereo type rhetoric of some Palestinian-Iraqi Mullahs, of killing the infidels. This film has evil intents but fallacy and evil has its destiny to perish and be humiliated when it comes up to confront the truth. And it ultimately… dies its own death.

In the likewise circumstances; God admonishes in Quran; in [21:71] “And they had intended an evil plan against him, but We made them the worst losers”. And in [9;3] “So if you repent, it will be better for you; but if you turn away, then know that you cannot frustrate the plan of Allah”.

Regards