<$BlogRSDUrl$>

Saturday, June 04, 2005

Piss Koran: Koranic abuse as art 
The claim that Koran flushing, or Koran kicking, or stepping on the Koran or urinating on the Koran is offensive to Muslims seems to suggest, incorrectly I believe, that urinating on the Koran has neither place nor precedent within the Muslim tradition. To the extent that urinating on the Koran, or otherwise defiling the holy book, questions the boundaries between the sacred and the profane, it enacts what it represents. It threatens the identity of radical Muslims and liberal, America-hating idealogues, who respond by seeking to exclude the practice from.

I consider that what is at stake is not merely the question of tolerance within a pluralist society but also of tolerance within a pluralist Islam. To whom do religious symbols belong and who has the authority to prescribe the manner in which they are used? Ultimately, aren't these Koran themselves the property of the U.S. government, anyway?

I would argue that pissing on the Koran, regardless of the guard's intentions, is a profoundly religious act, to the extent that it raises profound theological questions that speaks to the very heart of Islam. Consequently, urinating on religious texts, such as the Koran, is still worthy of consideration.

It is my contention that it is the guard's exploration of the relation between the abject and the sacred that makes Koran kicking not only good art, but good religious art, bordering on the iconic. I am thinking of the theological meaning of icon in which the icon is less a representation than a window onto a deeper reality. (!)

The story of the Koran flushing incident is also a parable in which our expectations are turned outside down in order that the sacred may manifest, because as Hegel expressed: "the familiar is not understood precisely because it is familiar."

The history of its reception appears to show that Koranic abuse in general and Koranic flushing in particular have already unsettled and transgressed many boundaries and in the process questions that which is most familiar. Maybe it is not so much a question of the sacred and the profane so much as the sacred and the mundane. Those who consider Koran flushing to be blasphemous would seem to consider that the guard has profaned a sacred object. In doing so he is considered to have transgressed a distinction that should remain respected and protected. The guard they might consider, has in effect pissed on God. The guard has transgressed upon the sacred with the ultimate profanity.

But is it not possible that Koran flushing and other forms of Koranic abuse also reveal a genuine and insightful religiosity?

More than that, is it not possible that by comparing the liberal defense of Serrano's Piss Christ with the hysterical crocodile tears over the sacredness of the Koran, the sheer hypocrisy and intellectual bankrupcy of the cheese-eating liberal mindset can be exposed for the fallacy that it is?

Splash, out

Jason

Comments:
Hi,

I found this new software:
http://www.best-blog-link-generator.com

This is perfect for free traffic, high ranking, backlinks etc.

Check it out!
You don't want to miss this one.
 
Well hello there Blogger, I was just searching for some ideas on religious art when I happened on to your Blog. Although this post isn’t quite what I was looking for, it was for more information on religious art. You’ve still got a great Blog here.
 
Hi there Blogger, I was just cruising the blogosphere searching for the latest information on and came across this great blog. Although this post wasn’t quite what I was looking for, it has excellent articles. I see now why I found your page when I was looking for related topics. I’m glad I stop by, keep up the good work.
 
Hi there Blogger, I was just cruising the blogosphere searching for the latest information on abstract art and came across this great blog. Although this post wasn’t quite what I was looking for, it has excellent articles. I see now why I found your page when I was looking for abstract art related topics. I’m glad I stop by, keep up the good work.
 
Hi there Blogger, I was just traveling through looking for some interesting stuff on and I came upon your Blog. I haven’t seen what I was after regarding this post, but I’m going to carry on searching for more information on related stuff. By the way your Blogs great.
 
Hi there Blogger, I was just traveling through looking for some interesting stuff on inspirational art and I came upon your Blog. I haven’t seen what I was after regarding this post, but I’m going to carry on searching for more information on inspirational art related stuff. By the way your Blogs great.
 
Surrealizm
 
Evening, to come upon such a post was really what someone like me, or us, may find as proof and evidence to the prophetic word of the Holy One of Israel when He was rebuking the temperament of His People saying 'behold, day and night they are thrust angry with a stupid nation'. This could be also a controversy of purport, the purport of the word that is, but in either cases, where the word could purpose America or the Muslim Pluralism, which still is not the purport of the word, still, the purport of the word could only be understood, not through 'the stupid nation' indice, but through 'them'. To whom is The God speaking? As for me, I know where I am and who I am with the God, but I wonder if the blogger has the slightest idea if pissing on the book as an iconic entrapping of the heart of Islam is a cup more boiling than telling the American that if they be this furious with Islam itself then why is Hollywood governed by a Muslim. Why do the last floods of piss of the Hollywood film industry center their iconic entrappment, the coding of their streams, with an ambition toward the grammatical norm of the Upper Right. Note, I say ambition, I do not say succeeding endeavor. I do not hate America, I hate every pluralism under any the ungiven banner and streaming. Where the rightly drowned lift themselves as a torrent, as a flood, the Spirit in us says 'The floods have lifted O Lord, the floods have lifted'. As for the Ben Ladin event; should you be a dog for verity and truth, you will find it with the perfect instinct of pure sniffing, peculiar to dogs, as a bookworm I tell you, so in order to understand who the ben ladin event is sponsored by, you have to see who gives evidence of his coming through his own similtude of pluralism, a pluralism he cannot maintain under his own singledness, therefore, in order to equip his singledness with a mass, he draws upon the mass an enemy. As for Iraq and the elitists who sent the american soldiers to fall as a prey in a stake out, you have to check with the one who raises his axe of strength at leisure and says here, shall the axe lift itself against its carrier, o instrument of my anger, I will break you also'. Like I said before, this phrase is not my owing to my Reference and Sanctuary, my Reference and Sanctuary does not accept paradigms of vanity in guise of His word, because His Word is Supreme. It was the same scenario, he wanted the jews, he raised upon them an axe, and there was the holocaust, he always wanted the jews to convert; but whether there are jews or there aren't any left, because if you see Ben Stiller as a jew, you'd be wrong, and even worse Dustin Hoffman, and even worsest, if you find Scorcese a master of parables and not an esorterician of intrigues, then it is your problem of laying aside the perfect reference with your own sense of plenitude in deficiency; but yeah, whether there are jews or there aren't any left, Judaism knows and remains. 'Through Judah God is Known', the Upper Right Grammaticism would accentuate and say to this: 'Through the Continual Rendering of the Glory to the One to Whom Sovereignty Belongs and every Anointed Sovereignty Pertains, The Total Phrase of Redaction and Light is attained to the felicitous meeting of Favored Beatified Constancy'. The Star of David was not David's making, it was the Console of the Holy One to lift to His Standard the soul and spirit of one man who wanted to be Near God, or With God, or After God, or simply who wanted to be Jewish. Finally, to clarify, Jewish is a fallen word. Yehuodi is the phrase of the word, the meaning of which is 'With My Stay and of My Keep', it is a title that the Holy One bestows upon people who divorce the plane of things in favor of an Order of more owing and much more prior. So may the pharoahs you plundered be your stay and may your iconic expression of your given countenance be your keep. As for us, we are sick of bearing the stink of your 'countenance' (inner bearing, vessels filling) shadowing us with such unseemliness. We are the work of perfect concordance with our God, and He is no stranger to us and we are no strangers to Him. On the day of your way to water after all your drunkenesses of iconic piss, tell me who you will try to catch up with when you manage, if you ever manage, to distinguish water from piss. and thank you.
 
Post a Comment

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

Site Meter

Prev | List | Random | Next
Powered by RingSurf!

Prev | List | Random | Next
Powered by RingSurf!