Rushdie Haunted by his unholy Ghosts — Page 52
52 Mohamed Arshad Ahmedi ‘it was felt that this subject was as important for the welfare of Christendom as it was inherently stimulating to the imagination of individuals. The Christian criticism and exaggeration of the license attributed to Muslims was often excessive. ’ (p. 135). Dr. Daniel further admits to the true motives of the orientalists and also to the source of the so-called ‘facts’ that are often quoted as being from the same school of thought and research : ‘All writers tended - more or less - to cling to fantastic tales about Islam and its Prophet in a proprietary way, as belonging to the ‘Christian’ version. . . . Those ‘facts’ which tended to show the falsity of Islam were preferred to all others. The same polemic outline is common to the more scholarly and the more popular works. There was a rough unity of purpose and a similar attitude to the use of data. The difference lay only in degree. More that was incredible was excluded, more that was authentic admitted, in one case than in the next. The use of false evidence to attack Islam was all but universal. ’ (p240/241). Dr. Daniel, like his contemporaries, expresses unequivocally the real reason for this ‘falsification’ and the real fear of the Christians that Islam was beginning to appeal to the West : ‘The Middle Ages were like other ages in inventing and re-ar- ranging the facts of history and the beliefs of opponents in order to suit some noble purpose. It is important to realise that the facts and the Islamic doctrines thus rearranged were put into a form which primarily repelled, and must have been intended to repel, Christians; Islam was, in fact, not always described in terms neces- sarily repellent to Muslims. No doubt there was much that a Muslim would have had to resent; but the unpleasant image of Islam that the Christians drew was drawn to seem unpleasant to the Christian eye. . . . . . In one way and another Islam was made to seem repellent, either as unlike or else as actually contrary to all the most important Christian teaching. ’ (pp. 264-265). Even the hardened critics of Islam, like Dr. Daniel, cannot deny the above-mentioned facts, and he has time and again had to admit