Friday, May 28, 2010

Haram Koran Handling?

The July 2, 2002, Associated Press article about the Caner brothers provides a very touching portion that shows the love of Acar for his sons, despite their departure from Islam (Republication of Article here).
Sitting in his office on the picturesque Southeastern campus at Wake Forest, Emir Caner flips open the cover of a thick blue book. It is the Quran his father, Acar, presented him from his deathbed in 1999.

"To my son Emir," reads the inscription on the first page. "This is yours. Please take the time and read each word for you and for me. Your father."
Let me anticipate one objection. Someone may say that this shows that Acar Caner did not completely disown his sons, because he still refers to Emir as "my son" and calls himself "Your father." To me, that's a trivial objection. All it shows to me is that he still loved his sons.

But there are two other things that cause me to raise my eyebrows. Acar Caner has been presented as an exceptionally devout Muslim. Perhaps one of my Muslim readers will be able to tell me whether (1) giving a Koran to a non-Muslim is permitted and (2) writing in a Koran is permitted.

I don't claim to be a Islamic scholar, but both of those things strike me as inconsistent with the strictest and most devout forms of Islam. The rituals associated both with handling and reciting the Koran involve a large amount of outward purity. Giving the book to a non-Muslim (particularly an apostate Muslim) or writing in the book, just intuitively seem to be at odds with the kind of precautions Muslims are supposed to take with respect to the Koran (see some examples here). Perhaps one or more of my Muslim readers will be able to clarify this for me.

-TurretinFan

17 comments:

gypsyrose said...

The Kuran(Turkish spelling) that was given is a book of reference for instruction. It is not the actual Kuran that is only written in Arabic, no annotation, nothing is included in it that can ever be considered as deviating from the complete and revealed words.
In fact, if any deviation is present in the printing, it would have to be destroyed as corrupt. (Cannot be used for reading, reciting or prayers).
The instructional text that was given was most likely the form where the Arabic and the language that it is being translated into are given side by side, with annotations, references and explanations.
This is NEVER a Kuran that can be used for what is described above.
This controversy reared its head when in the 50's and part of the 60's (if I remember correctly), the ezan (the call to prayer) was given in Turkish in Turkey. There was an outcry from the Islamic countries and Turkish Islamic circles as being Haram and the practice was stopped.
The ezan (the call to prayer, by the muezzin) is only given in Arabic, regardless if 98% of the people in Turkey do not understand Arabic.Much like the traditional Catholic Latin service for the traditional mass.
For a father to leave his sons nothing but the Kuran, and write his own heartfelt words, made my cry because I could feel what he meant beyond the words written.
Such a sad life for all those involved. The father loving his sons, yet seeing them being torn from him by the mother and the grandmother by using Islam as a ruse.This is the reason I translated several articles in Turkish for this site and Debbie's site.I could feel what was going on by reading what the columnists were feeling about the sadness one feels for a family that was destroyed through meddling by others. I can't find the words to describe the emotions involved.
The father saying to remember him as a good man describes his sense of being villified by the others present in the family.When he was no longer around, Islam became the embodiment of the father and the villification continues to this day. The Caners would have benefited from therapy in integrative reminiscence to rid their lives of childish perspectives.What a burden they are carrying.
Sadly, because these perspectives have formed their adult identities,that is too much to expect.

mirele said...

Since none of the Caner sons apparently speak Arabic fluently, I suspect Acar gave them English or English/Arabic versions of the Qur'an. There's nothing wrong with giving a translation, since, as everyone acknowledges, a translation into another language is not the Qur'an, which can only exist in Arabic.

Some years ago, the Saudi embassy sent me a Hilali-Khan English-Arabic "translation," (if you can call it that, it's more like an "Amplified Bible" but with a particular bias). If that wasn't permissible, they wouldn't do it.

Fredericka said...

If all sects agreed this was prohibited, no one would give Western politicians copies of the Qur'an:

"It's [the Qur'an is] a very thoughtful gift."

On 26 September 2001, President George W. Bush held a substantive meeting with American Muslim leaders, and said that "the teachings of Islam are the teachings of peace and good." During this meeting, Dr. Muzammil Siddiqi, President of the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), presented a copy of the Holy Qur'an to President Bush."

http://www.harunyahya.com/miracles_of_the_quran_p5_01.php

Turretinfan said...

Thanks for the answers!

Turretinfan said...

gypsyrose:

Thanks for the suggestion. That seems to me to be reasonable possibility.

A few minor points of clarification:

1) The use of Latin in Romanism when the people don't understand the language is contrary to the teachings of the Bible. So, while there is a similarity between Rome's historical practice and the Arabic prayers by non-Arabic speakers, it's important to recognize that it is fundamentally inconsistent with Christianity to do what Romanism was doing.

2) Yes, the family was split apart - and there are doubtless a variety of reasons why. Part of the reason the family was split apart, though, has to do with the exclusive claims of Islam and Christianity. Both cannot be true. If Islam is true, Christianity is a lie, and vice versa.

Christ prophesied that these sorts of splits would take place:

Matthew 10:32-39

Whosoever therefore shall confess me before men, him will I confess also before my Father which is in heaven. But whosoever shall deny me before men, him will I also deny before my Father which is in heaven. Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword.

For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law. And a man's foes shall be they of his own household. He that loveth father or mother more than me is not worthy of me: and he that loveth son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me.

And he that taketh not his cross, and followeth after me, is not worthy of me. He that findeth his life shall lose it: and he that loseth his life for my sake shall find it.

-TurretinFan

gypsyrose said...

Turretinfan said:

2) Yes, the family was split apart - and there are doubtless a variety of reasons why. Part of the reason the family was split apart, though, has to do with the exclusive claims of Islam and Christianity. Both cannot be true. If Islam is true, Christianity is a lie, and vice versa.

I don't totally agree, and here is why:

1.) There already would have to be conflict for this to be an issue.We do not know the reason for the divorce.

2.)The grandmother was Swedish and Lutheran. Even today there are such terms as "blackhead", "brownhead" and "immigrant" in the Nordic tradition.

One of the reasons I put up the Swedish citizenship laws pre-1975 was also to address this. Immigrants were considered non-Swedish for generations EVEN if they were born there for generations. Germany recently changed its laws to include that children at 18 could choose their nationality as German for citizenship, if they were born in Germany.
What I am arguing is that the father was always looked upon as a "foreigner" by the grandmother who influenced the mother and the children to disrespect the father and through him Islam. That is when Islam became the base of acrimony in their court battles.
The father's defense would have been to try to raise the children as Muslims to have some influence on them.(I.E usul, respect). Hence the lessons at the mosque.

I do not believe that they were "devout" anythings. I would be surprised if the father prayed 5 times a day even if he volunteered at the mosque all the time.
All that shows me is that he had a social consciousness and a helpful nature. I have known people who are agnostics (Turkish Muslims) who spend time in the mosque organizing, teaching,and helping immigrants.
That is the reason I am very skeptical of Caner's description of his father. In those days, one would have been very hard pressed to find anyone praying 5 times a day or even fasting, given Acar Caner's background. Yet, people were/are active in the mosque.

The conflict in the family created the religion issue and served to sour the relationship of the father and the children. Once they were firmly embedded in their new roles, the childish perspective they had of their father was defined as being "saved" from Islam.
Obviously Ergun's feelings of abandonment were further reinforced when the father married soon after the divorce and fathered other children with his Turkish wife. The abandonment was now complete and Ergun, as the eldest son would have been seeking to "protect" his mother by becoming more beligerrent with his father to the point that he instigated the final break in the relationship by his "conversion".
The father was left with no alternative but to disown him on principle, because he may have feared for the other two also becoming like Ergun and disrespecting him in support of their mother.
More and more I read about Ergun, I am convinced that this situation was created by negative family dynamics and dissonant cultural role models and less by any real "devout belief" systems of the family actors.

gypsyrose said...

I'd like to add the rest of my theory to this:


One thing I am very sure about is Ergun really hates Turkish women specifically because his mother was replaced so soon. His "joke" that "the only thing Turkish women excel in is having a better mustache than Turkish men", shows the depths of his anger and estrangement from their father.
The only reason these three went to their father's death-bed is to try to convert him as the final coup in their push to negate his influence on them and to be free of his disappointment in them.
They will forever have that disappointment because the father made sure of that, he gave them something they could never, ever defeat, the Kuran. So the battle they have "fought" against the Kuran, in their minds and souls, has become like the old Norse tales of Valhalla, where the heroes are forever fighting the forces of Darkness.A soldier only enters Valhalla by dying at the hands of the Darkness.
I find the whole thing apropos on so many levels.

Anvil said...

I find gypsyrose's opinion plausible. Also, Turretfin fan, it is important to go beyond your world view when attempting to understand human relations. Not everyone takes religion as the be-all, end-all i.e. if a Muslim or Christian come into a marriage relation and there are tensions, then it's the veracity and truth of one faith, relations being about that alone.

Muslims, as many Christians, are reared with many factors (e.g. see how America becomes the Church for Evangelical Christianity, with the 'Muslim' as the enemy. Ergun's racist stereotypes feed into that and he plays to it captivating his audience - the audience is not necessarily the victim).

The scenario gypsyrose mentioned can occur when the father and mother come from different backgrounds, including different religions - for many people religion is merely nominal and a cultural marker, that includes visiting a mosque or church for socials (it is part of an identity, that includes other markers). I don't like to discuss this personal stuff, but I think it is plausible that Ergun + brothers were caught in that tension, when a divorce proceeded. The father could have personified his own background and so hating that background means hating what are common folk-assumptions/prejudice towards Arabs and individuals from middle-east countries. Gypsyrose's noting of strong prejudicial attitudes to 'immigrants' and folk social categorisation of the 'foreigner' is very true and there is a strong swing to fascistic and right wing politics mainland Europe.

It seems Ergun's dad was an engineer and not a clergy man - he was for sure not a Muslim scholar.

It is clear Ergun is bearing false witness about his own father, stating he had multiple wives - playing again into repugnant racist attitudes and painting him out as some demented Al-Qaeda fanatic. On his website he states

http://erguncaner.com/home/news/korea.php

"His father was somewhat similar to an Islamic priest, a scholar of an Islamic sect called Ulima."

'Ulima is not a sect! It is merely the plural of 'Alim - a learned man/women. It is often used for Muslim scholars but also for learned in any field, secular or religious - there is also no priesthood in Islam. ''Alim riyadiyiat' merely means a learned man/woman or scholar of mathematics! It is not a sect!

This whole episode is absolutely shocking and has opened my eyes to the levels of hate that exists in Baptist and right wing Christian circles – if that is being passed and Ergun makes gain of it, then you have to say there is something rotten to the core in that subculture. This has little to do with confessional Christianity but everything to do with the idolatry of racism and the nation state. Millions of lives are shattered in what are wars of conquest for the personal gain of a few, in the name of national 'interest'. First the 'war-on-terror' and then merely 'evil Muzlimz', ergo the mystique and caricature of the 'other' (notice how Ergun and his equally ignorant brother talk about Arabs/Turks in their interviews - they are one blob).

Anvil said...

In my opinion, right wing Evangelicalism has made America and the 'Christian nation' narrative into their own works based theology (to put it in words that would be more understandable to this blog's readers) and that is why they are caught into this moralising about themselves as 'Americans' as opposed to all that is 'other'. Ironically, much of this prejudice to the 'moral majority' justifies and hence the previous noting of idoltary! I think Stanley Huerwas gets it spot on when he says “This dilemma, I believe, is crucial for understanding the character of religious life in America. America is the first great experiment in Protestant social formation. Protestantism in Europe always assumed and depended on the cultural habits that had been created by Catholic Christianity. America is the first place Protestantism did not have to define itself over against a previous Catholic culture. So America is the exemplification of a constructive Protestant social imagination. … Protestantism came to America to make America Protestant. It was assumed that was to be done through faith in the reasonableness of the common man and the establishment of a democratic republic. But in the process the church in America became American; or, as Noll puts it, “because the churches had done so much to make America, they could not escape living with what they had made” (194). As a result Americans continue to maintain a stubborn belief in a god, but the god they believe in turns out to be the American god. To know or worship that god does not require that a church exist because that god is known through the providential establishment of a free people. This is a presumption shared by the religious right as well as the religious left in America. Both assume that America is the church. “

http://www.livingchurch.org/news/news-updates/2010/3/9/americas-god

The issue is bigger than the Caner brothers and the audience are not necessarily victims of 'lies'...We all need to re-examine our lives and why we believe, what we believe...This includes all people, of all faiths.

thegrandverbalizer19 said...

With the name of God, Peace be unto you.

First off TF may Allah never allow me to speak ill of you. Of all the Christians I have interacted with that don't necessarily have a favorable opinion about Islam atleast your theology is consistent.

What I mean is this you hold to total depravity /original sin but you do believe that babies should be baptized. Though this is not a very tasteful position to hold I find it more theologically consistent than "reformed" baptist who shy away from it.

So for that you have my respects.

I don't know what I can add that is helpful here. I am pretty much in agreement with what everyone has said.

There is an understanding among the Islamic Ulemah that there is a certain adaab (manners) to be observed with the Qur'an and even with the Bible and books in general.

1) Do not put a book on the ground (any book).

2) Do not break the Qur'an or the Bible into the toilet (it's one reason you do not find Muslims wearing verses of the Qur'an on necklaces)

3) If you give a copy of the Qur'an to Non Muslims do not give a mushaff (Arabic text only).

You can also get a feel for the esoteric interpretations as well by looking at the following link.

http://www.islamawakened.com/quran/56/79/default.htm

An zahiri (literal) interpretation is that one should be clean, by performing wudhu (abolution). However, others have mentioned that people have indeed touched and even profaned the Qur'an.

So what it means is that those with a pure heart would touch it or penetrate it.

They would use the following as a proof text.
Hudhayfah ibn al-Yaman said,"The Prophet said,'Islam will become worn out like clothes are, until there will be no-one who knows what fasting, prayer, charity and rituals are. The Qur'an will disappear in one night,and no ayah will be left on earth. Some groups of old people will be left who will say, 'We heard our fathers saying la ilaha illa Allah, so we repeated it.'Silah asked Hudhayfah, "What will saying la ilaha illa Allah do for them when they do not know what prayer, fasting, ritual and charity are?" Hudhayfah ignored him; then Silah repeated his question three times, and each time Hudayfah ignored him. Finally he answered, "O Silah, it will save them from Hell", and said it three times. [Ibn Majah]

It can mean that the literal pages of the Qur'an dissapear off this earth, if you will a rapture of the Qur'an?

The other understanding is that the meaning of the Qur'an would be taken or people who understand it's meanings.

So these are all possible ways to look at the matter. I think that there is overlap in the interpretations.

A person who is willing to wash before reading the Qur'an (or a woman who abstains due to menstration) are people who are observing adaab (manners) the Muslim would argue that such people due to their humility would definitely be given the guidance.

Hope this helps and Allah alone knows best.

Turretinfan said...

Anvil:

Some of my comments below to GR may also address your comments. Very briefly, my comments have to do with the boys' religion, not their mother's.

Generalizations about America and American religion aren't something that are particularly troubling to me.

I would like to briefly point out that the content of:

http://erguncaner.com/home/news/korea.php

is a translation of Korean into English. In turn, the Korean original had to come in some way from English. It's a great example of the "lost in translation" effect.

Gypsyrose:

As I tried to indicate, there may be more than one issue involved in the breakup of the family as such. I think the Caners' book points to worldview differences between their mother and their father (although the boys were young enough that they may not really have accurate firsthand knowledge).

There is evidence that the boys' relationship with their father was damaged by their conversion to Christianity and there is evidence that the boys' father wanted them raised as Muslims, regardless of whether he would qualify as devout in Saudi Arabia.

As far as immigration laws go, I think it is worth pointing out that laws disfavoring aliens are not unique to the Nordic countries. The UAE, for example, does not automatically grant citizenship to those born within her borders.

I find it difficult to read much into jokes that people made. Perhaps you are better at it than I am.

I think there are a number of points on which the Koran is defeated by the Bible, but perhaps that debate belongs in a different thread than this one.

-TurretinFan

Anvil said...

"Some of my comments below to GR may also address your comments. Very briefly, my comments have to do with the boys' religion, not their mother's."

Indeed, a worldview clash is plausible - we can only speculate. It again depends on the background of their parents and these personal issues are not the main concern. Each human beings has their own agency and they mediate their own environment...

"Generalizations about America and American religion aren't something that are particularly troubling to me."

Indeed, we must be very careful not to generalise, religion is prior embodied and is systematically meshed - of course, it takes meaning in different ways. However, I was speaking about a very specific and well documented subculture, that Ergun is affiliated with - right wing Evangelicalism and the idolatry of the nation state.

"I would like to briefly point out that the content of:

http://erguncaner.com/home/news/korea.php

is a translation of Korean into English. In turn, the Korean original had to come in some way from English. It's a great example of the "lost in translation" effect."

Agreed but Ergun put it on his website! If it was incorrect in anyway or misleading, why did he put it on his official website? He really doesn't know the difference, his knowledge of Islam is beyond rudimentary, that is why this episode is shocking and tells a lot about the rotten racist core of right wing Evangelicalism, if this could get passed around & people don't care or can't tell the difference - this is the issue and not the fine details of his life (of course theological discussion are important, as you noted, but this case has a different dimension to it).

Also, he has been passing this information around for a while - his father was clergyman or was that a caller to prayer or missionary...etc. He wanted to conquer America, as his 'evil demented religion' told him!

As I noted, bearing false witness about your own father, to demonise like that, is a symptom of something deeply rotten in the circles he is affiliated with.

natamllc said...

Anvil

you conclude your remarks this way:

"As I noted, bearing false witness about your own father, to demonise like that, is a symptom of something deeply rotten in the circles he is affiliated with."

I would offer a few groups of verses that seems to reflect the "error" that there is something deeply rotten in the circles he is affiliated with.

Pro 25:27 It is not good to eat much honey, nor is it glorious to seek one's own glory.

The first thing I would note about that verse which will logically lead me to the second passages of Scripture is after listening to Ergun's audio or audio/visual clips one senses one seeking to draw attention to "a self made persona" with a purpose that one needs you to continually "believe" in in order for his "own glory" to keep him attractive and sellable to those lusting for that self made attraction themselves. It is one's own personal sin patronizing a mass of other's with the same lust and desire for their own self glorification. What's that old saw? "Birds of a feather flock together".

Now what I see looming on the horizon of this phenomenon is for us to consider the second group of verses which is indicative of an unusual time in history foretold already that would come upon the peoples of the world and now is upon us:

2Ti 3:1 But understand this, that in the last days there will come times of difficulty.
2Ti 3:2 For people will be lovers of self, lovers of money, proud, arrogant, abusive, disobedient to their parents, ungrateful, unholy,
2Ti 3:3 heartless, unappeasable, slanderous, without self-control, brutal, not loving good,
2Ti 3:4 treacherous, reckless, swollen with conceit, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God,
2Ti 3:5 having the appearance of godliness, but denying its power. Avoid such people.
2Ti 3:6 For among them are those who creep into households and capture weak women, burdened with sins and led astray by various passions,
2Ti 3:7 always learning and never able to arrive at a knowledge of the truth.

For the one group, a falsification of the True Church, it will come as a surprise to see Jesus return unexpectedly as the world also, while the other group, the True Church, it will not seeing we remain viligant and sober and expectant in His way of Life in this life, hence the concluding verse of that Chapter of Proverbs:

Pro 25:28 A man without self-control is like a city broken into and left without walls.

This is a good time to remind us of what that Prophecy says:

Rev 18:3 For all nations have drunk the wine of the passion of her sexual immorality, and the kings of the earth have committed immorality with her, and the merchants of the earth have grown rich from the power of her luxurious living."
Rev 18:4 Then I heard another voice from heaven saying, "Come out of her, my people, lest you take part in her sins, lest you share in her plagues;
Rev 18:5 for her sins are heaped high as heaven, and God has remembered her iniquities.
Rev 18:6 Pay her back as she herself has paid back others, and repay her double for her deeds; mix a double portion for her in the cup she mixed.

gypsyrose said...

natamll said:
2Ti 3:2 For people will be lovers of self, lovers of money, proud, arrogant, abusive, disobedient to their parents, ungrateful, unholy,
2Ti 3:3 heartless, unappeasable, slanderous, without self-control, brutal, not loving good,
2Ti 3:4 treacherous, reckless, swollen with conceit, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God,
2Ti 3:5 having the appearance of godliness, but denying its power. Avoid such people.

Timothy hits the nail on the head. This is my purpose in joining this discussion. Thank you for bringing this to my attention.

Anvil, you have clarified my analysis further than what I had. Thank you for this superb analysis and exposition.

Turettin, several points,

" It's a great example of the "lost in translation" effect."

This is also my point in reading the Turkish columnists and translating them. I personally feel the gravity of the perspective that no translation can convey.This is due to my background. This is the formation of this perspective and understanding.

Gypsyrose:

As I tried to indicate, there may be more than one issue involved in the breakup of the family as such. I think the Caners' book points to worldview differences between their mother and their father

(although the boys were young enough that they may not really have accurate firsthand knowledge).

Here lies the quandary. They were too young to understand the causes of the divorce, yet "differences in religion" capped their youthful perspective.This morphed into their thesis of Islam vs. Evangelical Christianity as the great divider of their family.I disagree with their interpretation. I agree with they were too young to understand wholly what was going on between the adult actors.

( I am having trouble putting in all this to the commentaries, is there something I am not doing right?)

gypsyrose said...

There is evidence that the boys' relationship with their father was (I would add FURTHER to this because that would be the accurate timeline definer) damaged by their conversion to Christianity and there is evidence that the boys' father wanted them raised as Muslims, regardless of whether he would qualify as devout in Saudi Arabia.

As far as immigration laws go, I think it is worth pointing out that laws disfavoring aliens are not unique to the Nordic countries. The UAE, for example, does not automatically grant citizenship to those born within her borders.

Agree, yet knowing what I have seen in working with Turkish immigrants in Germany, I beg to differ in the analogy of the UAE/Nordic countries. It was not the issue of citizenship", it was an issue of "belonging", being part of that society.Anvil made a pertinent analysis of this situation in Europe. This is my analysis, because I have seen the prejudice of the Europeans first hand when they had no idea that I was Turkish and thinking they were speaking to an American of "like sentiments".

I find it difficult to read much into jokes that people made. Perhaps you are better at it than I am.

No, it was not the joke that drew my attention, it was the stream of consciousness speeches Ergun has been giving. Those "Personal journey" stories are very revealing to someone who can compare and contrast his scenario with my upbringing and experiences.

I would also like to bring to your attention that Ergun could never have been able to travel to Turkey after the age of 18 because through his father, he would have been seen by the Turkish authorities as a Turkish citizen and subject to conscription into the army.

He said he became a citizen in 1984, this may have been part of it. Yet, I am sure that he became a citizen of the US by transferring from Swedish citizenship. I wonder if he would have included Turkish citizenship. If not, he would still have been eligible for conscription until his forties.
He had said in the Turkish interview that after 1969 he had no contact with his family in Turkey because they moved to the US.
So why on his websites would these appear?:

http://haroldhendrick.com/content/view/136/5/

Ergun Caner of Turkey; President, Liberty Seminary

He was never "of Turkey", why push this as his background except to set his "branded image."

Turretinfan said...

Understood. I think he has claimed he had a Turkish passport, but I understand that he may well have received that without going to Turkey.

gypsyrose said...

Turretinfan said:

'Understood. I think he has claimed he had a Turkish passport, but I understand that he may well have received that without going to Turkey.'

He said many things, yet again there were other options. If one comes from Sweden, and his mother is Swedish, her children (even if the father is Turkish) are considered Swedish citizens.
I said this in another post.

Why go to the expense of a Turkish passport if you have a Swedish one? (Turkish passports cost me in those years over 300 dollars if I remember correctly.)
The state of Ohio has naturalization records, I wonder what citizenship Ergun had.
Also his mother. Why use a Turkish passport that had the encumbrances
then? The same encumbrances now in coming to the US and going to Europe?
They would have created problems for themselves in terms of bureaucracy, time and expense.
He did not need a Turkish passport to go to Turkey, yet since his father was a Turkish citizen, he would have been considered a Turkish citizen even without a passport. If he would have visited Turkey, with his name, even with a Swedish passport after the age of 18, he would have been conscripted. You can live in other countries as a Turkish citizen, yet you have to have served in some service to plead out of conscription.
I am looking at the timeline, I know my brother's situation.
Many boys return to Turkey from Europe or the US in the same situation to serve in the military or make amends. That is more complicated.
I don't believe he ever had Turkish citizenship (it was not necessary.)It was an encumbrance while the Swedish one was not.
It certainly was for me.