The title of this post is a question often asked these days. The so-called experts on Islam seem to almost concur on some link between Islam and violence. Though it’s hard to exonerate any of those experts from a political agenda or sometimes a pure hatred for Islam and/or Muslims, it still remains a valid question that every Muslim should be able to answer for himself or herself and for others. Does Islam condone violence? Is Islam to blame for the rise of terrorist activities? Even if we’re able to clear the name of Islam, clearing Muslims from it is another challenge.
In our times, the saying, “not every Muslim is a terrorist, but every terrorist is a Muslim,” has almost become a cliché. While we Muslims know this is not true, and some Muslims go to the extent of proving so by citing examples from the KKK to Timothy McVeigh, we still owe an answer to ourselves and to others. To me, whether non-Muslims are involved in terrorist activities or not is irrelevant, and certainly does not justify Muslims being involved in terrorist activities. Another weak argument is to say that only a small percentage of Muslims are involved in terrorist activities. To me, no small number is small. Some of those so-called experts would have us believe that it’s that small number of extremists who are following the literal injunctions of the Quran while the mainstream Muslims are being apologetic and are involved in acts of deception and double-talk, perhaps in attempts to dissemble and deceive (in Muslim terminology, practicing Tuqya) the non-Muslim masses. In this short article, I will try to address some of those Quranic passages.
Perhaps the most often quoted verse of the Quran is from chapter 9, verse 5:
فإذا انسلخ الأشهر الحرم فاقتلوا المشركين حيث وجدتموهم
“When the four forbidden months are over, then wherever you encounter the idolators, kill them!”
Keep supporting MuslimMatters for the sake of Allah
Alhamdulillah, we're at over 850 supporters. Help us get to 900 supporters this month. All it takes is a small gift from a reader like you to keep us going, for just $2 / month.
The Prophet (SAW) has taught us the best of deeds are those that done consistently, even if they are small.
Click here to support MuslimMatters with a monthly donation of $2 per month. Set it and collect blessings from Allah (swt) for the khayr you're supporting without thinking about it.
This verse seems to give an open license to kill all pagans or non-believers, without any restrictions. It is important for us to understand that Islam came to establish the rule of law and vehemently fought anarchism. Islam did not invent war. War has existed since the beginning of the human race. Islam came to regulate war. This is why you find clear injunctions given by Prophet Muhammad (sal Allahu alayhi wa sallam) to his commanders to not kill non-combatants such as women, children, monks, the elderly, etc. Once the Prophet (sal Allahu alayhi wa sallam) saw a dead woman in the battlefield and he made his objection clear and forbade the killing of women and children:
عن ابن عمر رضي الله عنهما أن النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم رأى امرأة مقتولة في بعض مغازيه، فأنكر قتل النساء والصبيان. متفق عليه
“Ibn Omar narrated that the Prophet saw a woman killed in one of the battles, so he forbade the killing of women and children.” [Bukhari and Muslim]
Some might ask, but what about some other narrations that may imply the permissibility of killing women and children, at least if they happen to be in the wrong place or if they get in the way? One of those narrations goes like this:
عن الصعب بن جثامة رضي الله عنه قال سئل رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم عن أهل الدار يبيتون فيصيبون من نسائهم وذراريهم فقال هم منهم. متفق عليه
Sa’b bin Juthamah narrated that the Prophet was asked about night raids where women and children could be killed by mistake and he said “they are from them” [i.e. you don’t intend to kill them but they may be killed in the process since it’s hard to discern them from fighters. See Subul as-Salam hadith# 1296].
Here understanding the setting of these narrations is key. For example, ibn Hibban narrated the Hadith of Sa’b above and added:
ثمّ نهى عنهم يوم حنين
“Then he [the Prophet] forbade the killing [of women and children] on the Day of Hunayn.”
This shows that the absolute prohibition of killing women and children abrogated any earlier narrations that may indicate otherwise. Scholars may argue when exactly this prohibition took place. Ibn Hajar argues it was during the Battle of Hunayn:
ويؤكد كون النهي في غزوة حنين …فقال لأحدهم: “الحق خالدا فقل له لا تقتل ذرية ولا عسيفا” فتح الباري، كتاب الجهاد والسير، أهل الدار يبيتون
“What confirms the fact that the prohibition occurred during the Battle of Hunayn is that the Prophet sent for Khalid to inform him not to kill any minors or contractors [i.e. non-combatants].” [See Fat’h al-Bari, the Book of Jihad, the Chapter of Night Raids]
However, Imam at-Tabarani narrated in his Awsat that the prohibition occurred during the Entry of Mecca:
أخرج الطبراني في الأوسط من حديث ابن عمر قال: لما دخل النبي مكة أُتي بامرأة مقتولة فقال “ما كانت هذه تقاتل” ونهى عن قتل النساء
“Narrated Ibn Omar, when the Prophet entered Mecca, a killed woman was brought to him and he said, ‘She was not fighting,’ and he forbade the killing of women.”
Regardless of when exactly the prohibition took place, it’s clear that it did occur toward the end of the Prophet’s life. Both the Entry of Mecca and the Battle of Hunayn occurred in the 8th year of Hijrah.
But, what about verse 9:5? Here, we have to observe the context of the verse. Many people who quote this verse rarely take the time to check the verses that immediately precede or come afterward, which makes you wonder if they’re sincere in trying to understand the context properly. But leaving intentions aside, it’s incumbent on any serious truth-seeker to look beyond one verse and try to understand it in light of other verses. First, looking at the immediate context, we see that verse 13 of the same chapter mentions a few reasons for this particular war declaration.
ألا تقاتلون قوماً نكثوا أيمانهم وهمّوا بإخراج الرّسول وهم بدؤوكم أوّل مرّة
“How could you not fight a people who have broken their oaths, who tried to drive the Messenger out, who attacked you first?” [Taubah 9:13]
This verse mentions people who initiated hostilities, who drove the Prophet and the believers out of their homes (referring to the forced migration to Medina), and who broke their pacts (referring to the Treaty of Hudaybiyah). Verses 8 and 10 mention those who have total disregard to ties of kinship and to contracts.
لا يرقبون في مؤمن إلاّ ولا ذمّة
“…They respect not the ties, neither of kinship nor treaty…” [Taubah 9:8]
It’s clear here that Islam is not waging war against all pagans or non-believers. Looking at the historical context, the Prophet didn’t understand this verse to mean the killing of all pagans. For example, when the conquest of Mecca took place, the Prophet issued a general pardon to all its inhabitants, who were not only pagans but also those that had fought him for the longest time, and regarding whom many of those verses had been revealed.
Looking at other verses of the Quran allows us to gain a more comprehensive understanding of war and peace in Islam. Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) reminds us in verse 8:61 that if enemy combatants show any inclination toward peace, then it’s incumbent on us to show a similar inclination. Verse 2:190 tells us to fight only those who fight us and not to commit any act of injustice or transgression. But, then you have the clever so-called expert on Islam come and say well all those verses are abrogated and only the Verse of the Sword applies. The Verse of the Sword, of course, is nothing but verse 9:5 discussed above. The answer to this claim is that it simply is not true. Consider for example the following verse. Verse 60:8 states that God does not stop believers from offering the best forms of treatment to those who didn’t fight them:
لا ينهاكم الله عن الذين لم يقاتلوكم في الدين ولم يخرجوكم من دياركم أن تبرّوهم وتقسطوا إليهم إنّ الله يحبّ المقسطين
“Allah does not forbid you to deal kindly and justly with anyone who has not fought against you for your faith or driven you out of your homes. Allah loves the just.” [Al-Mumtahina 60:8]
It’s very interesting that the Quran uses the word Birr, which encompasses all acts of good, to describe dealings between Muslims and the vast majority of non-Muslims. This verse should set the record straight on whether Islam is behind terrorism. According to this verse, not only is the killing of innocent people forbidden, but extending best treatment to such people is an obligation. But is this verse abrogated? Not according to the most prolific exegetes (scholars ofTafseer) of Islam. At-Tabari, after mentioning various opinions about the verse, says that the most correct opinion is that this verse is general and applies to all who “didn’t fight us”, without any exceptions.
At-Tabari also asserts that this verse is not abrogated:
وَلَا مَعْنَى لِقَوْلِ مَنْ قَالَ : ذَلِكَ مَنْسُوخ
“The statement that this verse is abrogated has no merits.”
Al-Qurtubi also asserts that this verse still applies (i.e. not abrogated), according to the vast majority of Muslim exegetes.
Both al-Tabari and al-Qurtubi lived at a time when Islam was a super-power, so no one can argue that they were involved in any exercise of double-talk or mass-deception in order to appease their non-Muslim counterparts!
Announcements1 month ago
Farooq
February 21, 2010 at 6:27 AM
Great post, very beneficial. Allows us to show those who misquote the Quran the truth of these verses.
Guest Account
October 30, 2015 at 11:09 AM
All the apologists who say Islam is not a violent religion have either not read the Koran or are trying to deceive everyone else into believing their lies or misinformation. If you believe Islam is peaceful but have not read the Koran, read it and then deny that it is anything more than a unrelentingly violent screed against all non-Muslims. The only way it would be possible that Mohammed was not an incredibly violent man would be that the early Caliphs, for political reasons, actually hijacked his teaching and had them re-written by their scribes to suit their own military purposes for the “religion,” certainly a possibility since Mohammed himself was completely illiterate and, as a result was never able to write down anything he or anyone else ever said.
Melek
March 9, 2016 at 8:37 PM
You haven’t read it, so who are you to criticize others?
Solusandra
August 3, 2016 at 2:11 AM
The Korran has about as much violence and war in it as the old testament. And like the new and old testaments it’s constantly referring back to Mohamad’s peaceful intentions to those who aren’t aggressive towards Islam. The problem, I think, which spurs the haters who read it and the faithful who read it and find hate is that the book is poorly arranged. Instead of offering things in order of progression and context so that it can be easily understood, it offers the verses in order from largest, to shortest. Any storyteller will gladly inform you what a mistake this is in offering any narrative and even philosophers over most parts of the world take care to tell you when they wrote something because seeing how their perspective on the world evolved is often as important to the wisdom they offer as the individual verses.
Mombeam
February 21, 2010 at 7:05 AM
I think it is important to discuss and stress, together, the Qur’anic verses in their complete context before moving on to the aHaadeeth. Rather than waiting until halfway through the article to revisit that section of the Qur’an, do it right away. Not only that, don’t jump from verse 5 to verse 13. Give the entire section. Right wing preachers and pundits have made a cottage industry out of claiming to “have read” and “understood” the Qur’an and then they start throwing these sentence and paragraph fragments around. That needs to end and we need to be forward and crystal clear with the fact that these verses, when read in their complete context, refer to specific aggressors and are not general commands to go around killing all non-believers. Unfortunately polls show that too many people are believing otherwise.
A Skeptic
September 28, 2012 at 2:01 AM
Most people observe the behavior of the adherents. What we in the west observe of the muslim world is that of all societies we know about on Earth, Muslim societies appear to be the quickest to anger, aggression, and to take offense. Why is it, do you think, that you seldom hear a word against Buddhism or Taoism, but there’s so many words against Islam? It’s because of the mentality of the societies that appear to have Islam at the heart of their culture, while societies that promote Buddhism and Taosim seem to produce some of the most peaceful societies in the world and I think even put most Christian cultures to shame. Despite what’s written in the Quran, actions speak louder than words.
Skeptic # 2
October 9, 2012 at 5:21 PM
The problem may not always lie in the texts themselves but in how they are interpreted. The chauvinism in Zionist thought are not within Jewish scripture, yet we would still consider that the problems created by Jewish settlers have roots in their religion. Similarly, the problems of violence in the muslim world (recent killings of the American Ambassador to Libyia, the suicide attacks against Shiite pilgrims in Iraq, etc.) have clear roots in religion, even if condoning violence and suicide bombing is not within the text.
Religion is not purely text, but it is also how the text is interpreted and acted on. It is the job of muslims to interprete their religion properly and correct false interpretations. It follows then that it is the job of muslims to confront these problems and these mis-interpretations of the religion and make it clear that murder can not be committed in the name of Islam.
It does seem clear to me, however, that there is a serious problem with these mis-interpretations of Islam and that murderous acts are being carried out in the name of Islam. A Pew opinion poll from 2007 showed that nearly 26% of American muslims ages 19-30 believed that suicide bombing is justifiable. Thats outrageously high for a religion that makes it clear that both suicide and killing innocent people is unnacceptable. This is 1/4 young American Muslims! furthermore, this number increasing significantly in other countries polled.
Obviously, a campaign needs to be waged against these mis-interpretations of Islam.
Equality
November 6, 2012 at 1:46 PM
I agree with the first two skeptics at the top of the comments: there is no reason why so many Muslims should have such a poor or misguided understanding of their own religion. and while Buddhism and Taoism are pinnacles of peace-seeking religions, no other well known religions can be put to par with them. Christianity especially, is incredibly similar to Islam in far more ways than anyone wants to admit: If God loves all people, then why is He so quick to “hate fags”? If He gave us free will to do as we please, why then are we women fighting to be the masters of our own bodies?
Just as some Muslims are using portions of the Qur’an to justify their actions, so do Christians with the Bible.
What I’m trying to get at is, I believe there needs to be a group of people for every religion to read and interpret the meanings of the religions’ Holy Text. From there, I feel it should be necessary, not only to snuff out any misinterpretations or evil acts based on wording, but also to enlighten everyone on the basics of every religion so that there is no more false and non-credible accusations. It would be nice for this to occur if only for the hope that we can become a more peaceful and understanding world, and so that we actually know what it is that we think we need to be fighting.
muslim-christian
October 13, 2013 at 6:29 PM
Ok, so i am christian. Sort of. But i was raised by my muslim grandfather and i love him very much. Resently in school i have learned that islam was not always so violent. Yes the abassid empire was possibly the greatest empire to ever exist (the richest man in history, mansa musa, was muslim) BUT islam was very tollerent of other abrahamic religions (jews and christians) and the prophuet muhammad was influenced by them. Muslims considered them people of the book and they were seen as equals (about as equal as you get in a society) they converted people peacefully through trade,mysticism (in india mostly) and migration. Muslims were not so hostile. Ironically, the catholic church was very hostile for centuries.
Emmy Abdul Alim
February 21, 2010 at 8:21 AM
Salaam Anas! Thank you for trying to clear this up! On the matter of female combatants in armed forces in many armed forces these days – would you say the argument holds that it would then be permitted to kill a female soldier fighting for the enemy?
Anas Hlayhel
February 22, 2010 at 12:18 AM
Salam Emmy,
Yes … this is taken from mafhoum al-Hadith [implicit meaning of the Hadith]. If you remember the Hadith of ibn Omar, the Prophet based his objection of killing women on the fact that the killed woman was not a fighter. So, and as ibn Hajr deduced, if she was fighting then the prohibition of killing women does not stand. However, ibn Hajar mentions an opnion among the Malikis (e.g. Maliki scholar ibn Habib) who said it’s not permissible to kill a female soldier until she initiates the fighting and her intent to kill becomes obvious. In general, it seems that the Maliki school is the strictest when it comes to killing women and children at war. Again, ibn Hajar mentions that it’s the opinion of Imam Malik (along with al-Awza’ee) that it’s absolutely forbidden to kill women and children even if they are used as a human shield (tatarruss in Arabic).
Hope this helps!!
Bill
August 16, 2014 at 1:28 PM
If a woman is wearing a uniform and killing our soldiers, yes they will be killed as a soldier
Green Sufi
February 21, 2010 at 8:47 AM
Fantastic Post!
John
February 21, 2010 at 8:49 AM
-Comment removed. Either address the issues raised in the post or take your cut n’ paste jobs somewhere else. It’s like asking, “Is Buddhism is an esoteric faith”, and then posting a link on how there is rampant sexual abuse in certain quarters of buddhist monks. -editor
Pingback: Radical Muslim :: Jewish and Christian Extremism :: February :: 2010
John
February 21, 2010 at 11:31 AM
-Your racist comments, and by virtue of that, you belong at the Islamophobes central. Try LGF.
Mahmoud
February 21, 2010 at 11:49 AM
I definitely think muslims aren’t terrorsits. Islam is a religion that preaches peace until provoked. The real terrorists are those that kill women and children mercilessly. Plus, who are we to judge what’s going on? How do we know what to beleive? BBC? CNN? Nice article though. I just think musilims are too apologetic these days..We’re so busy desperately trying to clear our name from the west and so occupied by what the media has to say about anything we forget about the people suffering.
Servant of I AM
October 30, 2010 at 4:07 AM
Is this not why it was said, “Render unto Caesar, that which is Caesars.” The Spirit has no role in politics. The sooner we stop talking about politics and focusing on Salvation, the better. Would we all be links in a chain being pulled by those who really do not care or want the truth? Certainly the Spirit needs no help to “Control” war? Let us not be legalistic to the whims of those men who control power. Do not be deceived.
Kashif
February 21, 2010 at 12:40 PM
Excellent post. If more scholars articulated these very basic rules and stopped creating “exceptions” for every Muslim being oppressed or persecuted we would be better off. People who support actions in which civilians are targeted purposely or recklessly (even if it’s just in their heart) need to ask themselves what would Muhammad (peace be upon him) say about this.
mofw
February 21, 2010 at 2:37 PM
I don’t even think the question makes sense.
Take for example the question, “Are men violent?” How do you answer that?
Thinking this way leads us into the trap that MSM have set for controlling the discourse.
Anas Hlayhel
February 21, 2010 at 7:38 PM
I may agree with you that the question is absurd to a certain degree! Nonetheless, the question is no doubt out there and I think we should address it. In a way, this title was an attempt to kickstart the article, but it was the hope of the author that a better understanding would be attained at the end :)
Now, let’s not forget that even the Quran contains quite few quotes from the early opponents of Islam and what they used to say about Prophet Muhammad. Yes, what they said was absurd too. But it’s interesting that the Quran faithfully carried their words despite the negative message they contained. If anything, it shows us that from day one, Islam was not affraid of criticism (because only the weak is afraid of criticism).
Take for example Surah 34:43, “And if our clear verses were recited upon them they will say ‘he is nothing but a man who wanted to divert you from what your fathers used to worship’, and they will say ‘this [the Quran] is nothing but a fabricated lie’, …” No doubt their statements were absurd, but the Quran quoted it then refuted it.
Not only that, but the Quran further entertains the argument of its opponents, regardless of its absurdity, to a level that may surprise many:
“Say if the Merciful [i.e. God] has a son, then I’m the first one to worship him” 43:81
This shows how much the Quran is willing to walk with its opponents (tamashi ma3a al-khasm), and I think this is how Muslims should be. In other words, it’s saying we don’t oppose someone for the sake of opposition. Instead, let’s take a look at the argument (no matter how much we detest it) and entertain it to the end, see to what conclusions it leads to. Furthermore, it teaches us that if the assumptions of my opponents are true then I will be the first one to embrace their conclusion. This should be the mindset of any truth seeker!!!!
Dawud Israel
February 21, 2010 at 11:19 PM
btw anas, despite my comment below, your response here is tops! mashallah! keep using that sharp aql of yours!
ma’salam
mofw
February 22, 2010 at 9:39 AM
I could be wrong, but as I understand it, the Quran did not reply to the charge with a defense. Rather it exposed the hypocrisy of those making the accusation.
xxyz
October 2, 2010 at 12:08 PM
I will explain why your argument about ‘are men violent’ is wrong…
when men kill others, they don’t do it in the name that they are doing it ‘for men’. on the other hand when some Muslim terrorist kills others, it won’t be called ‘in the name of Islam’ until he justifies killings for the cause of Islam.
Also Muslims need not be apologetic. Apologetic feeling comes when we try to justify something wrong. simply oppose in the strongest words possible, the terrorism. though in that regard I also hate US for having an opportunistic behavior.
I am a non muslim and hence its inappropriate for me to comment here and so my sincere apologies for that.
but article was gr8 and I loved reading it.
Amad
October 2, 2010 at 1:02 PM
there is nothing inappropriate in your comment or in you commenting here. People who don’t share our faith are always welcome on MM, as it only enriches the conversation.
thanks.
Aashiq Hussain
July 24, 2013 at 8:17 PM
Haven’t you seen USA And NATO bombing innocents in the name of ‘Peace’ and ‘Democracy’. Is here anyone who will hate Peace for that? People have been killing each other in the name of color. who is gonna hate his/her color?
The USA has been in war for over 200 years out of about 230 years of its history. Anyone here gonna label Americans terrorists? And MOST of the Americans don’t condemn these wars. Are they terrorists?
Why do we have two different scales for measurements here?
ibn Insaan
February 21, 2010 at 2:55 PM
Is Islam violent?
hmm ..interesting question. If the answer – for the sake of argument, were to be ‘yes’ –
then perhaps it begs the question:
*so what?*
Ditto to the insightful remark of mofw. Jazahullah khairan .
A good article nonetheless though.
Wassalam
ibnTaufic the Second
February 21, 2010 at 9:09 PM
I liked your article, but please use a better font for arabic next time. I really had a hard time reading the ayaat.
JazakAllaahu Khair
Dawud Israel
February 21, 2010 at 11:18 PM
Yes…it is. Look I appreciate the effort, and jazaka Allahu khayran, but this topic is a tad over-done.
The more we answer these rhetorical questions, the more legitimacy we give to those who ask them and the longer we keep discussing this, the more time elapses, and our Islam becomes all about what the West understands Islam to be, not what we believe and live. What I’m saying is, we could better focus our energy and not lose out on the greater khayr that comes from creating an American/Canadian/British Islam than trying to defend what little of it is there right now…
Ya feel me? Anyways good effort and intentions in contributing this piece.
Ameera Khan
February 22, 2010 at 2:22 AM
Great article! I really enjoyed reading some of the points you mentioned! :) Your style is slightly different from other articles I’ve read on this subject – too much academic discussion sometimes sounds dry but this article has kept a very good balance! BarikAllahu feehi! Keep writing.
Abdulwali ibn Adeniji
February 22, 2010 at 10:17 AM
Salam.while i was searchin tru goggle dis morning,i searchd 4 d noun ‘mohammed’,unda dis search there are several titles on the history of the prophet mohammed(sw),history of islam,etc.of which i click on ‘d history of islam’.pls,kindly go tru dis page,nd help in d provision of authentic answers.bicos dis story luk so confusing about ones stand in d islamic religion.anoda reason is dat am young in d islamic knowledge.ma-salam
Naseebah
February 23, 2010 at 10:16 AM
Interesting article ma sha Allah, that only makes one wish for more, in sha Allah.
It would be good if knowledgeable people could start to define terms and structure the discussion about Islam and violence within an analytical framework such as this:
What is meant by violence? (what are the types of violence; physical, emotional, pychology. e.g. is waterboarding violent?)
Who is the doer of violence? (e.g. who is a legitimate violent actor – a state? an islamic state? an attacked tribe? an armed citizen? an oppressed group? In an Islamic society, who conducts war, who develops strategy, who is accountable? And then who is not a legitimate violent actor — i.e. who is a murderer or what is a rogue/criminal state?)
Who or what are legitimate object of violence? (people versus machinery/hardware/infrastructure, animals & plants, civilians vs. military, men vs. women, those within one’s territory vs. those outside of it, high vs. low population centers.)
What is the context of violence? (e.g. defensive war, war of choice/aggression, a homeowner defending himself against an intruder? a female resisting rape?)
What is the rationale for violence? (is it defense against imminent attack, or is it strategic for long-term profit? is it threatened violence for a political purpose? is it to gain land or resources? is it to protect religious minorities or religous rights? What is a just rationale for war?)
What is the means of violence? (e.g. a bow and arrow vs. a rifle vs. nuclear weapons vs. napalm)
What is the punishment for unsanctioned acts of violence and war crimes? (e.g. if it is unlawful to target non-combatants, what is the punishment for doing so? is it punished as an act of apostacy? Is it a military crime – e.g. not following orders, or breaking martial laws -punishable in a military tribunal? Is it simply murder and the hudood for that applies? How about if civilians are not deliberately targeted, but end up as “collateral damage” – is the punishment different than for deliberate targeting, or is there no punishment (an apology will do)?)
How does violence legitimately end and what does reconciliation look like? (what is the end-game for violence? diplomacy, treaty, death, conquering, court trials…)
how can violence be prevented or re-directed ? (better defenses, diplomacy and communication, social protest movements, more robust and fair political and legal systems…)
Perhaps through such a framework we could develop a matrix by which to analyze and assess the various conflicts that come up.
A brother
February 23, 2010 at 3:20 PM
Neither violent nor peaceful. Simply a way of life.
As I heard put to me elsewhere: “Islam is a peaceful religion, but not a pacifist religion.”
Antionio
April 22, 2010 at 10:06 PM
Peaceful religion? Are you kidding me? Yes Muslims can be peaceful but “true” Islam in its purest is the epitome of violence. I think a more simple answer is “Yes”. When one studies the Quran, Hadiths, and Mohammed’s biography one can clearly see Mohammed’s violent agenda. Bottom line: the purpose of Islam is to spread all over the world as the only religion worshiping Allah no matter what approach: violence or non-violence, and also to imitate Mohammed who is suppose to be the ideal character we all should model after. The problem with you quoting specific surahs in support of showing how Islam is peaceful is that it only pertains to certain events in Mohammed’s life BEFORE Mohammed thought he could convince others to easily convert. When he failed and grew fristrated, he then supposedly receive revelations to then use force. That is a pattern all throughout the Quran- use kindness first or use force. You have to be willingly blind to neglect other the violent themes resonating throughout the entire Quran!! Being a true Islam is modeling after Mohammed himself.
History doesn’t lie. Islam ALWAYS used force and fear to get their final word. Mohammed even pridefully admitted that Allah injected fear into the hearts of non-believers. In fact Mohammed also used deception and lies as he said “for war is deceit”. Study history.
For example: During Mohammed’s last years and the height of his political power he wrote letters to the Roman government, also in Portugal, Spain, and Northern Africa to either receive Islam or pay the price. Now what wrong did those other countries do to him??? nothing! For the first 200 years after Mohammed’s death, millions and millions of Northern Africans were murdered because they didn’t accept Islam!
Mohammed also had a 100 year old poet named Abu AfaK murdered as well as Abu Afak and her unborn child for writing against Mohammed. Now if that isn’t the definition of violence, then what is? Who orders the execution of elderly people and pregnant women? I could spend hours and and days posting surahs and hadiths regarding the use of Islamic violence
Umm Bilqis
April 22, 2010 at 10:14 PM
Nonsensical post not worth bothering with, as usual much disinformation and lies> typical and boring.
Ultimately who cares what you think.
P.S Antonio when will the “Peaceful”west release our captives who are innocent until proven Muslim?”
Antionio
April 22, 2010 at 10:36 PM
In what is it nonsenseical? You don’t even bother to elaborate but only opinions. You’re a typical kind: all you do is express useless opinions and only favor what “feels” right to you. My friend you haven’t studied Islamic history.
You accuse of me lying. What part or parts am I lying about?
As the final words of Mohammed:
“I descended by Allah with the sword in my hand, and my wealth will come from the shadow of my sword. And the one who will disagree with me will be humiliated and persecuted”….
In other words, his final sermon instruct Muslims how to handle non-believers. And that my friend is consistent with extremist today. I’m sure you’re fictitious version of Islam would not coincide with Islam in the Middle East such as Iran. Either Islam over there is correct about stating that their version is true or you’re painting a children’s coloring book of Islam.
Umm Bilqis
April 22, 2010 at 11:45 PM
Any person or groups of people who believe imams are infallible are upon falsehood and we believe that Only God is Infallible. This is what we Muslims say to all other groups. Read The Quraan if your group does not fall in line with the prescription that Only Allah is Divine and infallible and has beliefs that a Prophet, Imaam, Priest, Rabbi or any Human being or idol should have any qualities of the Creator (i.e Divinity, infallibility, Immortality etc). then this group is upon falsehood no matter what heading it is under. Do not let human beings change what Allah has legislated upon.
Only The Creator is Infallible. If you legislate on issues that Allah has legislated upon then you are ascribing yourself as a partner to Him and this will lead
you to hellfire. The Creator can forgive all sins except that of shirk or ascribing partnership in worship to Him. Human beings are only His deputies on earth they are to govern with the divine laws that are revealed.
This is the price for attaining heaven, otherwise you will be left in the day of judgement to those whom you worshiped and hellfire is an terrible abode.
To acknowledge and worship the one who Created you and not to be ungrateful by worshiping others or yourself (desires).
God has given us a book that can not be changed and it is memorized, because His previous books the psalms, the injeel (gospel) and the Torah fell into the hands of corrupt individuals who have changed the scriptures with their hands.
One big example with present day ramifications are the laws dealing with Riba or interest.
These corrupt religious people changed the Creators legislation against this practise and now we have gross corruption in the land.
The Noble Qur’an – Al-Baqarah 275-281
275. Those who eat Ribâ (usury) will not stand (on the Day of Resurrection) except like the standing of a person beaten by Shaitân (Satan) leading him to insanity. That is because they say: “Trading is only like Ribâ (usury),” whereas Allâh has permitted trading and forbidden Ribâ (usury). So whosoever receives an admonition from his Lord and stops eating Ribâ (usury) shall not be punished for the past; his case is for Allâh (to judge); but whoever returns [to Ribâ (usury)], such are the dwellers of the Fire – they will abide therein.
276. Allâh will destroy Ribâ (usury) and will give increase for Sadaqât (deeds of charity, alms, etc.) And Allâh likes not the disbelievers, sinners.
277. Truly those who believe, and do deeds of righteousness, and perform As-Salât (Iqâmat-as-Salât), and give Zakât, they will have their reward with their Lord. On them shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve.
278. O you who believe! Be afraid of Allâh and give up what remains (due to you) from Ribâ (usury) (from now onward), if you are (really) believers.
279. And if you do not do it, then take a notice of war from Allâh and His Messenger but if you repent, you shall have your capital sums. Deal not unjustly (by asking more than your capital sums), and you shall not be dealt with unjustly (by receiving less than your capital sums).
280. And if the debtor is in a hard time (has no money), then grant him time till it is easy for him to repay, but if you remit it by way of charity, that is better for you if you did but know.
281. And be afraid of the Day when you shall be brought back to Allâh. Then every person shall be paid what he earned, and they shall not be dealt with unjustly.
The Only Fictitious version of History is the orientalist one which you give.
Mike
May 21, 2013 at 8:42 AM
“If you legislate on issues that Allah has legislated upon then you are ascribing yourself as a partner to Him and this will lead
you to hellfire.”
Is this what Muhammad has done?
sam
August 19, 2010 at 12:41 PM
Antionio,
Just because you studied Islamic history, does not mean you know islam or should comment on it. A scholar in Islam has to study the subject of quranic arabic not regular arabic for 25 years to be considered a true and trust worthy person to elaborate on Islam. The quranic Arabic can be very complicated. I found this definition on the website: Quranic Arabic an which includes Arabic grammar, syntax and morphology for each word in the Holy Quran. There are three levels of analysis: morphological annotation, a syntactic treebank and a semantic ontology. Look I am not an expert either, so please research yourself about this subject. All I am saying, sometimes when you translate the quran to english, the meaning is completely lost, a word could mean 4 different things depending the situation. Therefore, to assume Islam is a violent religion without understanding quranic arabic is just plain ignorance on your part. Even Arabs do not fully understand the quran.
Christian
October 4, 2010 at 9:02 PM
Sam, 25 years is a long time to study – don’t you think? To comprehend physics or astrology one does it have to restart re-inventing the wheel, that would Take more than 25 years. Knowledge is easily transferable and Antonio’s point of view would be based on collective work of many others and years of research on their behalf. I think Antonio is in good position to make his comments.
Servant of I AM
November 18, 2010 at 4:53 AM
If Islam is a religion of peace, they why would those who use Islam as a means of waging war be allowed to make war? Certainly islam is not a Theocratic-economic-political ideology all rolled into one. Indeed it is a way of life.
War against cultures?
Islam will loose in the face of the truth of what you are.
There is a firm belief that freedom of will descends from God. Islam seeks to destroy that principle.
As long as I live I will undermine Islam. It is inherantly of Satan. The crescent is taken from the Babylonian moon god named Sin. And it is atop every mosque I have ever seen. Antonio has a point, why is it that in the name of Islam 54 million people have died due to empire expansion which islam followed close behind, ohhh but not in the name of islam.. just amoung people who subscribed to islam and were allowed to sin then reap the rewards of conquest. Evil vile creatures bent on deceptive domination. Satans roost here on earth. But you deny it and will not listen to the words, ” Come let us reason.” Vulger philosophy it is.
Anas Hlayhel
April 23, 2010 at 12:04 AM
Antionio,
Before you jump all over the place from Quran to history, maybe you should have invested some time in reading the article a bit more carefully. I tell you if you are reading the Quran and Islamic history like you read my article, I’m not surprised you have arrived to such conclusions.
For example, you said:
While the focus of my article was on the verse of the sword. This is the most often quoted verse by the anti-Islam crowd to prove that Islam is violent. I didn’t avoid that verse. Rather I made it the center of my article. But, I also showed how it’s taken out of context, and I brought verses that came after which clarified the textual context a bit, something that no one cares to do these days.
Another example, you said:
Again one of the central themes of my articles was to show that this is not true. I brought a verse from the Quran that was revealed later that tells us to treat non-combatant people with all acts of good. I also brought 2 major scholars of tafseer who said that such verse is applicable and not abrogated by any other verse.
I can go in pages about this topic. But I think if we’re not able to even read one article objectively and answer to it, then it’s useless to jump here and there while avoiding the arguments that this article brings.
May Allah guide all
But curiously...
April 20, 2013 at 7:52 PM
I realize the date so I’m probably not going to be seen but… okay, let’s run with this (unfortunately, it seems I have no access to any writing, there is no link and it stops after “Though it”. If you show that it is decided to treat non-combatants well, then what is the designation of whom is combatant? Some parts of followers believe that not accepting Allah and following is a combatant gesture. Some believe those who come after them for lapses in humanity are combatants. If one throws acid on a woman and another man of any faith tries to stop him, is he the combatant? If the man is Muslim, does the other man then stop his attempt or is he betraying Allah? The problem may not necessarily be that it doesn’t EXPLICITLY state “Go kill and suicide bomb everyone unlike you” but rather who designates a combatant and what they deem to do to them.
If for example, if an Ulama (I hope I have that word correctly) comes to you and says “This person is a combatant” and thus I command you to kill them all, even if it means killing yourself, do you blindly follow them? Could you criticize them openly or would that make YOU the combatant?
This seems the crux of the argument. It may not mean not to kill someone who just exists – except when someone interprets that all citizens of a country or all of a certain ethnic group are “born of” a combatant and thus they are.
Hena Zuberi
April 21, 2013 at 8:31 PM
The post is up again please excuse us it didnt transfer over when we redesigned the site.
Umm Bilqis
April 23, 2010 at 12:53 AM
Antonio,
If you are friendly or neutral towards Muslims then you get peace from Muslims. If you oppress or unjust towards Muslims then we have a right to stop the oppression.
Surah 60 verses 4-10:
4. Indeed there has been an excellent example for you in Ibrahim (Abraham) and those with him, when they said to their people: “Verily, we are free from you and whatever you worship besides Allah, we have rejected you, and there has started between us and you, hostility and hatred for ever, until you believe in Allah Alone,” except the saying of Ibrahim (Abraham) to his father: “Verily, I will ask for forgiveness (from Allah) for you, but I have no power to do anything for you before Allah .” Our Lord! In You (Alone) we put our trust, and to You (Alone) we turn in repentance, and to You (Alone) is (our) final Return,
5. “Our Lord! Make us not a trial for the disbelievers, and forgive us, Our Lord! Verily, You, only You are the All-Mighty, the All-Wise.”
6. Certainly, there has been in them an excellent example for you to follow, for those who look forward to (the Meeting with) Allah (for the reward from Him) and the Last Day. And whosoever turn away, then verily, Allah is Rich (Free of all wants), Worthy of all Praise.
7. Perhaps Allah will make friendship between you and those whom you hold as enemies. And Allah has power (over all things), and Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful.
8. Allah does not forbid you to deal justly and kindly with those who fought not against you on account of religion and did not drive you out of your homes. Verily, Allah loves those who deal with equity.
9. It is only as regards those who fought against you on account of religion, and have driven you out of your homes, and helped to drive you out, that Allah forbids you to befriend them. And whosoever will befriend them, then such are the Zalimun (wrong-doers those who disobey Allah).
Pay attention to verses 8, and 9.
Antionio General
April 23, 2010 at 5:39 PM
All i’m doing is pointing out that “True” Islam in its rawest form is following the ways of Mohammed. Peaceful Muslims don’t practice “True” Islam just a derivative of it. I don’t consider peaceful Muslims following “True Islam”. So which version of Islam are you taking about? Because Fundamentalist are in disagreement with you.
That’s easy to understand that. Try leaving Islam in the middle east. Muslims will persecute you, you will lose your job, status, family, and even be killed. Why? Because the Quran gives specific guidelines on how to handle infidels. And that’s suppose to be peaceful? Fundamentalist claim they are following true Islam. In fact, try to reconcile with fundamentalist now and see how far you’ll go. You’ll probably be killed when you preach your version of Islam.
One can examine Mohammed’s life and make that clear distinction. Most Westerners are highly ignorant on Islamic history and Mohammed’s life and only take in what the media makes Muslims out to be whether peaceful or terrorist. But it is impossible to not pick out how violent “fundamental” Islam is when evaluating Mohammed’s life and I think its sad how you try to justify that. The Islam you purport is foreign because fundamental Islam at its core is true and violent.
Here are some of the numerous examples of violence from Mohammed:
BEFORE Mohammed got kicked out and boycotted at Mecca, he was a forgiving person. He preached about loving and forgiveness. The Quraysh tribe left him alone at Medina and didn’t try to peruse him. After 3 years they felt bad so they removed the boycott.
AFTER Mohammed grew a military power of warfaring tribes his attitude began to change. He now received revelation to command Muslims to fight anyone who rejected Islam (Surah 8:39, Surah 8:65, Surah 8:38) Remember, he attacked the Quraysh tribe first!! It wasn’t defensive but offensive tactic for Muslims.
Another excellent example is through his relationship with the Jews.
Mohammed lived among the Jews peacefully in Medina. He did business with them, ate with them, and even faced Jerusalem with them. After 3 years of unsuccessfully trying to get them to convert, Mohammed finally gave up and used excessive force as an alternative, even assassinating a poet there. Why? Because the Jews wouldn’t convert????? That’s suppose to be peaceful? What wrong did Jews do to him at first before the Battle of Trench?
Even to Christians he said they either had to submit, pay taxes, or be destroyed. (Surah 9:29). Is that peaceful? What wrong did Christians do to him?
One more thing- Mohammed, now a military power in all of Arabia sent out letters to the King of Iran, emperor of Rome, Roman governor of Egypt, King of Oman, King of Bahrain, King of Syria, and King of Yemen-
“Convert to Islam and you will be saved. And if you reject my challenge, you are responsible for what will happen to your people”
What wrong did those countries do to him? Is that suppose to be peaceful? Islam also attacked Egypt, Spain, Portugal, and Southern Europe even though they did nothing wrong. Unfortunately, this practice itself is the inherent attitude of fundamentals now: to spread Islam by all means.
You keep citing surahs about peace but neglect other ones. Those surahs you quote are only relative to the events in Mohammed’s life. You cannot read the Quran as a whole because some surahs contradict each other. You must read it consistently with the events at that time. That is the only way to reconcile those differences because some revelations canceled out other revelations (naskh, as referred to Muslim scholars)
Anas Hlayhel
April 24, 2010 at 7:50 PM
Everytime I see a blatant attack on our Prophet Muhammad (may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him and all his brothers from previous prophets), my love of him increases.
Now you pretend to be an expert on Islamic history and Muhammad’s life, but you conveniently leave very important facts!! Prophet Muhammad was at war with Quraish when he left Mecca. They made an assassination attempt on his life right before he left Mecca. In fact, they followed him wanting to kill him before reaching Medina. When his followers wanted to leave Mecca, the Meccans would strip them from their possessions. His followers [those who didn’t have clan protection] were tortured in Mecca. So Prophet Muhammad never initiated the war with the Meccans, it was already there. One thing the Arab avoided, even before Islam, is to be labeled as back-stabber. If Prophet Muhammad, as you claim, back-stabbed the Meccans, then they would have made sure to tell the world about it. They were after ruining his reputation since he started his call in Mecca and they would have loved such an opportunity. Yet you don’t find such evidence in history.
Now, this war lasted about 6 years after the migration to Medina. When the first opportunity to make peace presented itself, the Prophet rushed to make peace (known as the Treaty of Hudaybiyah), even though he had to make several reconciliations that were not in his favor. Many of his companions weren’t happy (by now Prophet Muhammad had a mighty army) but the Prophet insisted that the treaty would go forth. In that occasion the Prophet said, “Woe to Quraish, they are consumed by their love of war. Why can’t they leave me to interact with the rest of the Arabs? [that shows that the Meccans never ceased to interfere in the Prophet’s affairs]”.
The following years were peaceful till the treaty was broken by Quraiysh [by attacking one of the allies of Prophet Muhammad]. This initiated the Conquest of Mecca. The Prophet and his Companions entered Mecca and they could have exacted revenge from their enemies. Yet, the Prophet FORGAVE everyone!! You say that Muhammad was preaching forgiveness in Mecca and he changed in Medina. But this incident happened towards the very end of Muhammad’s life. He was very poweful and he had full control over his enemies, yet he chose to forgive! Isn’t forgiveness in times of strength much more valuable than in times of weakness??
As to his treatment of the Jews, again you seem to ignore very important details. The Prophet had a treaty with them when he came to Medina [which shows his intent to co-live with them]. But the Prophet was back-stabbed several times by the three Jewish tribes of Medinah. They tried to assassinate him and they conspired against him. In the most difficult moments, when the Muslims were surrounded by enemies [an alliance of Arab and Jewish tribes] from the outside, the last Jewish tribe decided to revoke their contract with the Prophet from inside. Despite all this, the Prophet never declared war against all Jews. Up to the last moment of his life, Prophet Muhammad had Jews live in his city. In fact, it’s narrated that the Prophet died while his armor was with a Jew [as a ransom for a loan]. The Jews used to enter the gatherings of Prophet Muhammad very casually and have discussions with the Prophet. The Prophet only retaliated against the Jews who betrayed him.
I’m not sure of what your sources are! I would really like to know what they are. I hope you’re going back to original sources which tell you all the facts, not just the convenients facts to attack Islam and Prophet Muhammad.
Peace :)
Nitin
July 19, 2010 at 12:44 PM
All said and done, look at what is happening all around us. I agree that opression should be met with opression. However, why kill little children, elders and women in suicide blasts? what is the harm in other religions practicing their own faith, having their own gods and worshipping their own idols.
After all, when there were no religions, Mesopotamia and Harappan civilizations still worshipped trees and their holy spirits. Were they kafirs?
Why blast the worshippers in Lahore? They were not opressors, merely practicing their faith, thats it. And they were killed for same.
The pointing questions is not about violence, it is about tolerance. Can we be tolerant to huamanity or we just want to blast people who dont follow my way of life?
Every religion is violent when it comes to protecting their own, but I do not see any other religion, except Islam who goes out of the way to maim people just because they do not follow Allah.
mMuslim
July 19, 2010 at 12:58 PM
I condemn all the incidents you have mentioned, as Islam is against terrorism, but terrorism is not a muslim monopoly, and hindus have been involved in terrorism all along. Forget the Gujarat Genocide, forget the killing of Sikhs and christians and nuns in Delhi and Gujarat by Hindus, now there is evidence that many bomb blasts done in India and blamed on Muslims, were in fact done by Hindu terrorists.
suhail
July 19, 2010 at 1:14 PM
Well they don’t care. They ask us to condemn this and that while they sit happily and cheer for there murderer Modi and elect him to be the next Chief Minister.
The hindus who are allied to the RSS and BJP have this kind of mentality that they will blast all the things that is happening and then blame it on muslims.
For example take the issue of Kashmir. There they have been killing everybody with impunity for years. They are killing woman, children and elderly. They have been raping muslim woman in daylight and killing them afterwards but no justice to the people have been given. Then when some explosion occurs then they all start shouting with there whole mouth open.
Same thing with Gujarat they did the same thing. That goon Modi and his followers were all acquitted by the court while the muslims in Hyderabad and other places in India were just hounded and put in jail for no reason at all or just for mere suspicion.
All the bombs that went on from Malegaon to Hyderabad were put on muslim youths and then when they found that hindus have done it they are still houding the muslim youth. They falsly put the muslims in jail and have destroyed countless muslim youths who now cannot pursue any career why because of there illegal detention.
Indian jails are one of the horrible places you can be. If any riots break in any part of India be assured that all the muslim youth will be put in the jail first as if they are the one who instigated them while the hindus roam freely. Indian police is one of the worst police in terms of sectarian mentality. They have grudge against muslims and call them by all kinds of dirty names. Just hear some of the speeches by there new found youth leaders like that Gandhi.
Last but not the least they have killed thousands of muslims with impunity in India and will do the same in future. Why because the government keeps a shut eye towards any violence against muslims and all the injustice imparted to them.
If you see any Politicians pandering for muslim votes he is already branded as being a muslim and defamed. When these people talk about extremism within muslims they should look into mirror and see there own extreme leaders like Bal Thackrey, Modi, Advani, Uma Bharti and the other RSS goons. Hypocrisy at the best.
suhail
July 19, 2010 at 1:21 PM
Muslims are virtually condemning all kinds of acts of extremism from all the places. You can find countless fatwas on the internet condemning all kinds of stuff from suicide bombing to civilian casualties. Just use Google and they are there for everybody to read.
But where is the hindus condemnation and there religious leaders speaking against the injustices and killing that is happening against the minorities in India. Only few Human rights group have done that other than that there is total silence from Media as well as the leader of hindus religious organizations. Zilch.
And this guy has the audacity to come here and preach us what Islam teaches. Go and clean up your own backyard before you point fingers at us.
And by the way just telling it that Islam tells this and that does not mean that this is right. Provide us proof that Islam tell us that you can maim people who do not follow Allah. If you cannot than shut the hell up.
Nitin
July 19, 2010 at 1:22 PM
I agree that they are bad incidents and are an ugly face. But just compare the reach, magnitude and local/global reach of such fringe groups? They are on margin compared to rest of the population. No one listens to mindless preachers in other religions, who justify killing of small children in name of Jihad.
Nothing compared to what happends on a daily basis in Pakistan, Afghanistan & Iraq. It makes me shudder the plight of poor people living in shadow of terror under name of mindless Jihad.
suhail
July 29, 2010 at 10:15 AM
Really nobody listens Nitin. Are you kidding. Modi is virtually a hero among the NRI Hindus in USA, UK and other places. Global reach or local reach has nothing to do with it.
Indians are typical when it comes to Pakistan. They will accuse it for everything that happens even for cockroaches in there kitchen.
By the way Indian Army has been opressing people of Kashmir for years now but still they are the peace makers. India police has one of the worst track records and is one of the most secetarian organization but well that is not a problem since it is not from Pakistan.
Afghanistan was made a puppet show by western powers from USSR to US. They did not wanted to be invaded by USSR devastated and then left to ruins. Then invaded by US and left to ruins.
Iraq do not even talk about it. The sanctions alone killed more than one millions babies because the western powers did not wanted medicine in Iraq. Madeline Albright was asked on TV show that what about those million dead babies. She said it was worth it.
Where is your condemnation? No where to be seen. What a fruit cake.
Muslim
July 30, 2010 at 3:06 AM
I agree with Nitin, Hindu terrorism is confined only to India though it has hindu terrorist supporters outside India. This is because hinduism unlike the global religions has only a local following and it was just created by Brahmins to exploit the lower castes. It is not a universal religion and does not believe in Universal brotherhood. Hence all the bombs and killing of innocent people, is done by Hindu terrorists only in India, and none of the brahmins have criticized these terror activities. But when you compare it to christian terrorism you can see this type of terrorism globally, since christianity is a global religion, and christian priests have also not condemned christian terrorism. Only muslims, and Islam being the true religion of God, have universally condemned terrorism.
Aashiq Hussain
July 24, 2013 at 8:33 PM
@Nitin, In Islam killing one innocent is like killing whole humanity. And you are talking about Magnitude? Killing two or two thousand is same in Islam.
I as a Muslim condemn and am against violence against innocents.
You see some people on TV and blame whole Muslims or Islam for that. But Majority , about 99%, Of Muslims aren’t on the TV and they haven’t killed anyone. So why don’t you think Muslims and Islam as good?
Why do people fail to use brain. And you should take interest in world politics and use alternate media. It will help you a lot.
Michael
May 7, 2016 at 10:27 PM
Why can sharia Law be practiced in Irac and other Muslim countries and not in Australia, Why do muslims not follow the commands of Allah practiced in lands where they are Legal and not do the same in Australia, Is Allah to be worshiped differently because they are in a different Land, Christians that are real will practice Christianity no matter where they are at the risk of there life!!!!?
Umm Bilqis
April 25, 2010 at 1:38 AM
It will be interesting to see the sources for his misinformation. However, without a doubt his sources will be the failed, useless orientalist scholarship. Which is and has ever been a waste of their time and money and will God willing always cause them much regret : )).
Essay on Orientalisn, Misinformation and Islam:
http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/orientalism.html
An excerpt:
The feeling that there is a general ignorance of Islam in the West is shared by Maurice Bucaille, a French doctor, who writes:
When one mentions Islam to the materialist atheist, he smiles with a complacency that is only equal to his ignorance of the subject. In common with the majority of Western intellectuals, of whatever religious persuasion, he has an impressive collection of false notions about Islam. One must, on this point, allow him one or two excuses. Firstly, apart from the newly-adopted attitudes prevailing among the highest Catholic authorities, Islam has always been subject in the West to a so-called ‘secular slander’. Anyone in the West who has acquired a deep knowledge of Islam knows just to what extent its history, dogma and aims have been distorted. One must also take into account that fact that documents published in European languages on this subject (leaving aside highly specialised studies) do not make the work of a person willing to learn any easier. (From The Bible, the Qur’an and Science, by Maurice Bucaille, page 118)
Antionio General
April 26, 2010 at 6:46 PM
Umm Bilqis,
I think its unnecessary to go verse by verse in the Quran or Islamic history to prove evidence for our claims. I don’t claim to be an Islamic scholar but I definitely have done more research that the typical westerner so I am somewhat knowledgeable about the basic of Islam and I also have my own copy of the Quran which I have read many many times over.
I think everyone in this blog site are probably the friendliest Muslims ever and I don’t have anything wrong against Muslims. I also think they take it as in insult against Muslims. Can Muslims be friendly..Yes, of course. But going back to the basic question: Is Islam a religion of violence. The answer is “Yes”
Jihadist and extremist for over a thousand years now all claim they are doing the works of Allah just like you. They can recite the entire Quran better than some of you. They even claim that their abominating acts of cruelty are justified by the Quran!!!! They use these verses in your Quran:
“Fight in the cause of Allah those that fight you…and slay them wherever you catch them,….and fight them until there is no more tumult or oppression, and there prevail justice in the name of Allah” (Sura 2:190-193)
“Fighting is prescribed upon you, but it is possible that ye dislike a thing which is good for you, and that ye love a thing that is bad for you. But Allah knoweth and ye know not.” – (Sura 2:216)
In other words, Allah wants you to fight and knows what is good for Muslims
“For unbelievers are unto you open enemies”..(Sura 4:101)
“Fight those that do not believe in Allah of the Last Day…nor acknowledge the Religion of Truth among the People of the Book (Jews and Christians)(Sura 9:29)
The Quran even gives instructions on what to do with unbelievers such as cut their feet, head, hands, or use crucifixion (Sura 5:33, 8:12-13, 47:4). These passages only enforce evil acts.
Osama bin Laden used Sura 9:14 in his video of a captured US soldier- “Fight them, and Allah will punish them by your hands, cover them with shame” (Sura 9:14) To this day, jihadist are still more inspired by Mohammed’s thirst for violence than ever before.
Some say that these verses are only for Mohammed and his enemies at the time of Mecca. That is not the case. For 1400 years Muslims have doing this and continue to this day.
So where do these Muslims get this idea to spread Islam to the entire world by all means necessary including destruction? When you ask them, they will tell you the Quran is where they find their roots and that they are following the ways of Mohammed!!! So who’s interpretation and doctrine is right? Yours or theirs? And what makes your school of thought more right than theirs? You never answered the question. I look forward to your answer.
What about fighting against North Africa, the Persian Empire, and Europe? Where Muslims acting in self defense or against oppression? No. Then what’s the justification for that? Still hoping for an answer.
What about the Islamic Law of Apostasy? “Whoever changed his Islamic religion, then kill him”.
What about the murder of a Jewish woman and her child by writing a poem against Mohammed? (Muhammad Husayn Haykal, the Life of Mohammed, 1976, page 243)
What about some of the most ancient Hadiths recorded by al-Bukhari which gave permission to kill all children and women that were pagan? (Sahih Musli translated by Abdul Hamid Siddiqi, 1994, 3:946-947) Is that suppose to be peaceful?
I even knew Muslims that lived in Iran before the Revolution and told me that everyday in school, they had a pledge by reciting to kill all Americans. They are brainwashing these kids!! I don’t need a couple of Quranic verses to convince me that Islam is violent. You can see that just by looking at the current affairs in the East now!!! They all claim they are following the Quran and Mohammed.
Umm Bilqis
April 27, 2010 at 1:10 PM
For an the Explanations you requested you should go to the proper authorities:
http://www.islam-qa.com/en/cat/430
Let us examine the world today it is headedby Secular Humanism and it is the world leader. These states have damaged and poisoned human relations to the point that many (especially those in authority) are unethical, Immoral and still others have engaged in barbarism. ( Their troops).
This uncivilized behavior has come about because of secular humanism. It is built on a house of sand. Secular humanists become violent and brutal when living is no longer easy. (Beware, perhaps when the times of economic hardship occur you may be better off living with those accostumed to it.) Plus remember that the Prophet Sallahu allahi wassalam and the Sahabas chose poverty.
In strife and trouble, Secular humanists turn on their own values so goodbye constitution and good bye the Geneva Conventions. Hello situational ethics and morality.
This shows that ethics without the Creator is involved in sounding good but no deliverance of genuine goods. It is not about inner refinement but observable show.
Those who are ethical due to submission to the will of the Creator cannot and will not surpass the rules of engagement. They have been ordered to engaged in exalted character in all situations. In politics, business at home or Alone.
Muslims are not allowed to torture captives and kill women, children the elderly., and Uproot trees among other things that you can read about in that link. The penalty for not adhering to these rules of engagement could be Hellfire and Allah taala knows best.
Muslims have been ordered to heed the call of the Creator and the Creator has ordered us to put a stop to oppression even if we dislike to do this.
Yet many Muslims drown the Voice that they should hear and instead listen to the voices of others that give them a less exalted calling such as lawyer or doctor. ( There is good in these fields, I know.)
However, we forget that we are the people of strong will and emaan Insha’Allah, and that a weak emaan is like a donkey it has some small benefit however a horse or many horses if disciplined and properly trained can move mountains.
Antonio, brother Anas has responded to some of your queries please respond.
Shua
April 28, 2010 at 1:35 AM
Antionio,
I know you feel as though you have a lot of good points but you’re arguement is logically flawed. You mention the violence from early Islam but refuse to accept the possibility of an alternative view. You continue to refer to the “middle east” as though it is the final say in translation. As far as I know Allah is supposed to be the only one capable of perfection. Though the Prophet Muhammad was a messenger of Allah, he was a man and he was capable of fallacies. You argue your point as if you want the answer to be yes so you can validate your passions against the faith.
I am not a Muslim. I am not a practitioner of any regulated faith. I find myself studying many beliefs in an attempt to understand the history of human faith. I have found that every religion has a hint of violence in its past but this does not make it a violent religion. I have also found that the reason faith is continued is because of the translation. You’re right, many Muslims are violent and believe the Quran justifies their actions. But you also have to understand that a person of pure heart can read the same message and be inspired to live righteously. This too is a cause for a continuation of belief. Neither interpretation is more correct than the other and you cannot generalize a whole religion based on the negative comprehension of one side.
You have to look at the belief as a whole. Which way of worship is more widely practice? It’s hard to say because if you bring politics into the question then the poll will be skewed. What form of violence is acceptable? Again, depending on your survey sample you will get a different result.
Maybe a better question would be “Does the history of a faith cause the current practitioners to be less deserving of love and acceptance?”
I hate to break it to you but many (rather MOST) religions, especially of the major world religions, have a violent birth. No faith has ever been guilty of always being peaceful yet it is relatively safe to assume that the average westerner perceives Islam to be inherently violent. This is due, mainly, to distorted media coverage and a common fear from the Muslim people to actually educate the uneducated. It is also due to many anti-Islam, or Islamophobes, preaching a misconceived perception of a religion they have decifered themselves.
I, as I imagine the other bloggers, have appreciated your position. Though I am not a follower of Allah I believe that every faith has a right to peace. I also believe that one must consider an objective side when trying to evaluate another’s belief. Rather than judge somone’s interpretation of a spiritual message against your own; consider the possibility that we are all human and all capable of human fallacy. Continue to inspire thought and passion. Continue to question the realities but never ignore that little voice inside you that says that all men (and women) are iherently good, it’s the choices and translations in life that lead us to violence.
Be kind to one another and thank you all for a very intersting discussion.
Best wishes to all…
Shua
Umm Bilqis
April 28, 2010 at 3:04 AM
Greetings Shua,
Interesting perspective! Please note one area that needs a bit of clarification is in regards to the act that Prophet Muhammed Sallahu allahi wa Sallam (Peace be upon Him), as with all the Prophets and Messengers of God were protected from sin by the Creator.
As mentioned in a previous comment These books were tampered with to the extent that heinous stories about the prophets were incorporated in them. The Peace and Blessings of the Creator be upon All of Them.
The question is who is attempting to discredit them? Unfortunately, the worst of Creation and the Corruptors have seized control due to much dishonesty intellectual and otherwise.
Triumphant Satanism with its secret brotherhoods has taken over many societies The liars and deceivers are in control and the truthful ones are not believed.
Islamic prophecies about the end times call these the years of deceit in which the truthful person will not be believed. and the liar would be believed.
(Excerpt from Islamic-suite beliefs101)
From the Qur’an, Muslims also know the names of 25 of the prophets. They are:
Adam
Idris (Enoch)
Nuh (Noah)
Hud
Saleh
Ibrahim (Abraham)
Isma’il (Ishmael)
Ishaq (Isaac)
Lut (Lot)
Ya’qub (Jacob)
Yousef (Joseph)
Shu’aib
Ayyub (Job)
Musa (Moses)
Harun (Aaron)
Dhu’l-kifl (Ezekiel)
Dawud (David)
Sulaiman (Solomon)
Ilias (Elias)
Al-Yasa (Elisha)
Yunus (Jonah)
Zakariyya (Zechariah)
Yahya (John)
‘Isa (Jesus)
Muhammad
The prophets were noted for their righteousness, truthfulness, piety and honesty. Allah protected them from sin, supported them with miracles, and made them exemplary in their obedience to Allah and in their actions: “They are those whom Allah had guided. So follow their guidance.â€(Qur’an 6:90)
Islam’s Prophets – The Ulul ‘Azmi
Among the prophets, five are revered as the Ulul ‘azmi, or “messengers of strong will,” distinguished by their devotion to Allah and their determination in the face of hardship: Nuh (Noah), Ibrahim (Abraham), Musa (Moses), Isa (Jesus) and Muhammad (peace be upon them all).
Muhammad (peace be upon him), however, has the highest status. Not only is he the seal of the prophets and the one who received the final revelation of the Qur’an, but he has the distinction of having been sent to all of mankind rather than to a specific nation as the other ulul ‘azmi were.
In the Qu’ran, it says that, “We have not sent you (O Muhammad) except as a giver of glad tidings and a warner to all mankind, but most of men know not.” (Qur’an 34:28); and, “Indeed in the Messenger of Allah (Muhammad) you have a good example to follow for him who hopes for (the Meeting with) Allah and the Last Day, and remembers Allah much.” (Qur’an 33:21)
G
May 6, 2010 at 10:41 AM
Hello Anas Hlayhel,
I found your article to be very interesting and enlightening as well as the comments made in this post. Dialogue like this is important for Muslims and Non-Muslims if we hope to improve relations world wide. I am not a Muslim, however working in a University setting I often come in contact with Muslims and to date I have not met a Muslim who I did not like. Clearly the media is responsible for unfair labels that Muslims as a hole receive, just because the radical Muslims are the ones making the news. Every religion has a radical group that uses force and violence to get their point across.
Here is one question I would like your opinion on. In the west it is common to make fun of ourselves. We do this all the time on sit-coms and talk shows. We make fun of every religion (including our own) with the exception of Islam. Everyone is afraid to say anything that might be offensive to Muslims for fear of a violent retribution. The recent South Park episode has come under fire by many Muslims because they came very close to representing Muhammad (Peace be upon Him) which I know is taboo. My question is do Muslims (not the radicals) feel that this is an offense that the creators of South Park should die over as some groups have suggested? Or is this just a case where again radicals Muslims are the ones that are getting the media attention?
Amad
May 6, 2010 at 11:29 AM
Dear G.
Have you seen this post? Pls read it, and if it doesn’t answer your question, I am sure Br. Anas or someone else will be more than willing to.
http://muslimmatters.org/2010/04/26/south-park-episode-censorship-of-mohammeds-s-depiction-the-script-played-to-perfection/
Anas Hlayhel
June 13, 2010 at 11:57 AM
Hi G,
If I may add, we Muslims believe that certain matters should not be made fun of (e.g. God, His Messengers, His scriptures). This is because faith is a v. serious matter and ridiculing it undermines its seriousness or its sacredness. BTW, this goes for all Prophets and all scriptures (Muslims are, or at least should be, equally offended when Jesus or Moses are made fun of). Off course, none of this should condone any act of violence claiming to be protecting the sacredness of religion and its figures.
Hope that makes sense,
Anas
G
May 6, 2010 at 12:53 PM
Dear Amad,
Thank you for reading my post. I followed the link as you suggested,also a great article and posts. I think this helps to answer my question.
Sincerely,
G
amad
May 6, 2010 at 1:58 PM
You are welcome G. I hope more people in America were like you, instead of relying on a segment by Anderson Cooper to create more fear about Muslims and Islam. By the way, Cooper seems to be on a mission, kind of like a soft O-Reilly, interviewing an arrogant Maher and creating more Islamophobia. I don’t what these guys are thinking? Will a billion people just disappear? Instead of doing responsible journalism, everyone seems to be trying to outfox FOX these days.
Robert
June 12, 2010 at 4:37 AM
Thank you Anas for your explanation…BTW if others haven’t mentioned this, your page comes up pretty high in Google rankings for searching “is islam a violent religion”. Thank you for taking the time to explain to us…Admittedly I’m a Christian and have not touched the Quran, please pardon my ignorance.
I’ve always had difficulties understanding why people would commit acts of violence in the name of God, or Allah. Killing of innocents and claiming its a means to an end…Holding people responsible just because they are part of a country that they see is evil.
Why such hate?
Your post does a great service to people like me…See I have heard so much about Islam being a violent religion that I was starting to believe it…But the Lord always tells us to seek the truth. I live in a town full of faithful Muslims and there is also a large Christian following, and we all get along just fine. There is no racial or religious tension here, there is however a lot of respect.
I wish the world could be more like this. Hatred should not be tolerated, neither is blind fanaticism…Its how wars are started. Life is tough enough without us being at each other’s throats!
Anyway, again, thank you. I hope you don’t take offense, but God bless, and good luck with your future endeavors.
Anas Hlayhel
June 13, 2010 at 11:45 AM
Hi Robert,
Thank you for taking the time to read the article and for wanting to seek the truth. We need more people like you who are not blinded by propaganda or hate. No I wasn’t aware of this article’s ranking with Google, so thank you for bringing that to my attention.
I’m really glad that I can be an agent of understanding and that people like you are appreciative of that.
Sincerely,
Anas
Jason
June 25, 2010 at 1:08 AM
Very interesting blog and insightful too. I’m not too educated or anything in Islam but I just started diving into the Koran so I’m very new. I have all kinds of impressions of Islam. I had a few questions and maybe someone can help me answer these.
Part of being peaceful means living in harmony, tranquility while respecting one another and their beliefs. So if Islam truly is peaceful can some guy like me go to Afghanistan or Iran and practice any religion I want to and be respected peacefully just like here in the US, Canada, and Australia?
I was touching up on some history on Islam and I read the part when Mohammed died, Abu Bakr took over. Why did he send all the Muslims to attack Europe and India first? Isn’t that kind of messed up to go out and just attack countries that never even did anything to them? What was the purpose of that? I thought they were suppose to be peaceful and only fight when other countries pick on them.
I mean, I understand why Iran is at war with the US, that makes sense. Its political issues stem from oil and other conflicts of interests. But why did the early Muslims just go out and start picking on other countries?
Thanks for helping me out.
Sayf
June 25, 2010 at 2:37 AM
Hi Jason nice of you to drop by, I hope you enjoy the other articles as well and engage in more discussion.
This is actually a two part question that needs a two part answer. Islamic history is a testament to how much safety and mutual respect people of other faiths enjoyed within the Islamic Caliphate. This is from the article on the exiling of the last Caliph.
In the Golden Age of Islam people of other faiths flocked to the Islamic nation at times where there may have been mass persecution of people like Jews.
As for living in Afghanistan or Iran, you have to understand that Muslims may or may not be behaving in the manner that their religion teaches which is unfortunate. Thus let’s try to focus on what Muslims are supposed to do vs. what they may actually be doing, I hope you see that’s fair. My background is Afghan and that in no way means I’m going to blindly support every action Afghans do just because they’re Muslim, rather a person who truly cares objectively analyzes and advises against the wrong actions that take place, which is actually my the true responsibility of a Muslim.
Actually, the Byzantines and the Sassanids were in open conflict with the Muslims and battles/skirmishes took place before an all-out invasion, hopefully someone else can provide you with a more detailed explanation on this than I have.
For more info about Islam and answers to common questions:
http://www.whyislam.org/?TabId=165#Q11
=D}
Jason
June 25, 2010 at 11:30 AM
Sayf, thank you for clearing that up. So you’re pretty much saying that Muslims that don’t allow you to practice your non-Muslim faith aren’t really following real Islam then. But isn’t that mostly every Muslim country out there now? I can think of any Muslim country like Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran, or Africa that will not persecute you if you practice another religion like Judaism, Buddhism, and Christianity.
Sayf maybe you can help me answer this one too. Just understand that I never been to the middle east so I am one of those people that only knows what goes on there by what the media shows me. But hopefully you can clarify this for me.
Do some Muslims actually bomb themselves and if so why do Muslims bomb themselves? What is the basis behind that? I mean, where did they get that idea from and is that in the Koran?
Last but not least Muslims that practice that kind of act or suicide, are they twisting the Koran and lying? I appreciate your time Sayf.
Sayf
June 25, 2010 at 2:24 PM
Even though I try to give the media the benefit of the doubt, they consistently show misrepresentation and bigotry towards Muslims. The truth is there is a lot of good going on our there but it’s not being shown in the media and it escapes through people’s minds because of the confirmation bias.
With that being said, you should check out the story of a woman named Yvonne Ridley. She was a woman who was captured by the Taliban just before and during the US invasion who has first hand experience in Afghanistan as a foreigner and she eventually converted to Islam. She has quite the entertaining and captivating story and I’m sure you can find it on youtube.
Another example, here’s an American non-Muslim who resides in Saudi Arabia and studies at KAUST. I’ve been following his blog because I’m interested in the school and he seems to be having a very awesome time there.
As for the other question about suicide bombers, the short answer is that it is completely against Islam. Even if let’s say a person is justified in fighting against oppressors, there are still very important ethics of war that can’t be compromised. This includes harming civilians, women/children, even unnecessary destruction of wildlife. Suicide is also completely forbidden in Islam, the ends simply do not justify the means.
I’m sure you might ask, well if it’s that clear cut in Islam then why is it still happening? A lot of it has to do with ignorance/lack of education, poverty, desperation, people taking advantage of their situation etc. At the end of the day though, it still doesn’t justify evil actions BUT it’s not my place to judge individual people and condemn them to hellfire, only the Creator can judge people.
I hope that answers your questions nicely, and there’s a lot of info in the links I’ve given you for you to check out. Please don’t hesitate to continue asking if you have any more questions!
Jason
June 27, 2010 at 9:15 PM
Sayf, I still have some difficulty understanding the mind set and resources of Islam.
When Muslims commit violent crimes you say they don’t get that from the Koran. So where do they get it from then? Obviously its either from 1 or two sources. Either from the Koran or the religious leaders, scholars, and high Muslim officials and teachers.
If its from the caliphs and other high leading Muslim figures, then they are either leading many Muslims astray by being corrupt or they are following the Koran.
So I guess it boils down to whose interpretation is more correct. The teachers and leaders in the middle east or yours. Why should I personally take your answer over theirs? And shouldn’t a religious leader know more about the Koran then you do?
Pretty much what your telling me is this:
If a Muslim scholar and Muslim leader in Iran, Afghanistan or Pakistan uses violent and claims they are following true Islam, then according to you, they are ignorant, foolish, and are twisting the religion? Am I right?
Also Sayf, let’s say that I was a news reporter in the middle east and I interview a jihad suicide bomber. If I asked them where they got that idea from how would you think they would respond? And why should I believe your answer more than theirs? Why? I guess that’s where I am confused really. Who should I believe and why?
Yes, I do know that the media such as the news never are really fair by only show more bad stuff then th good stuff but the point is this: The bad stuff is a reality! Unfortunately some of it is true especially when I listen to whats happening in Britain. Again Sayf, if you asked those Muslims in Britian where they got that idea from, they say its from the Koran!!! Yikes! So that leads me back to the original question, why should I believe you over them?
I have never heard of Muslim organizations that are against Muslim violence! I never seen or heard of Muslim burning down a Osam bin Laden picture and claiming that they are against violent Muslims. Why is that?
Sayf
July 2, 2010 at 2:56 PM
Sorry for the late reply, I didn’t see your post until now. If you would like, we could either continue this conversation here or on MSN.
Two issues need to be addressed here:
The first problem is that through the availability heuristic, you’ve come to the conclusion that the majority of Muslims (either here or the Middle East) are radicals, which couldn’t be further from the truth. The majority of Muslims live by mainstream Islam and it’s beautiful teachings which I’ve presented before you. This psychological bias leads someone to believe that radicals and extremists are the majority simply because the observation is more traumatic. It’s like being afraid of roller coasters because they seem scary, when in reality a person has a much higher chance of dying on the way to the theme-park then on a ride.
The second issue which I’m very glad you brought up is about interpretation. What makes one person’s interpretation correct and the other one’s incorrect? The answer is extremely important and surprisingly simple, just turn to the Qur’an and Sunnah (actions of the Prophet peace be upon him). Who better to learn the religion from than the one who began the call to it? You may be a little surprised at this point because it seems the radicals are also referring to the Qur’an and Sunnah – well are they really? I invite you to actually learn about the Qur’an and Sunnah and see for yourself how such extremism is supposedly “open to interpretation”. A person can take any book they want and misconstrue it to fit their agenda, but it isn’t necessarily correct academically. I could sit here and claim that the award-winning book To Kill a Mockingbird encourages me to kill mockingbirds – how ridiculous does that sound?
Islam is an extremely academic religion. I encourage you to take on this academic study critically and objectively and you shall see for yourself how the religion presents itself.
To be honest I’m disappointed in this sentence. I’ve sent you several links – have you been looking through them? A lot of your questions are actually answered already in the link I sent you:
http://www.whyislam.org/
Here’s another:
http://muslimmatters.org/2009/02/09/muslim-scholars%E2%80%94west%E2%80%99s-natural-allies-in-fighting-scourge-of-terrorism/
I encourage you to look through the information I’ve provided and don’t be hesitant to continue probing and asking critical questions.
Jason
July 2, 2010 at 9:16 PM
Sayf thank you once again.
I never ever once said all Muslims are terrorist. Obviously they aren’t. I haven’t seen any and the ones I have seen are friendly and nice people. I was only referring to some Muslims, not all, particularly what we call extremist.
Also Sayf. you say that Islam is an academic religion. So you are assuming that only terrorist are uneducated and nonacademic. That is not the case. Actually most of them are academic and strict to the Koran. Here are examples:
Amin Al-Husseini
Abdullah Yusuf Azzam (Sunni Islamic Scholar who mentored Osama bin Laden)
Sayyid Qutb (father of modern jihad. He memorized the entire Quran at the age of 10 and graduate from Dar al-Ulum University)
Hassan al-Bann– a school teacher and founder of the Muslim Brotherhood
These men supported and influence Muslim violence and yet they were highly educated in the Islam religion
On one occasion you say that these Muslims didn’t get in from the Koran and then you go on to say that they mistranslated the Koran. That just confused me more.
All i know is one thing, they had to get it from somewhere and I know they all didn’t just invent it in their heads.
You should check out these links. What you say and what they say can confuse Westerners. Could you please clarify this. Thank you Sayf for having patience with me. Please let me know what your thoughts are on these:
-Edited. No islamophobic sites permitted. It is becoming clear where you get your misinformation from. Rather than have everyone refute nonsense, why not start from scratch and understand what Islam means to Muslims!
Sayf
July 3, 2010 at 1:12 AM
No, that’s not what I’m assuming my friend. Someone who says something which is against Islam doesn’t necessarily have their head in the ground, they could be very well educated and well-versed, but that doesn’t prevent them from erring in presenting proper academic proof from the Qur’an and Sunnah to support their claims.
Are you under the impression that a few poorly (Islamically) versed western Muslims promote mainstream Islam – whose knowledge is surpassed by radicals in the Middle East? What I’m explaining to you about the nature of Islam is backed by thousands of well-educated scholars all over the globe. Check out the list of authors on the side and see how many scholars are posting on this little blog alone. Here‘s another Islamic institute in the west. The brother who wrote this article also has a degree in Islamic studies. Mind you this is all just to name a few.
When I said Islam is an extremely academic religion – I meant claims are backed by providing strong proof from the Qur’an and Sunnah objectively and critically which has to be met with rigorous analysis from the rest of the Muslim academic world – and the majority of them are making the message clear for you. Simply cutting and pasting verses and hadiths out of context is not enough – which is my point.
With that in mind, I want you to take a second look at the links you sent me and what the vast, vast majority of Muslim academia around the globe have to say about such claims. How horribly biased is the first video? Did you notice those same “reporters’ also hinted at believing Obama was a secret Muslim? Do you really think such Islamophobes would tell you that there are hundreds of scholars in Britain alone who would condemn any sort of sympathy for terrorist acts.
The man claimed jihad is an integral part of the Islamic faith, which is completely true backed by Islamic scripture – however that provides absolutely no proof for supporting terrorism. Evidence from the Qur’an and Sunnah for military action as promotion of terrorism – do you see the false leap in logic with that? Islam does not teach complete pacifism, there is a place for self-defense. People seem to have a double standard when loving characters like Batman and Spiderman yet take issue with the fact that military action exists within Islam. However it is important to keep in mind this is all under the strict guidelines I showed you – I don’t think I need to repeat what Islamonline with their massive team of scholars and influence all over the globe has already presented (with proof from the Qur’an and Sunnah).
Look at the second link you sent me again carefully:
Don’t you see what’s wrong with this? Muslim scholars provide proof from authentic Islamic scripture and their counter-proof is the logical fallacy of appeal to tradition – who is really being disingenuous? The rest of the scripture they quote is about the rank of warriors, which we already discussed above and is another logical fallacy (straw-man argument) because the topic in question is suicide bombing – not about those who fight legitimately in self-defense.
The people in the links you showed me are no different from the extremists on the other end of the spectrum – fueled by hatred in tunnel vision compromising logic and the science of Islamic jurisprudence along the way.
It’s like going to the KKK for information about African-Americans then going to the Black Panthers for their response when you have people who listen to Martin Luther King Jr. all around you. Sure, read what you want to read but at least find the mainstream and check out the proof they bring to the table.
Again, please keep the conversation going if you have more queries.
Jason
July 7, 2010 at 11:35 AM
Sayf I have read that links of the articles that you gave me. All it talked about was to integrate academic systems in which Muslim scholars could create peaceful Muslims by educating them on “authentic” Islam.
Sayf, there’s a few problems with that.
1. Its only preventive maintenance. It’s to stop future Muslims from being recruited by extremist. But the issue is “what about those that are part of the extremist vision now”? So what are we to do with them? Including you Sayf, what would you do personally if you were to encounter a Muslim extremist? I hardly doubt that using intellect and scholarship by busting out the Koran will change their will and attitude especially if they are carrying guns.
2. Those are only future plans that haven’t been executed yet. At this point its only wishful thinking. I’ve been to various Muslim websites against terrorism and all they mention was what their mission statement was and what the peaceful Muslims were doing to establish peace among other nations. That’s not the problem Sayf. The problem is what exactly are these peaceful Muslims doing against non-peaceful Muslims????
So could you please tell me in your own words what are Muslims organizations exactly doing (not saying what they are going to do) that is indicating opposition directly against violent extremist Muslims?
Its just very hard to believe that’s even working when extremist is at a all time high and recruitment is increasing more than ever. I never hear about some Buddhist militia attacking a Muslim village, or a Christian extremist movement bombing some Muslim town, or some Hindu dictator using the Vedas to recruit Hindus to overthrow the Muslim government. I only hear Islam.
Sayf, here is an analogy to illustrate where I am going with this:
Let’s say that there are 100 Muslims and some Westerners in a room. 80 of them are peaceful and 20 of them are violent extremist. Now the Westerners can point out that the majority are peaceful so its obvious that Islam is probably peaceful. However, the Westerner is not concerned about the peaceful ones by saying “well i can live in peace knowing that they are mostly peaceful”. No Sayf, the Westerner is going to say “what are we suppose to do with the other 20% since this is a reality and it will affect me”?
What proactive measures are we suppose to do at this current moment? Do we engage in physical war to eradicate them? Do we use scholar intellect to convince them otherwise while they are carrying guns and bombs? If so, how are we to initiate a plan to gather all of them in one room while we use words against their guns while being safe? Also, the root of the problem is powerful leaders than support suicide bombings. So Sayf, how do you suppose we should handle them? Bring a scholar to go out and debate with them and try to convince them why their philosophy is dead wrong??? And do you honestly think that’s going to work? Or do you think we should just execute them?
I just think in my opinion, Muslims are spending too much time convincing everyone how they are a peaceful religion instead of attacking the most important issue of “what needs to be done against the violent Muslims NOW and what is actually going to work.”
Look forward hearing from you and thank you again for your enduring patience, brotherly respect, and concern.
Jason
July 7, 2010 at 2:13 PM
Sayf, I just wanted to add on to my previous comment.
I know there are a lot of Muslims that are silent on the issue against Muslim extremist and there are also some that are against it. They condemn it, they denounce it, they are even outrage by it.
However, condemnation and denouncing is not enough. Why? Because after the 9/11 attacks there are actually more Muslim terrorist then ever. In fact there are more pamphlets about killing non-believers being circulated especially in the UK more than ever. The polls don’t lie and the fact is that there is an increasing radicalization, indoctrination, and endorsement more than ever.
If non-Muslims were to have confidence than Islam is not a violent religion then they need to start seeing Muslims stand up against their counterparts and combat extremism by some form of action instead of just declaration such as:
1. going to Pakistan or Iran and install teachers to teach kids against terrorism and true Islam
2. form some sort of organization that detects, monitors, and intercepts terrorist activities
3. Police these terrorist by capturing and imprisoning them.
So why are Muslims doing any of this? I have never heard of a peaceful Muslim take down an extremist Muslim and send them to jail in a non-Muslim country. Never! If so please send me a link.
I see Muslims spend more time being passionate about defending against islamaphobia than being strategically offensive against extremist. We want to see action on behalf of these peaceful Muslims and not just talking about how much they are against it. We get that already
Sayf
July 8, 2010 at 10:10 PM
I’m assuming based on how this conversation has shifted that you have understood that Islam is not a violent religion, and that Islamic terrorism is an oxymoron.
With that being said, you really shouldn’t underestimate the power of education. The number of Muslims and non-Muslims who have turned away from fatalistic hate is unbelievable. We’re really saving lives here, and yes even those in armed conflict who truly care about what their religion asks of them can be educated (and I’ve seen this in a doc).
However, this is being severely undermined. Armed conflict is not the solution here my friend, the West’s foreign policy is creating its own terrorists. Just check out these statistics:
http://www.ifamericansknew.org/
Despite claims of “seeking peace”, Israel continues to expand its borders beyond what the UN is allowing with more and more illegal settlements. If you were a Palestinian, how would you feel if you’re home was demolished?
http://www.iraqbodycount.org/
If you were in Iraq and your entire family was killed by foreign troops (God forbid), how would you feel about them?
The truth is the world is not a safer place because of what Western leadership is doing in the world, and to be honest it’s my opinion that they don’t really care too much either. Here’s why I believe so right from the horse’s mouth:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4383835181717429209#
This doc is overall biased but I want you to pay attention to a very special moment from 53:00 – 56:00. Henry Kissinger says the US was prepared to invade Saudi Arabia if King Faisal continued to refuse them oil. Do you realize the insanity behind such a statement? The US was willing to invade the holiest place for more than 1 billion people in the world to secure oil!
And yes, there are violent activities perpetrated by non-Muslims that don’t get very much media attention, here are a few examples:
http://muslimmatters.org/2010/05/28/cair-texas-radio-host-urges-bombing-of-ny-mosque/
http://muslimmatters.org/2010/05/11/first-coast-news-explosion-fire-at-islamic-center-in-jacksonville-targeted-possibly-a-hate-crime/
http://muslimmatters.org/2010/02/25/newsweek-should-joseph-stack-be-called-a-terrorist/
Here are a few examples of Muslims actually stopping terrorist activities:
http://muslimmatters.org/2010/05/13/obama-please-phone-the-muslim-street-vendor-hero-too/
http://muslimmatters.org/2010/04/21/nyt-militia-draws-distinctions-between-groups/
I want to make it clear that I’m not placing the blame squarely on Western foreign policy, there are serious problems within the Muslim world as well. I want you to take from this an objective, honest look at the world and understand the very real multiple factors contributing to the problems we see today.
If you’re asking me how to save the planet, the short answer is I don’t know and it’s not in my capabilities. All you and I could really do is what we can within our potential to contribute positively to the world.
Prasad
July 11, 2010 at 4:55 AM
@moderators: Im sorry, I guess I submitted a post in the wrong place above. I am submitting the same post again. Please delete the previous one because it is the same as the one below..
Sayf,
I guess Jason had asked the wrongs questions here. The issue today is not about which interpretation is right, or who is wrong and who is right. As you said, in theory, Islam may be a peaceful religion. Again as you said, maybe the Quran has given instructions to Muslims not to kill unless provoked or attacked.
Anas has explain to us patiently and clearly the real interpretation about Quranic verses and how some standalone Quranic verses should actually be studied in the context in which they were written and that they should be used in conjunction with other Quranic verses.
My point is this:
It is very well to write an article and prove that Islam does not warrant killing innocent people.
But sadly today, most terrorists are Muslims (If I say that all terrorists are Muslim, it will lead us to a different argument).
Why? Is it not because radical Imams and terrorist organisations use standalone Quranic verses to prove their people that Islam orders them to kill all kafirs?
Do those people, who decide to join terrorist organisations, care anything about the context in which certain Quranic verses were written? Why are they not aware of the contextual usage as has been explained here? Why is it easy and possible for fundamentalist organisations to encourage Muslims to blow themselves up and kill innocents in the process?
Now my biggest question: Why is this type of misinterpretation happening only in Islam? Is it not because of the fact that only Islam provides the the people in power(like the Imams) the opportunity to contort and misinterpret the verses in their Holy Book? Why is this not happening in other religions? In this context, is it not true that the way the Quran is written, is flawed, which directly leads to misinterpretation?
Arif
July 11, 2010 at 12:20 PM
As Brother Sayf mentioned in one of his earlier comments,
One of the reason why it appears that muslims are getting drawn into acts of voilence is primarily because the current conflict areas/war-zones are mainly populated by Muslims. Just think, From when did this word “Islamic terrorism” started surfacing up ? Did this word existed before west invaded the muslim lands ?
I am not justifying the mindless voilence being perpetrated by terrorists, There can be no justification for it even in the pretext of injustice done by invaders of their lands….. But it is important to take all facts into account before blaming a particular community. It is important to understand how much phycological and mental stress these people (living in such conflict areas ) have to go through ….and in such situations, You really cannot control everyone and stop all from getting taken over by rage and drawn into acts of unjustified voilence…
As for the question on what Muslims are doing to stop terrorism, All our scholars and muslim organizations are trying their best to spread the teachings of Qura’n that there is no justification of killing innocents in Islam.
At the same time, we also need to ask how much West is ready to stop these voilence? I hope you all know that its the west governments and their giant corporations who are making the most of profits in such conflct areas….Will someone from West standup for this and ask their govt to end these injustices??
Nitin
July 19, 2010 at 1:16 PM
Arif,
I dont think the various religious sects worshipping their faith in Pakistan were western agressors. Why were they blasted while they were praying?
Every religion has some amount of extremism built into it. However, why is that only followers of a particular religion go out and seek revenge against their own (not even western kafirs!) And that too children, elderly and normal peaceful humans.
There has to be a logic to it. Right?
mMuslim
July 19, 2010 at 1:25 PM
I agree that there is logic only when High Caste Hindus brutally murder and rape Low Caste Hindus. They are doing it because their book says so. However when one muslim kills another muslim unjustly then he is either a psycho or he is not a real muslim but just a namesake muslim. There is no logic to it.
Liberal
July 19, 2010 at 11:18 PM
My friend, please reason and distinguish between crime and terror.
Let us have a clear disctinction, else, murder, rape, kicking in the eye, punching the nose will all constitute terrorism :)
We are talking about a bigger picture here. If you do not want to see it, none can help. You can feel bad, retort to the posts and post your opinions, but that does not change the reality.
I am not a hindu or Indian for that matter. You will call that whole world is against Islam, my question is, why is such a need? Why things have come to this? Islam is today one of the largest (and as per arguements, peaceful) religions in the world and not minority by any means. Still why do I not hear terrorism related to other religions in such large numbers? Is that a media propaganda? Why would anyone do that?
These are complex questions and you can dismiss them as whole world against Islam or that kind of arguement.
Your posts above are very myopic and you are trying to justify one wrong by another. It is like, since my neighbour beats his wife, it is okay to beat my wife ;)
mMuslim
July 20, 2010 at 12:41 AM
Fortunately today it is coming to be known even in the media that the terrorist attacks done in India were done by Hindu terrorists and then blamed on innocent muslims. So even by that logic, all Hindus are not terrorists but all terrorists are Hindus. And by the way the person killed unjustly will not care whether he was killed by a Hindu terrorist or criminal!
Sayf
July 11, 2010 at 9:48 PM
Hello Prasad nice to have you here!
http://www.loonwatch.com/2010/01/not-all-terrorists-are-muslims/
I think that should be sufficient. Your paradigm is hurt by the availability heuristic, which you can thank the media for. It turns out Germans don’t cut the hands of Belgian babies either, go figure!
http://www.100megspop3.com/bark/Propaganda.html
Is it really that surprising that war comes with propaganda? It’s a lot easier to pass off the mass-deaths of sub-humans isn’t it? History doesn’t repeat itself, but it sure rhymes.
I’ll be glad to continue this discussion with you if you have more questions!
Aashiq Hussain
July 24, 2013 at 8:53 PM
Most terrorists are NON-Muslims. If you call them soldiers and not terrorists even though actions are same, that doesn’t change the fact that they kill innocents.
Indian Army has been killing and raping people in occupied Kashmir for 60 years now, you call them soldiers, I call them terrorists. Israel army has been killing Innocents Palestinians for about 60 years, I call them terrorists and you call them soldiers. And I can go on.
Bhaghat singh was a terrorist according to British.
Jason
July 11, 2010 at 11:29 PM
Sayf there are interesting points from everyone and a lot of great contributions to this discussion. I will gather all of my thought as I examine these highlights at a later time.
Anyways, you mentioned that education is a powerful tool. Indeed. That is the reason why lots of Extremist outsource and become very successful in recruiting other Muslims from universities. Through education. Its a double side on the coin.
You have to wonder about this Sayf: How is that a large portion of Muslims that are recruited to become terrorist are in fact derived directly from Universities??? These Muslims are actually educated, politically motivated, seek understanding for their Islamic faith, are are perpetually rooted to their Islamic culture.
So what is powerful enough to capture the thoughts of these academically oriented Muslims to transform them into terrorist??? The only thing I can logically conclude is that these recruiters are actually providing compelling, irrefutable, and very hard substantial evidence from the Koran to support the killing of infidels and non-believers.
One should seriously contemplate on that: how some very well educated Muslim studying in a university without a background of violence slowly but surely become a terrorist!
Is it fear that allows them to join the gang? Is it because these terrorist could inflict such powerful emotions to overcome their will? Or is it in fact that these terrorist speak the truth about the Koran actually preaching about killing infidels and non-believers. ( i fear for the latter)
And do you know why I am concerned Sayf? Its because Islam is the future and it will affect me. As we speak Islamic terrorism (Westerner’s perspective) or killing infidels in the name of Allah ( an extremist perspective) is moving up in such an alarming rate. I never hear Buddhist suicide bombers , or Christian terrorist claims 200 lives in Africa, or Jews passing out pamphlets in European universities about killing non-believers. Only in name of Islam. This is a reality Sayf. There are actually more extremist now than ever and is predicted to grow exponentially and most of the converts are already Muslims. And what makes it worst is that unfortunately most of them were already Muslims that knew the Koran and grew in the Muslim faith already. Most of the converts are in democratic countries where they can make a free choice and aren’t forced unlike theocratic ruled governments in the middle east. So what is the reason behind the success of these terrorist recruiters?
Curious on your position Sayf and look forward to your answers or anyone else here.
Sayf
July 11, 2010 at 11:48 PM
I’m actually very disappointed in your last reply. I’ve given you more than enough information and statistics (see post just above you) that speak volumes for a person coming to the discussion reasonably and objectively – but it seems you have some preconceived notions that you keep trying to “prove” in the discussion.
There’s no need to keep going in circles, all the information is there, it’s up to you if you want to block them from your paradigm or not.
Jason
July 13, 2010 at 4:47 AM
Its so hard to believe that every single Muslim leader that supports jihad in terms of killing infidels are ALL in great error of the Koran. Despite that some of them have a vast devotion in Koranic studies and some of them are even scholars, suffis, shahs, mullah, imams, they are ALL in error according to you. The Islamic militant leaders in Somalia, in Jordan, in Pakistan, in the Philippines are all in error. Since according to Pewpolls, countries like Jordan, Lebanon, Morocco that mostly supports suicide bombings and justify the use of violence to eradicate infidels are entirely wrong! Or how about the 72% of Algeria that supports Osama bin Laden? Imagine that, entire countries are just plain dead wrong and completely ignorant about the Koran. So, pretty much I know more about the Koranic concept of peace than an entire Muslim dominant country! Please excuse my sarcasm….
Unfortunately that thing that you label as “error” is killing so many people. And yet according to you, we are suppose to educate the educated? I guess only in due time the future will unfold.
Also Sayf, to be honest I’m the one thats actually disappointed with your recent answers as you failed or avoided the critical questions.But I appreciate your genuine efforts and approach as I realize that my questions can be demanding and not everyone has all the answers. I commend you for your valiant efforts though.
Anyways, you show me links to facts and documentation on how the West is creating terrorist and that its responsible for this and that. Do I believe that? Yes. But that doesn’t change the fact that there are Islamic terrorist that think they are fighting in the name of Allah. This blog isn’t dedicated to argue about Western governments, this is about Islam. When I say Westerner, I use it synonymously with non-Muslim. I understand that evil is not contingent on any culture, society, or religion. Furthermore, I can also use links and documentation in my favor like show you a picture of an 8 year old boy in Iran having his hands run over by a truck for stealing based on the Sharia Law or how the the Somali militant group al-Shabaab killed 50 people yesterday when they were watching the World Cup, or a Catholic man beaten and having his hand cut off for asking a question about Mohammed, or how hundreds of innocent children are blown to pieces by an Islamic bomber while they are waiting in line for humanitarian aid! These are all recent events. I can easily access facts that supports each position, Sayf.
Even though there are more Jewish terrorist in US soil or more female Hindu suicide bombers as compared to Islamic ones, at least they are exclusive. Islamic fundamentalist has a mission which is to expand by means of recruitment. That’s the scary part and that separates it from the rest of the groups. What’s even scarier is how its gaining momentum and nothing seems to be working yet.
So far everyone here is telling me this: If a Muslim is peaceful and practice the pillars of Islam faithfully then he is a true Muslim. However if a Muslim can memorize the entire Koran, practices the pillars everyday, and even graduated in Al-Azhar, but somehow manages to interpret the Koran in support of jihad killings of infidels, he is not a true Muslim and is pretty much ignorant to the Islamic faith. hmmmm.. now what’s wrong with this reasoning?
And who said that mainstream Islam is responsible for the defining what True Islam is?
Was mainstream Germany back in World War II defining the identity of what a true German was? Was mainstream America before the Civil War suppose to define what universal human rights were?
…and the solution to liberate and demolish extremism is somehow to further educate them and point out where they are wrong? That’s the remedy that’s going to work huh? Doesn’t sound comforting at all. Its one thing to ask for a change of perception about Islam and its another thing to provide better evidence to make such a change.
Sayf since you seem to represent the common educated and modest Muslim i guess I’ll turn the spotlight to you specifically instead of the general. With that said, how do you view your role in regards to the Sharia Law? Do you support it, are you a reformist or are you against it?
Sayf
July 13, 2010 at 3:30 PM
I got my hands on the data from Pewpolls, manipulating and misrepresenting information isn’t cool. Here is the link.
Algeria isn’t on the list (is there another one?), and the question doesn’t even ask about support of Bin Laden, it asks about their confidence in him to do the right thing, such details are crucial drawing scientific conclusions from surveys.
With regard to your bit about “supporting suicide bombings and justifying violence to eradicate infidels”, that’s simply not true. The question doesn’t say that, it asks if “suicide bombings are justified against civilian targets in order to defend Islam from its enemies”, there’s a huge difference. Here’s the data:
Jordan: 56% (never), 26% (rarely).
Lebanon: 44% (never) 18% (rarely).
Morocco is not on the list.
With the exception of Lebanon, Palestine and Nigeria, every single other country (6/9) asked gave the majority opinion that it was never justified and in all of these six the second highest opinion was rarely justified.
Another interesting point, every single country shows the trend of increase over time for people strictly against such actions (even Palestine). Check out Pakistan:
Summer 2002 – 38% (Never)
Spring 2009 – 87% (Never)
I don’t think we’re going to benefit from any more discussion, it seems like your questioning is an attempt to prove the points of Islamophobic websites rather than learn Islam from Muslims. You should check out more anti-Islamophobic websites.
Two facts have been my main points and they remain:
1) Majority of Muslims and Muslim scholars (graduates from Islamic Universities) are against extremism.
2) The damage done by non-Muslim extremism (including Western foreign policy) both feeds and significantly outweighs the damage done by Muslim extremism (not to say two wrongs make a right).
Thanks for the discussion Jason, but I think we’re finished here.
Aashiq Hussain
July 24, 2013 at 8:55 PM
@Sayf, Better leave it. Going in circles will make you dizzy :)
Jason
July 13, 2010 at 4:50 PM
Misrepresenting information? I think you are misinterpreting information. I also think my discussions are coming to a close since there seems to be some form of non-acceptance and negation towards some facts.
Um no it doesn’t say that. It says confidence as a leader. If you truly read the content correctly, that category was about “support for terror” not doing the “right thing.” You’re now guilty of adding words Sayf. That’s not cool. By the ways, you didn’t clarify what the “right thing” was and according to who’s perspective. Common sense dictates that the “right thing” of Osama’s leadership is to eradicate all those that oppose Islam. What else would you think Osama would do?..lol
http://pewglobal.org/2005/07/14/islamic-extremism-common-concern-for-muslim-and-western-publics/
Sayf, so who are the enemies of Islam according to Jordan, Algeria, Somalia, etc? I’m going to take a wild guess here: ALL non-Muslims who are considered infidels, apostates, the greater Satan, or the lesser Satan as quoted by the Iranian president, and all those that “oppress” them by not allowing them to Islamacize everything. That doesn’t change the fact that 56% of Jordan supports that! Sayf, if you aren’t against bombing, you are for it. Justification is a form of support which doesn’t necessarily equate to being proactive. I think that what you were thinking.
I admit the Westerners are ignorant of Islam and there are vile and corrupt people installed in our goverments motivated by greed. But at least I admit that. I base it on facts not feelings. But on the contrary you make an audacious claim that ALL extremist are pretty much ignorant even to this day and that every one of their interpretation collectively of the hadiths, biography, and Koran are entirely wrong! Don’t you think they would get it by now after a thousand years? If you say that there are more scholars that support peace and the non-use of violence then why don’t these extremist reatlize that then and comform? Instead history is indicating that more extremist are coming out of homes of once peaceful Islams. That’s a tough cookie to bite Sayf and should require further investigation. I just don’t get how Islam is the largest group this world has ever seen to be suceptible to error in their own holy book causing them to go on a mass killing spree. I’m curious now; since you seem to research a lot and can pull up all these facts then do you know where I can find information on a Muslim extremist debating with a “peaceful” Muslim scholar about the interpretation of authenitic Islam?? That’s all I ask. I’m also suprised how you appear to know so much but didn’t know what initiated the Crusades..hmmm..nevermind that. I also won’t include the fact that you avoided the question if you are in support of the installment of Sharia Law.
Its ironic how I genuinely seek the truth and when I ask driven questions and show what other say for clarification its automatically considered “islamaphobic”.Every single time, all the time. I think that reveals the real biased nature in this site. Its like me going to an ethnic person after I caught him stealing and all he can say every time is “you’re being racist”….its getting old and overused.
Just keep in mind while we are having this conversation, more and more, what you call “Muslim perpetrators” are adding bodies to the pile of bloodshed because they think Allah requires that for them. While all your scholars are insisting that Islam is so peaceful its the extremist that are actually being successful by being more proactive and heavily engaged.
Well Sayf, thanks for this adventure. I will continue to pray for guidance, revelation, and peace for everyone. I truly hope you are right and that I am gravely wrong. I wish that in 5 to 10 years Peaceful Muslims will become victorious over extremist and that the trends are showing that there are less extremist in this world. All we can do is pray and let God take the world to its course.
suhail
July 19, 2010 at 1:40 PM
You have such a idiosyncratic view of the world that it is hilarious. Have you seen that body tolls on the muslim side of conflict. More that a million people dead in Iraq, Thousands of people in Afghanistan, and hundreds in Pakistan from drone attacks. Thousands killed in Chechnya by Russia whom Bush supported, Thousands killed in palestine just this year, Thousands killed in Kashmir.
You guys really are blind asking muslims the question that who is violent. Yeah you occupy there lands, kill millions of them without any issue and than ask them why are reacting this way. Well anybody with a small sense of mind would say that it is your own god damn fault. I am not even mentioning the massacre that you guys did when western nations colonized the muslims.
Peace cannot happen in vaccum. It need two party to be peaceful and respecting each other lives. On one hand you do not give a damn if a muslim die and on the other hand when the muslims react to it you say well why are you being so extreme.
Muslims are condemning the extremism within there own circles for years. Countless fatwas exist from the muslim scholars and the leaders are already puppet of western nations. Just google it and you will find many many fatwas by scholars of highest position condeming senseless acts of violence.
May be if you start asking your own people the question about killing muslims that would help.
Jason
July 23, 2010 at 7:46 PM
Suhail please don’t comment waaay after I already covered that. You’re being hilarious now. At least pay your due diligence and read what I wrote prior to commenting. I’ve already covered the fact that Westerners are just as evil and there are corrupt people in our government systems.
We already know that Westerners and Christians have committed acts of violence as well as Hindus. So has communism. Muslims are without exempt either.
Study history too before wasting time and displaying your ignorance. Look at the Crusades. Muslims expanded almost all through Europe, Asia, and Africa even massacring thousands of people who didn’t convert. You actually think they spread so fast by evangelism only? thats funny if you think that.
Look at what Muslims did to the Armenians. That was one of the worst genocides in the history of mankind and unfortunately its almost forgotten by being swept under the rug. So bad it even Hitler alluded it.
Last but not least, I am going to give you a perfect example:
Look at Sweden and Norway today! They were once voted the most peaceful countries in the world with the least crime rate. Now that Muslims are invading those countries and immigrating there, crime has sky rocketed. 75% of crimes are committed by foreign Muslims there! And you know what? There is very little of no Western influence or aid there. That is a perfect isolated case. Should I also add Somalia which was voted one of the most dangerous countries in the world? Oh and who lives there? That’s right, mostly Muslims.
I also acknowledge the fact that fatwas were already issued by Muslims that wish to fight against violence. I added to that by stating that it was more vocal condemnations than any actual pro-action.
So please save yourself the time by understanding current affairs and history as well as read what I wrote first my friend before you just jump randomly into conclusions and contribute.
suhail
July 29, 2010 at 10:07 AM
Same senseless replies. You just post bogus and made up numbers of crimes due to immigration in sweden and norway. Come on you can be better than that.
Also nobody is disputing that in history muslims must have done some bad things. But what west have done cannot but be come closer to. Millions killed in world wars, Millions of muslims have been murdered in middle east by the western powers and you are crying about Armenia. Cry me a river. I am not defending what happened in Armenia but comparing it to what muslims have suffered is like comparing Watermelons and grapes.
Somalia is in the current state because of the western powers who are causing havoc there by supporting the warlords. Since you have included African nations into fray why don’t you comment on Rwanda where millions of people have been massacared and nobody gives a two hoot about it.
Western nations have been scourging Africa of its natural wealth for there own sake. They are flaming the wars for years which has caused this havoc on Africa.
By the way was it muslims who wiped out two whole cities in Japan with a nuclear bomb in a moment.
Jason
August 9, 2010 at 3:04 PM
Here we go. Another run around.
Nazis killed millions, Communism killed Millions, Westerners killed millions, Christianity killed millions, Muslims killed millions…Suhail, we get it already. We can do this all day but it would be pointless…
You sit here and bash on Westerner society when its Western democracy that fights for your freedom to speak while you sit in your room and chat on this blog site..
Its Western democracy that accommodates your religion and gives you the rights to express yourself..Notice the Muslim extremist rallies in New York and Britain. You think Westerners or other religions can hold rallies in Saudi Arabia or Iraq without getting killed??
Its Western society that allows you to build Mosques and have the rights to worship. How hard do you think it would be to build a Buddhist monastery in Afghanistan or a Zorastrian temple in Somalia?
you didn’t think of that did you? I’m willing to bet you’re not even in a country that has Sharia Law in it. You’re probably in the US or England or somewhere in Europe
If the Western culture is so bad then go back to the east then and tell us about your living experiences and ALL the rights and conveniences you had to give up.
Ohhh, the irony my friend.
dapo
March 11, 2012 at 1:58 PM
Your post shows how Islam as divided the World into two camps, the believers and non believers. Good or bad is out of the picture, all that matters to Muslims is to be a believer, regardless of if you good or bad. A muslim can kill and do evil , but if a christian tries to stop that evil the muslims talk of their land being invaded even though the invasion was done to free muslims. To do good shouldn`t be about being a christian or muslim. We are all of the human race.
America invaded Serbia and fought against fellow christians to protect muslim from prosecution, America fought against christian Russia to free Muslim Afghans from occupation and the tyranny that comes from communism. Why is`t different when America invades Iraq to free the people from a brutal dictator who killed millions of his own people and invaded another Country, Y is`t different when America invades Talaban ruled Afghanistan where women were denied education, forced to cover up from head to toe, beheaded for common adultery, where their was no freedom of religion and oppression was the order of the day? It seems like the muslim take goodness as being a muslim and badness as being a nonbeliever.
America might not be a perfect society, but we have to give it credit for fighting to keep us free from totalitarian regimes that spring up from time to time trying to rule the World. America might have killed more people in the last 100yrs but that is because they have been fighting to make the World a better place for us all regardless of religion and have the means to do so. I am sure if Saudi Arabia had the means they would be doing the same thing, but more like forcing us all to believe in Mohammed and truth of Islam just as they did when they had the means to invade and conquer the non believers. It`s only the science of the West that was able to put a stop to it, if not we will all be shouting allah akbar today.
As a black African who as lived in America and Europe, I have nothing but respect for the western World for trying all the time to make this World a better place. It`s true they have done alot of bad things in the past and are still not perfect, but all cultures of the World as had a brutal and evil history, so lets not pick on the West just to score a cheap point. I believe the West today represent the goodness in humanity. We the less fortunate in Africa and the Muslim World if given a choice would rather be in a western country than a muslim sharia dominated one. But instead of showing gratitude for the kindness shown to us by these so called unbelievers, some of us go about biting the finger that feeds us.
We all run to the the land of the unbelievers because with all their faults they have shown themselves to be more humane than the so called Muslim countries that some believers want left alone to continue the oppression of their own people all just because they are muslims.
Why is Islam more important than doing good and protecting the oppressed people of this World? It seems Islam stunts the humanity in all of us. Fighting for the good of mankind should not be restricted to what religion one belongs to. Islam a bad.
Arif
July 14, 2010 at 2:11 PM
Muslims are going through a very troublesome and testing time. Their lands are invaded and they are oppressed in their own lands. Out of this , some muslims are getting taken over by the desire to take revenge and try to justify their actions (to themselves and to others) with religious text. Kudos to the majority of the muslim society who continues to differntiate right from wrong and critcise/condemn the wrong actions of their own rage driven people inspite of the injustes done by invaders. I hope and pray that Allah brings peace to the muslim lands and to the world. .
Some one was saying that even educated muslims are getting into such voilent acts. It is important to understand that when a person is driven by rage, It hardly matters whether he is a university graduate or an illiterate. and then incorrect religious interpretations becomes only a means to fuel revenge. Had this been any other non-muslim country undergoing such situation, We would have seen exactly the same pattern from their people… The only differnce will be that they will use some other means (e.g race, ethinicity, patriotism etc etc) instead of religion to fuel their revengeful actions….
There was mention of how “muslim” terrorist are adding bodies othe pile of bloodshed. Yes, this is true and unfortunate and they must be stopped.. But at the same time, have we compared this with the magnitude to loss of innocent ives done by western invaders in the name of fighting terroism?… And if we are so concered about loss of human lives, shouldn’t our first target of condemnation be the one who are causing greater damage ?
I hope we all remain focussed on the path of seeking truth. For anyone who is seeking to know Islam, the best option is to a read translation of Qura’an (by known Muslims and not by islamophobic experts :-) ) with its proper contextual information (e.g time of revelation, situation at the time of revelation etc). Usually this contextual information is available in most of the available translations.
Its better to get first hand information and then, decide for yourself. And Allah knows very well the state of each of our hearts. Ultimately, we will all return to our creator and will be answerable to our creator on the day of judgement. May Allah make the day of judgement easy for us. Aameen !
Nitin
July 19, 2010 at 1:04 PM
Excellent post Murtaza.
I have only one arguement here:
So, if we all agree that Al Qaida and Taliban are not true muslims, why is anyone not speaking against them. I see huge rallies in New York, London and else where about west agression, people shouting slogans and carrying placards.
Should the same people, if they believe that Al Qaida is also doing wrong, not come up with similar rallies? Shout slogans and carry placards against them? I have never seen such rallies against terrorists, except for the one in Lahore recently when it was too much to blast innocent worshippers in a Mosque.
So, as educated liberals and followers of peace, when we can shout against western agression, why not do that against killing innocents in name of Jihad?
I do not have answer to that. I hope someone in this forum does.
May peace be upon us
Aashiq Hussain
July 24, 2013 at 8:59 PM
@Nitin, Have you ever rallied in India against rapes and killings of Muslims by Indian army in Occupied Kashmir? You rallied a lot few months back against rape of a girl, why not for People in Kashmir?
Everyone has double standards, check yours before you label others.
Dave
July 28, 2010 at 11:42 AM
“Let’s not debate religions, please” This is what uneducated people have been doing for thousands of years and using it as an excuse to kill people to forward their misguided beliefs. Cant we just believe the way we choose to believe without persecution from anyone else? It’s difficult enough to just raise kids and be a productive human being in the crazy world today.
Here is a simple litmus test for this issue that always stops pro-Islamic folks in their tracks.
Lets look at the facts….Over the last 20 yrs (that’s as far as I went back in my research), there have been over 200 verified terrorist attacks killing innocent men, women and children around the world, tied to Islam, or one of the wonderful Islamic groups that so call “misrepresent” what the religion of Islam is really about.
I wanted to paste one of the many “verified lists” here but was afraid it would have gotten deleted by the moderator as do so many on these type blogs and sites.
Here is the bottom line…can anyone out there on planet Earth provide a chronological list of over 200 terrorist attacks that killed thousands of innocent men, women and children alike, over the past 20 yrs. that were carried out by people of the exact same religion and in the name of their said religion?…lets say Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism, or even Atheism for that matter.
PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE…someone give me that list. And please don’t insult me and the other thousands of people that would like that list as well, with the “going back to the stone age” to find some really consistent violence in the some obscure writings that haven’t really been verified, or cant really be applied in the last 20 yrs of human existence.
And also please don’t insult us with some reference to “military actions”, “police actions” or acts of “wars”…. Lets not blur my question with such misguided responses and ones that try to take away from my exact question.
Thanks and I really hope someone from your community can give me a viable answer to my exact, specific question and provide all of us with that list.
Oh yeah, one more thing. If you answer my question with a question as do so many that try to deflect serious debate, then we will all have our REAL answer about Islam, won’t we.
Mike….
Robert
July 28, 2010 at 1:36 PM
Lol Dave, I’m a devout Christian myself, and I find your comments highly amusing.
If you want first hand accounts, please by all means, visit one of the many places that Buddhist extremists inhabit in Southeast Asia and openly declare yourself as a Muslim or Christian. Better yet, just take a walk down any town in southern India and proclaim either Muslim or Christian faith, and see what happens.
Let’s not even begin talking about what just about every religion did to the Jewish people.
Or here, go to Google, and search “Christian Missionary Atrocities” or actually, atrocities, and make sure you have a pot of coffee handy.
Here’s another one for you…Go ask a real Hawai’ian how they feel about the Christian missionaries that came and dominated their Islands, killed off some 90% of their population on some islands, just so they can build a few churches, spread their version of Christianity, and destroy the pagans.
Yes I said their version, because my version of Christianity, my worldview, doesn’t involve killing people to get my point across…It doesn’t involve a vengeful God that punish people for making choices, right or wrong.
The ability to choose for yourself, personally, was God’s greatest gift. I truly believe that we are ultimately responsible for our own salvation, or destruction. God certainly saves, but you have got to want to be saved.
Oh my goodness, could there be Muslims that even though they may not follow the same laws and edicts, but believes in peace just as I do?
Your comments are about as naive as someone living in a bubble. Please, travel the world, get out there, and see the truth for yourself. A third of my friends are Muslims, and some are Buddhists. Yeah we crack religious jokes on each other all the time, but we’re buddies. I certainly don’t prevent them from their daily prayers, just as they don’t stop me from praying before a meal, nor do I stop my Buddhist friends from not eating meat.
Is that so hard to believe that people of different religions can get along and live peacefully? I think that’s the real question.
When all that’s said and done, just about every major religion has committed atrocities (or still do) at some point in the human history…The Islam is probably the youngest faith (no insult intended btw), is going through their rounds of extremism, and the world is increasingly aware of their actions due to the advent of technology.
Dave
July 29, 2010 at 12:14 AM
LOL Robert,
Thanks for proving my point exactly. You didnt give me that list whatsoever, did you?
Instead you threw things out there to distort and confuse the common folk, the ones that get all their news from NBC or CNN.
We can always go back and find some type of “shocking atrocities” as you call them. There are many third world or generally uncivilized countries that can attest to that Robert, hence look at Yemen or Chad.
But guess what Robert, I don’t walk down to a river everyday to get my families water or use the bathroom in a hole in a mud hut. Does that make me and my family better, no just living a bit more civilized in a civilized country that hasn’t killed each other off by the millions like they continue to do in Africa to this day…and I might add, in the most violent ways known to mankind with knives and machetes.
The types of terrorist attacks I was speaking of you might expect in areas around the world that display these lower levels of intelligence.
Now you can bury your head in the sand and call me a bigot or short sighted for making such a statement, but when it gets down to it, the honest truth usually ruffles quite a few feathers. ..especially when someone actually will stand up and speak what the majority of real working people really think in my country.
Ya see Robert, I dont live in a bubble and I don’t get to go and picket and march against the atrocities as you call them…I’m too busy working 2 jobs to support my family and raise intelligent, loving children. I just wish I could do it without worrying when I get on an airplane that a female 20 yr old member of Islam might take it out of the sky killing me and leaving my kids fatherless.
And of course there are Muslims that believe in peace Robert, lets not be cute here.
As I said in my first post …a person can always go find a certain group of people that despise another group of people and then go to some point in history or some place in the world where this certain group of people could go and speak of some group of people and end up getting their head blown off because of it.
The difference is you have to get a certain type of people to go to a certain type of place in the world and speak of their religion publicly to provoke these extremists to kill you. In my country just getting on an airplane is provocation enough for a Muslim homicide bomber to take 200 innocent people out of the sky…
and you guessed it Robert, the Muslim homicide bomber didnt even know the religions of the 200 people they killed, but your Buddhist extremists did.
One more thing, do you have that chronological list of the last 20 years where the Buddhist extremists have created at least 200 terror events by killing thousands of innocent people of all religions around the world?
Please Robert dont insult people..ya know there is a saying by folks that cant compare apples to apples in such debates.
“Dont bother me with the facts, I’ve already made up my mind”.
Let me know when you get that list together…..Have a blessed day.
Amad
July 29, 2010 at 12:40 AM
Over the last 200 years, far more people have been killed by people who were not Muslims (6 million Jews in the holocaust anyone??) and in the “world wars” and other ravaging wars than any “muslim terrorism” has come close to. The death of an innocent civilian is the death of an innocent civilian, no matter if it comes at the hand of an individual or a state.
You have to worry more about dying in a car accident than having a 20 year old Muslim female on an airplane. You have the typical signs of islamophobia, and you need to check the real facts and real stats before being paranoid about Muslims.
Seriously, I am not going to argue with your types because your comment isn’t that smart. It’s typical garbage recycled around the internet. And the more you paint the world in black and white with all the Muslims out to get you, the more you agree with the radical violent Muslims who want to get you, and there are very few of them. Quit worrying about them and try building bridges with the vast majority of Muslims who want to be your neighbor without any desire to hurt you in any way. The only way that will happen is to drop your presumptions and go talk with a Muslim in real life.
Jason
July 30, 2010 at 2:20 PM
Just out of curiosity,are any Muslims writing on this post actually from Iran, Turkey, Afghanistan, Somalia or any country predominantly Muslim or abiding by the Sharia Law?
Amad, when you say talk to a Muslim in real life, I can tell you having a conversation face to face with a Muslim in Afghanistan is not the same as talking to a Muslim in the US or Europe
average westerner
September 13, 2010 at 8:08 PM
Look, I am an average westerner who has little or no knowledge of the Koran(spelling?) but my understanding of current events, following 9/11, shows me one thing, that Islam is a violent religion. Prior to 9/11 the U.S. was not “occupying” a muslim country and if we had influence on any muslim country it was purely economic and not relligious. Islamic terrorists have justified their actions on religious grounds. Islam justifies violence when their religion is being attacked or they are being oppressed, and as far as I know we are not attacking your religion or stopping you from practicing it in any way. The average american could care less. That raises the question about Islam and those that practice it. Why if your religion is one of peace dont you stop the terrorists?. Why dont the people speak up condemning the acts of the terrorists? We in the west must be afraid of terrorist acts perpetrated by extremists that just their acts by religious beliefs. If I am the average practicioner of Islam I would be outraged by the corruption of my religion and speak against those that twist the words of Muhammed. These terrorists are corrupting your religion by twisting the voice of your prophet. If you would call for the death of rushdie surely these acts must outrage you. Because you have not spoken out and called for the death of these people who corrupt your religion than The average westerner can only conclude that you support these acts and that they are not twisting your religion but infact are interpreting it correctly. We are not on a crusade to destroy your religion but through your actions it is evident that practicioners of Islam will not be content until the world converts itself to your faith. Your preaching of religious tolerance falls now on deaf ears. Christians are not trying to convert or kill you for your religion and you need to realize that fact and stand with us against terrorism by joining the fight through words. Prove yourselves.
AsimG
September 13, 2010 at 10:00 PM
I am a typical Muslim. I have seen the wars in Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan and the assassinations of Presidents in Africa and I’ve seen the trail of tears, the colonization of Africa, slavery, indentured servants, the treatment of the irish, catholics, jews, blacks, latinos and native Americans and so surely based on this one can say America and the West are what?
Oh wait, I don’t make assumptions of a whole people based on a few actions. There’s nothing these terrorists did that can compare to anything to what the West has done to the rest of the world and yet terrorists are lumped as followers of Islam but not the other way around?
Here’s some statements right after 9/11 from the leading muslims worldwide.
http://www.islamfortoday.com/terrorism.htm
We’ve been against terrorism for years, you just haven’t been listening.
We don’t want to convert or kill you. That’s the history of Christians in Spain and the Europeans in North America, South America, Asia and Africa.
Just Me
August 13, 2010 at 12:03 PM
The Muslims in the world need to police themselves of extremist who have taken their religion hostage.
You look around the world and where their is conflict and hostility you find radical Muslims at work.
As long as this continues the rest of the world perceives the Muslim religion as one of violence and terror.
You are either part of the solution or you become part of the problem.
Muslims need to unite in mass and take their religion back. Show the rest of the world it will not stand passive while atrocities are committed in the name of Islam.
Yusuf
August 19, 2010 at 11:36 AM
This is aticle from http://quran-m.com/firas/en1 i wanted to share it with you
Preface
-Can you pls provide exact link and not copy/paste pls – Editor
MWK
September 16, 2010 at 4:31 AM
There is one point that needs to be discussed whenever trying to answer such a question… what is the chronological order to the chapters and versus in the Quran?
In my research I am finding that the more violent versus came later in the rule of Muhammad and therefore my question to you is:
Why is that? Why, chronologically speaking, did Muhammad’s writings lean more towards violence as his political strength was increased?
If you look at the Quran in that way it might be a bit more worrisome for the outsider to believe the religion of Islam is really one of peace.
I.E. Christians… Jesus’ law replaced the eye for and eye law of Moses. This is a chronological move towards resolving things more peacefully, but the Quran does not offer the same enlightenment at the later stages of its teachings.
Gibran
September 14, 2012 at 5:26 PM
I think that is a bit strange. Don’t Christians believe Jesus alayhisalam will come down in the future and become pretty violent? Read the following article:
http://www.loonwatch.com/2011/04/jesus-loves-his-enemies-and-then-kills-them-all/
Anas Hlayhel
September 16, 2010 at 9:27 AM
It seems that many visitors of this post don’t even bother to read the article in full! They just come to score a preconceived idea they have then leave. This is why we end up having to repeat the arguments again and again and waste time.
By this I don’t mean to put down anyone. But guys/gals, we need to move on and evolve (and become more intelligent) in this debate. On this blog, I was not out to convert you or even convince you, but I was trying to provide more original data to make the debate more intelligent. So please use it.
One of the main goals of my article was to argue against the chronological theory that some experts on Islam claim to rely on when they’re analyzing the so-called violent nature of Islam. At the end of the article, I brought one verse 60:8 which, according to 2 major scholars of Quran, is NOT abrogated. I mean the whole purpose of studying chronology is to see what’s abrogated and what’s not.
As far as comparing religions. Yes, the Laws of Moses were strict (eye for an eye, etc.). Jesus came to ease the law (always forgive … though many Christians don’t practice that). Islam is in the middle. In Islam you have two options (eye for an eye, but it’s better to forgive). You see Prophet Mohammad at the end of his life gave a pardon to the people of Mecca after he conquered it. He could have executed all his enemies (who fought him for the longest time), but he chose to pardon them.
Please everyone, let us make our conversation a bit more intelligent. Use this site to learn new facts about Islam. Don’t just stick to the old argument. It’s NOT cool!!!
R.C.
September 22, 2010 at 10:10 PM
Goodness. I admire your patience, everyone from this website stopping to respond to these inane replies that keep recycling the same garbage and seem insistent on re-affirming what they already believe without taking in new information, somehow convinced that brief skimming of the internet has given them one up on scholars of a religion.
Sigh. Reminds me why I stopped dealing in any kind of message board years ago.
But seriously, you guys are amazing for continuing a dialogue with that silliness slung at you.
As-salaam alaikum.
(all respect intended, if I am mistaken in saying this!)
Robert
September 25, 2010 at 1:45 AM
You know Anas, I’ve been following these comments for quite a while, and its as you said, people tend to come here with a preconceived notion and simply wanted to voice their opinion.
I think the problem is that people get very emotional about this issue and doesn’t take time to recognize the truth. For example:
– Muslim who commit violent acts is a very small minority
– just as people who hate muslims, is a very small minority
One thing that is for sure, true, regardless of what religion you are:
– It is WRONG to blame an entire race, religion, culture, for the actions of a few, and to persecute them for the sins of others.
– It is WRONG to persecute someone just because they are different than you are.
Hitler and the Nazis persecuted Jews, so do we blame all German people for their sins?
Japanese Army butchered Chinese by the thousands, do we blame all Japanese people for their sins?
Here’s a touchy one: African Americans were enslaved during the early days of America. Do we blame the caucasian Americans of today for something their forefathers have done? Sounds ridiculous right? Take a stroll down some neighborhood in Oakland if you are caucasian, and you’ll soon realize its not ridiculous at all.
I’m certainly not here to preach, I just want to point out that people have got to take control of their emotions, and to look at things rationally. I don’t have to have a doctorate in religion to know that “hate” in any form is a major tenant of evil in Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. So why do we fall victim to it time and time again?
Its perfectly fine to not associate yourself with a group that you just aren’t comfortable with, feel free to set your boundaries. But does that mean we automatically revoke their status as fellow human beings, and to treat them as if they’re garbage?
Hate is wrong people. Don’t compromise in this truth, you certainly won’t be alone. If Hamas, the so called terrorist organization to the west, can protect Christians, and a Christian janitor can give his life to keep suicide bombers at bay to protect 300 muslim women, you too can stand up and do what’s right.
Here’s a thought…Those of you that hate Islam, why don’t you go and befriend a Muslim, get to know him/her, before you make up your mind? In fact, if there’s a group of people you hate, be they Christian, Jews, Hindus, Buddhists, Chinese, Japanese, Black, Caucasian, Hispanic, what have you, go and befriend them, and see what happens.
I bet you will find that:
– They have just as much misconceptions of you as you have of them
– They are really just people like you
Again Anas, as I said before, thank you for this post. It certainly is a good way to educate, and certainly, a great way to find out just how ignorant people can get, and how much good work is still needed to make this world a peaceful place.
Rusty Simons
October 13, 2010 at 8:17 PM
Nice explanation,but still wondering why Muslims here in the Philippines are war freaks, kidnap people volunteer people that help them in thier area, or are they only claiming that they are Muslims? How can you teach them to look at Quran the way you look at it, you seem not a violent person. To tell you frankly, I fear them when they around, because as I understand, your Quaran commanded to kill all Infidels (unbelievers).
Thank you for your post.
Kushea
October 14, 2010 at 12:16 PM
Ok let’s say that Islam isn’t a violent religion. Maybe these minor group of terrorist hijacked and distorted the religion claiming to represent Islam, maybe they are ignorant about the Quran. Whether they do it purposely or unintentionally, I think Rusty Simons has a legitimate question that the world needs an answer to:
What are Muslims suppose to do when they encounter these radical terrorists?
What are non-Muslims suppose to do?
Or better yet, what has been done? As fas as I remember I haven’t heard any Muslims going out to the Middle east to put a stop to this. I haven’t seen any Muslims have any rallies on the streets against these imposters, I haven’t seen any public debates with a Muslim and radical Muslim perpetrator in the news..
The closest thing I’ve heard were fatwas condemning it. Ok but has those fatwas actually work, how do we know it works, how can we measure its progress, and is it that effective?
Hopefully someone here can answer this.
Antionio
October 27, 2010 at 3:03 PM
Kushea, thats a valid point there. Seems like that question has stumped everyone. So what are we suppose to do? I must admit I was stumped myself. What I don’t get is this- Muslims claim that these terrorist are posing as Muslims or are ignorant on what Islam truly teaches yet nothing physical happens, only verbal approaches in the form of condemnation and complaints which seems every ineffective at the moment. But when some force like the United States or Europe comes in and gets rid of these wanna-be Muslims terrorist, its the same Muslims complaining earlier that now turns around and criticizes the US and Europe and demonizes them! I just don’t get that way of thinking! Makes absolutely no sense to me.
Now correct me if I’m wrong here and please excuse my ignorance because I’m not a Muslim scholar (so anyone is free to expand on or correct my fallacies); Didn’t Mohammed execute the Bani Quraytha/Qurayza because they were supposedly traitors? If that is correct and Muslims are suppose to copy Mohammed because he is the epitome of what a True Muslim is then why aren’t Muslims today going out to kill all these traitors who slander and misrepresent True Islam?
Anas Hlayhel
October 27, 2010 at 5:35 PM
Antinio,
the case of Bani Quraydha is a true case of treason. That is, when someone collaborates with a foreign enemy against his own country. Not only that, Muslims in Medina were under the threat of being exterminated by a much larger enemy that surrounded Medina. Imagine for a second that the same happened in the US. A large army at the US borders threatening to attack and the Muslims collaborated with the invading army. I don’t want to imagine what would happen to US Muslims in such a case! In fact, I think the case of Banu Quraydha is a shining example for the Prophet’s justice. Only the people who were proven to be part of that treason were executed. Jews, who didn’t breach the treaty, continued to live in Medina till the end of the Prophet’s life. There were no cases of stereotyping or mass accusations. Unfortunately, we don’t see the same treatment happening in the 21st century in the most advanced civilized country in the world. Muslims, who had nothing to do with 911, are having to prove once and again that they’re not guilty of 911. Jews continued to enter casually upon the Prophet after the Banu Quraydha incident without fearing on their lives or their reputation.
Antionio
October 27, 2010 at 7:41 PM
Fair enough response but it doesn’t really answer the underlying question. Anas, what would Mohammed do today to show justice to these terrorist that claim to be Muslims and distort the “True, Holy” religion?
I’m pretty sure Allah hates those that use his name for violence and bloodshed for their own will. So once again, I’ll keep it simple:
What would Mohammed do to these imposters?
PeacePlease
September 15, 2012 at 9:48 PM
Anas, The correct answer to Antionio here would be Mohammad would kill these imposters who pose as muslim and created problems for the rest of the muslims and non muslims.
Pingback: The Lies of Islamophobia | thehitjob.com
Pingback: The Lies of Islamophobia « Michael Moore « The New Peoples Almanac
Pingback: Crusade 2.0 - Politics .. poleyetics.com
Pingback: Tomgram: John Feffer, Crusade 2.0 « LobeLog.com
Pingback: John Feffer: Crusade 2.0 — War in Context
Pingback: IPS: The Lies of Islamophobia | MuslimMatters.org
Pingback: Gonzalo Gato Villegas » Blog Archive » Las mentiras de la islamofobia (Cruzada 2.0)
Pingback: Las mentiras de la islamofobia (Cruzada 2.0) | Amauta
Pingback: Croisade 2.0 : les mensonges de l’islamophobie « MecanoBlog
Pingback: Croisade 2.0 : les mensonges de l’islamophobie «
Ron Jon
November 17, 2010 at 12:02 AM
Hello so I’ve pretty much read all of the post but find myself not being able to organize all thats being said. I think Islam is not a violent religion, however seeing the chaotic war-like state of many Islam nations might have something to do with “terrorist” attacks on western countries as well as the uprising in violence from that area.
Ultimately I think many people here are throwing many ideas around but nobody seems to be drawing conclusions, here’s what I feel after having read all this, mind you prior to reading this blog I was a curious westerner with preconceived flexible notions:
1. Muslims as a whole are not any more violent than your other average ethnic group.
2. Media depictions of muslim acts of violence while seemingly barbaric are no more different than many other warfaring/chaotic nations in middle/south america which I liked to point out are very Christian (ie. Mexico/ Colombia).
3. Muslims only seem bad to us western folk because their culture is exotic and misunderstood.
While we fear muslims, we laugh at mexicans for being drunk little guys with funny sombreros yet many heinous crimes are done by mexican drug cartels, yet I dont see many americans giving mexicans a frightful look when riding a bus together.
4. Ultimately I think the religion is not the one to cause violence, is the political state of their lands that is causing retaliating blind violence with the excuse of “Islam extremism”, or saying that is supported by the Quran (sorry if I spelled it worng), as the the pulley to lift off all sense of guilt.
This is no different in effect to Hitler propaganda to the German people to justify what was being done during WWII. Meaning his statements of proliferation of the German race as well as many other reasons/excuses I rather not get into (I wanna keep the lenght of this short) to justify his means.
5. I think it comes down to media portrayal.
I will admit that during the times of 9/11 I was one to be distrustful of muslims and always being downright prejudiced against them, however all I had to go by was CNN and FOX ( lol!! fox what a joke) not the best source of media outlets.
6. Lastly (sorry for blaberring just trying to piece my ideas together) I think people misinterpret certain things about US/western international diplomacy and while the former statements are subject to erroneous interpretations, this I can attest with accuracy. US is not in the middle east to kill the infidels and spread the joy of american democracy out to these nations. They want to be able to control the economical and diplomatic actions of these countries. They do this by “invading” them and placing a shadow “dictatorial” goverment with a leader that they can easily manipulate. Was Saddam Hussein a bad dude, yes he killed tons of people, however the fake democracy the US installed through some phony election made Iraq a lot worse than it was before. Furthermore I remember US did this same thing to another country (forget exactly which now) which had a democracy already in place!!! Any country that does not agree to be held in custody by the US is instantly subject to having nuclear arms (Iran), be in support of Talivans (Afghan), and thus declared an enemy. In some sort of funny irony most of these countries fight vs US forces (which we love here so much no sarcasm intended) with US made weapons which we sold them, sometimes gave them for free like candy, a decade earlier.
I dont want American folks to think I hate US now, I love this country and think that its great and I can identify with the US wanting to lift their economy through any means possible to compete with the Chinas of tomorrow. However it should not shock us that these muslims are beginning to retaliate with force against our constant meddling over their affairs. Many times their actions are unruly, violent, and targetted at the wrong innocent group, but in times of war where one is defending his/her life who’s to say whats wrong or right. Sorry to bring politics to the mix but I feel that right now they are hard to seperate. Also I apologize for not posting citations but Im a very busy person, feel free to correct anything you think is misleading or downright wrong as I am not perfect and Im very interested in other’s opinion.
Antionio
November 17, 2010 at 4:12 AM
Ron you obviously know nothing about Islam. You voice nothing but opinions and your rants obviously reflect the ignorance of the common westerner. You’re either really that ignorant or your practicing taquiya.
It is a Muslim’s duty to spread the Sharia Law…you should study that. A good starting point is Reliance of the Traveller: A Classic Manual of Islamic Sacred Law (Shafi’i School). Also read the Islamic Penal Codes and each article. Look at the punishments of Apostasy in Islam, what happens when you steal, when a Muslim drinks alcohol, and when someone commits adultery.
This is the ironic part: The US is built on religious freedom, freedom of speech, and equal rights. Islam is not just a religion but a political system and you cannot separate the two. As a true devout Muslim, they must spread the Sharia Law until the World submits to it. With Sharia Law, say goodbye to equal rights, all those freedoms, and women’s rights. Get ready to have your hand and foot cut off! Under the US constitution, they must protect Muslims while the Sharia Law destroys the Constitution. So pretty much the US is blindly protecting what is destroying it. US is retarded like that and its only a matter of time before that country and ignorant people like you see that. Islam is a religion of peace when you become a Muslim.
Don’t take my word for it, just look at every country that has Sharia Law in it. By the ways none of these people here on this forum are from any country that practices Sharia Law. Thats pretty funny.
Anas Hlayhel
November 17, 2010 at 5:03 AM
Antionio,
I’m not sure if your knowledge about Islam is any better. What is more dangerous than ignorance is half-knowledge.
Under Sharia Law, non-Muslims are judged by their law, not by Sharia Law. In a way, this guarantees more freedom to the individual than Western Law (where everyone have to abide by the same law that the majority approves).
To view Sharia as an imminent threat on the U.S. or its constitution is very outlandish. This crazy thought was manufactured and funded by a big and thriving anti-Islam industry that you seem to be influenced by. Their intent seems to be to divert Americans from the real problems that the U.S. is having right now.
Antionio
November 17, 2010 at 7:21 PM
Very outlandish huh?
Anas tell me if I’m wrong.
If is the duty for ALL Muslims and the will of Allah to spread the Sharia Law until the whole world including the West is dominated by its governance? Am I wrong for stating that? Or am I one of those guys thats just influenced by propaganda like everyone here keeps claiming.
If it were up to Muslims, America and Canada would be governed by Sharia Law. Once again am I right or wrong? So this “majority” ruling thing you’re taking about is only temporary until the Sharia Law becomes the majority.
You make it sound like the Sharia Law is not a threat to the constitution. Of course it is. The best way to attack an opponent is to pretend you’re not a threat and slowly and gradually suffocate and outnumber your victim before they realize they are overpowered, outnumbered, and can no longer do anything about it. This is what’s happening. Anas, you’re a smart man, look at all the trends and what history reveals. Once a country submits to the Sharia Law there is no turning back. Countries have been overtaken and some of the middle east conflicts are due to Muslims trying to replace democracy to theocracy. Please prove me wrong. I challenge you.
Think about it. Islam is the fastest growing religion in the world including the US and Canada. Once they become Islamicized, what do you think the majority of the Islamic population is going to want? Sharia Law! Duh!
Anyways, you seemed to have avoided a few questions that I have asked you repeatedly. I didn’t forget those questions Anas and I’m still waiting for a response. You’re being very tactful and selective with your words.
Mantiki
November 18, 2010 at 12:24 AM
I have followed this debate with interest. While I see evidence that the great majority of Muslims want nothing more than to live a peaceful life of coexistence, I also see that there is a certainty amongst many believers – fostered by the Quran – that they must follow the Quran or risk damnation. Hence there is a tendency to want to follow any Islamic leader who claims Quranic justification for all kinds of activities from ordering women to cover themselves to ordering attacks against apostates and infidels.
Christians have waged their own war against Biblical and priestly infallibility. The danger therefore is not within the Quran, or even in Islam but lies in the blind faith that to be a true believer, you must be unquestioning in your faith. I am glad to see that the Muslims on this site do question their faith and the Quran, but concerned that the questioning is limited to which is the “correct” interpretation rather than whether whole sections of the Quran should be studied simply for historic reasons rather than for spiritual guidance.
I know that I am coloured by Western media perceptions, but is there any sight more frightening than seeing taliban youngsters rocking in their chairs as they memorise Quranic verses, etching into their minds unquestioning obedience to thoughts from a society at war 1300 years ago? Add to this the focus on Islamic culture in even modern Islamic societies, concurrent with the absence of evidence of critical thinking evidenced by the absence or scarcity of bookshops, libraries and newsagencies.
Anas Hlayhel
November 18, 2010 at 4:50 PM
Antionio,
Let me start where you ended. I think I’m selective in my responses (I don’t answer every single question) simply because I don’t have enough time. So, I usually select the most interesting -or most outlandish claims, they’re not always synonymous :). See in this thread, we have gone through a lot of topics that don’t necessarily fit in the original intent of this blog entry.
I’m not sure if I made my point about Sharia clear. I was saying that even when Islam was a super-power and they ruled over a large area of land, they didn’t impose Sharia law on non-Muslims. Non-Muslims were left to rule by their law.
I’m reluctant to discuss more about Sharia here for the simple reason that i see that a lot of background information missing. Maybe another blog should be dedicated to explain the ABC’s of Sharia. Sharia isnot the rigid set of rules that people imagine. Rather, it’s a set of deductions from original texts that is combined with some appropriated customs of the current time/place, etc. Antionio, have you read any definition of Sharia from a Muslim scholar?
Mark
November 19, 2010 at 11:42 AM
Anas, Good job for taking your time to explain Islam. First of all, I am hesitant about all organized religions. However I read some concerned verses from Quran and I found them to be harsh against non Muslims. I find that Islam seems to promote violence against non-believers. I find that Islamic countries do not accept other religions or even tolerate opposing views. Why is so difficult for Islamic countries to preach tolerance and religous harmony?
I hear Blasphemy law in Pakistan meant to protect Islam, but why hurt people in the name of protecting the religion?“In August 2003, the police arrested a Christian, Samuel Masih, for allegedly defiling a mosque by spitting on its wall. While in prison, Masih contracted tuberculosis. The authorities transported him to a hospital. There, on 24 May 2004, a police constable used a hammer to kill Masih. The constable said it was his duty as a Muslim to kill Masih.†http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blasphemy_law_in_Pakistan
Can you please clarify the following verses from Quran? 3:169,4:74,4:95 ,4:101,2:190-193,8:65,5:51 and there are many more situations like this in the Quran.
My view is that humanity should respect each other, respect the nature and respect all living beings, then the possibility for peace will arise. But as long as concept of religion exists peace will evade us all.
Alex
November 21, 2010 at 3:12 AM
Each Moslem contributor fits the mold of one who would run around in circles before squaring with the true meaning of right and wrong, good and evil. God bless the lives America has saved (WW2) disaster relief…and we are the infidels?…..
rifai
November 21, 2010 at 12:48 PM
What reality is this where America is such a force for good?It doesnt square with the facts for sure – how many civillians suffered in Vietnam(agent orange ring a bell)?What about the unnecessary atomic bombings of Japan(look up the scholarly consensus on this)?How many were killed?Hows about the Korean war?The sanctions on Iraq that killed about a half million children(U.N figures), or was it only 300,000(10 sept.11s +)?The latest misadventures in Iraq and Afghanistan? Can anyone put a price tag on the collective suffering these shows of force have caused?All in the name of spreading the “religion” of democracy or bolster “security”.Before trying to educate people on the meaning of truth please try to get a wider perspective of the reality we live in – you may come away a bit surprised.
Don
January 30, 2013 at 7:25 PM
Rifai you are correct in part on this. America has caused much harm. In my view, in virtually every case it has been out of fear – many times irrational fear, sometimes not. During the Cold War, like it or not, each of the Superpowers (US, USSR, China) lived in fear of the other’s ideology and power and felt they had no choice but to strategically counter and control every move by the other. This included insuring acces to natural resources, and ensuring “friendly” governments existed wherever possible . Was this wrong? Perhaps, yes. But during those years both the Soviets and the Americans truly believed that their very survival (and perhaps even avoiding world nuclear anihilation) depended on it. In the post-Cold War era, it is my belief that American intervention in the Middle East has been motivated by multiple (and confused) objectives, including preserving acess to natural resources, promoting democracy and human rights, attempting to provide political stability, attempting to couter state-sponored terrorism, fear of what certain Muslims nations may do with weapons of mass destruction shound they acquire them. Has America been wrong? Yes, much of the time. But these things had nothing to do with Christianity, per se, and were not “justified” by referene to the New Testament.
Alex
November 21, 2010 at 3:27 AM
Islam, Christianity, Hinduism etc in fact every religion, Is a manifestation of man having divine power over man. We need to embrace humanity and respect for life before teachings of MAN. Watching thousands die in New York is a testament of how fundamental Islam has lost sight of intrinsic humanity. A question to Anas, would you stand and watch a relative be stoned? A simple yes or no answer is what I am looking for, to any who are brave enough to tell the truth.
Alex
November 21, 2010 at 7:22 PM
RIfai, I respect your opinion.
I personally would not like to be a member of the fourth or fifth Reich or live in Soviet controlled society. Your brothers in Afghanistan would have made great Soviets had we not have pulled them out of the fire. Do your research friend.
Antionio
November 22, 2010 at 6:54 AM
to everyone: There should be a disclaimer here which is to at at least attempt to read some of the previous postings to discard anything that has already been discussed. We are re-inviting old news for circulation. We are not talking about who has done the greater good, religious past crimes, and its not a matter of West VS East, or Christianity VS Islam. Every religion has their share of both good and evil. Christianity was one of the first to practice equality among women, the proper treatment of children, and the abolition of slavery and savage maltreatment in the colosseum in Pagan Rome. Its found in the teachings of Jesus. One of Islam’s article of faith is charity work and to give to those in need. We can go all day trying to convince the others with our opinions on who has done the greater good and who’s religion has been misrepresented the most. There are more than enough evidence to support each side so its rendered useless. So please do not bring up repeat topics that are irrelevant to this website.
The subject is “Is Islam a Violent Religion”? Its focus is on Islam. We are not concerned with Christian crimes in the past such as the Spanish Inquisition, Salem Witch Trials, and Crusades. Why? Because there is no possibility of it happening again and we have not seen it since. When was the last time you heard some Christians ban together and hunt for witches to burn at the stake or some pope call all catholics for a spiritual cleansing? When was the last time Yahweh called out Jews to collaborate for genocide like the Caaanites? What is the likelihood of those events happening anytime soon? Zero percent! We need to close the books on them and only learn from history. Those are dead events with no potential to be actual.
However, what’s very much alive today and what’s a modern reality is certain Muslims in certain areas of the World are killing people. This is why one should be concerned: its a problem, its active, its a present reality, its the future, and it affects the world and everyone in it. That’s why. Just look at all the anti-American rallies and protest in New York, UK, and Michigan. I can also assure you that another bombing is going to happen in the week or so. Its predictable and everyone knows it inevitable.
Anas, I commend you for making the extra effort in defending your faith however, you cannot and will never resolve the problem unless you actually identify the root of the problem. it will reconcile questions like why is that these certain Muslims like Al Queda and Hamas are not behaving in ways that most “moderate” Western Muslims do? Why such a gap? Some of the earlier post said it was because of ignorance. We’ll, can one use facts to back that claim up and why is there a growing number of ignorance in Muslims then? What are we (especially Muslims in the World abiding in the ways of Mohammed) suppose to do with them?. If the Koran is the infallible words of Allah and prime example of Mohammed, then killing these fake Muslims is not only justified but a commandment from Allah- to kill traitors which also includes traitors of the faith and those that pervert Islam. Furthermore, the Koran does not permit the killing of non-Muslims. Since they are not “true” Muslims like some of the commentators say, then you should be allowed to kill them. Why isn’t that happening today? I never heard of a zealous Muslim finally having enough of it and proudly defend his faith, walking in the light of the courageous Mohammed and killing these fake Muslims. All moderate Muslims should be calling for a “jihad” against these traitors of the True faith right? None of it has happened yet.
After you identify the problem the next thing is to ask “what is the solution?” These are simple but tough questions for you and all Muslims in the world. It is your responsibility as a Muslim because your Allah commands it and also as a governed citizen and humanitarian.
Kevin S.
November 26, 2010 at 2:58 PM
Don’t be offended by this but I personally think that the reason why moderate Muslims aren’t really doing anything against their radical counterparts is that deep down inside they know that the radicals are actually doing the right thing for Islam. I don’t know any other explanation why they do nothing. Moderate Muslims seem to be the hypocrites. At least radical Muslims are fighting for their cause (not to justify their violence) but they aren’t cowards. Moderate Muslims mostly in America and Canada do absolutely nothing. Who are they trying to convince? We look at a man’s actions not his words. If Moderate Muslims claim that Islam is a religion of peace then they need to take action against Radical Muslims.
Since they don’t, then they are part of the problem. I look at it as if they are not doing anything to stop it or are silent on that issue then they might as well support it. I don’t know how Muslims can all group together and kill someone for making a cartoon of their prophet but the same Muslims can’t do anything against radical Islams that hijacked their religion according to moderate Muslims.
So in a sense, Islam is a violent religion
If Islam is based on Radical Islam then it is violent based on its barbaric ways;
If Islam is based on Moderate Islam, then it is violent because it allows violence to happen and does nothing to stop it
Its a lose/lose situation for Islam
But then again, I think all of humanity is mostly evil, not just Islam. Call me a pessimist but mostly everyone is greedy, vile, evil, selfish, full of envy and hate. No one is righteous, not one.
Mantiki
November 26, 2010 at 11:58 PM
Don’t despair too much about our lack of righteousness Kevin. If you are a Christian then Jesus has saved you through His own righteousness. If you are an atheist, the term is irrelevant. If you are simply an open minded believer in God, you might prefer to think of life as a physical environment we are born into to grow and learn. If you are a Muslim, unfortunately you currently must believe you need to live according to strict moral codes (many of which are unnatural) and believe in Allah and Mohammed as his messenger or risk hell and eternal punishment.
Like all animals, we are equipped with basic drives and capabilities which are sharpened through evolution and natural selection. Thus we maximise our ownership of things which give us and our families, food, comfort, shelter and power etc. Sometimes these survival traits find expression in distorted form which most people label as “evil”. It could be through our upbringing, genes, accident or the actions of others. A spiritually mature person will try and overcome their environment and distorted desires to live a life that benefits others. The others face karma or judgement or perhaps both.
Think of us as a “work in progress” and you will be less pessimistic.
Anas Hlayhel
December 9, 2010 at 11:57 PM
Antionio,
I agree to focus on modern history. Islam has not invaded any non-Muslim country in the last 200 years as far as I recall. It was always the opposite. You have the colonization period where you see mainly European Christian countries invading Muslim countries. Almost all the Middle East was colonized by Britain, France, Italy, etc. You also have the occupation of Palestine. Then you have the major world wars all planned and executed by non-Muslims (not forgetting dropping 2 atomic bombs and wiping out two cities full of civilians). Speaking of more recent events, so many atrocities happened to Muslim Bosnians on the hands of Christian Serbs while the rest of Europe was watching. I’m from Lebanon, and I remember when I was 5, my town was attacked by Christian militias (Kata’eb Lubnaniyyah). My father like others had to flee with his family in the middle of the night leaving behind all our belongings. When we could come back a year later, EVERYTHING was stolen (even the windows and light switches) and we had to go through a very tough winter. Also, after the Israelis invaded Lebanon, the massacre of Sabra and Shatila occurred at the hands of Christian militias with the consent of Israeli forces!
I’m not sure if you wish to call any of the above “terror” (since some people now believe that only Muslims are capable of terror, not to forget that they also conveniently discount state terror), that’s really up to you. At least, Muslims do acknowledge that there are terrorists among their midst. They may not have full solutions. But at least diagnosing the problem is the beginning of the solution.
BTW, in Saudi Arabia, they do execute whoever is caught on terror charges, if that makes you feel any better!
Pingback: L Islam en France: Les mensonges de l’islamophobie
Gracie
December 9, 2010 at 11:15 PM
So if your religion is so called ‘peaceful’ then why does it encourage to “Kill the infedels where you find them” Sura 9:5. Infedels are people who dont believe in Allah. Sura 2:161 it says “On unbelievers is the curse of Allah. It says to “Fight against them until idolatry is no more and Allah’s religion reigns supreme” in Sura 2:193 and 8:39. Sura 2:191says “Slay them wherever ye find them and drive them out of the places whence they drove you out, for persecution is worse than slaughter”
Allah is an enemy to unbelievers. Sura 2:98 Im sorry but that doesnt sound like a peaceful religion to me. i dont care if there are ‘blessings’ to or on others or that it forbids the killing of women and children. Thier children maybe. Allah only ‘loves’ the people who follow him. So basically its “If you dont believe in me then you deserve to die” Yeah real peaceful let me tell ya
Anas Hlayhel
December 9, 2010 at 11:35 PM
Gracie,
I doubt that you have read the full article. The article’s conclusion is that Muslims should extend the best manners to non-Muslims who have not committed aggressions against them! That’s based on a Quranic verse that you and others conveniently ignore!
Now let me show you how you are taking verses out of context. You quoted Sura 2:98 “Allah is an enemy to unbelievers”. Actually the whole verse goes like this: “Say whoever is an enemy to God, His Angels, His Messengers, Gabriel, and Michael, then God is certainly the enemy of such disbelievers”. You simply took the end of the verse and you ignored the beginning! The meaning totally changes!
Gracie
December 10, 2010 at 12:03 AM
yeah and wat kind of twisted idea of aggresions do musilms hav?? Im not going to start some argument with a stranger let alone one who stands firm in his ignorance. Yes i may hav left out part of the verse but it was an honest mistake i actually looked that one up but in the end there are still verses that say ‘kill the infedels’ and ‘kill those who persecute you’ it also says kill idolaters. lets face it Americans aren’t perfect and most spend to much time infront of the computer, tv or other various things. That doesnt mean we deserve to die. But according to the Koran it does.
Anas Hlayhel
December 10, 2010 at 12:30 AM
Gracie,
My intention was not to scorn you for an honest mistake. I’m just trying to say that we have to be careful and not jump into conclusions. What’s the rush? It’s not like you have to decide on the matter right away. Please take your time and think about it. If you are seeking the truth about this matter, then please re-read my article in full with an open mind (without any preconceived notions). Please check this verse in the Koran, “God does not forbid you to deal kindly and justly with anyone who has not fought you or driven you out of your homes. God loves the just” [60:8]. This verse specifically talks about those people you described that go about their business watching TV or work on a computer.
I totally respect that you don’t want to argue with a stranger. But I’m the author of this piece and am simply doing my job replying. I’m also not sure why you visit blogs since it’s full of strangers. Hey, I’m no more a stranger than others (at least I share my picture and my real name)
AsimG
December 10, 2010 at 12:33 AM
Gracie, if you want a simplistic view of the Qur’an then sure you can have it. Just pull one liners out of it without context or understanding and then demonize all of it.
The problem is you can do that with the Torah, bible and basically anything written. You can make innocent children’s stories into stories of supporting debauchery, murderer and who knows what else.
So let’s challenge ourselves to read and learn and not, like you said, stand firm on ignorance.
Cause at the end of the day the Qur’an is my book that I read and study and try to live my life by. So don’t come here and tell me all this junk after a few minutes of one liner reading :P
Gracie
December 11, 2010 at 4:35 PM
Im not Just taking one liners. I’ve seen the stuff to. If you ppl are so peaceful then y not start ur own religion based off Islam and leave out the killing? but of course that would be wrong right?
Azzy
December 11, 2010 at 7:01 PM
Islam, especially in regards to the modern consensus, only allows war for self-defense. No one (except anti-Muslim bigots) have interpreted it to allow for random killings, etc.
Rashid Rida (d. 1935), the author of the most renowned work of Qur’anic exegesis in the twentieth century, wrote “everything that is mentioned in the Koran with regard to the rules of fighting, is intended as defence against enemies that fight the Moslems because of their religion†(37). Mahmud Shaltut (d. 1963), who was the grand shaykh of al-Azhar in Egypt, showed in his tract al-Qur’an wa l-Qital (The Qur’an and Fighting) (38) that by taking an inter-textual and contextual approach to the Qur’an as opposed the classical “evolution theoryâ€, jihad becomes primarily defensive, and the fundamental relationship between Muslim and non-Muslim nations is established as one of peace.
In his extensive thesis on Jihad, the modern academic Muhammad Khayr Haykal quotes many modern authorities (ulama) on the subject of jihad and he discovers most of them believe it to be primarily defensive and one that envisages peaceful coexistence (39). I will quote a few examples here (all references are taken from Haykal’s work).
Abd al-Wahhab Khallaf (d. 1956), who was a teacher at Azhar and supervisor of Shari’ah courts in Egypt, wrote: “Islam establishes relations between Muslims and others as peace and security, not as war and fighting, except when they are targeted with harmful (intentions) to reek havoc in their religion, or quell their call (to Islam), for then jihad would be made obligatory in order to deter the harm and protect the call…and if non-Muslims withhold from their persecution and leave them free to call (to Islam), Muslims should not display a sword or initiate war†(40)
Abd al-Hafiz Abd Rabbih wrote, quoting and approving another authority, Dr. Muhammad Abd Allah al-Darraz: “We agree expressly that the war legislated in Islam is a defensive war only, and none besides, and it behooves us to point out that defence includes within it two types, both of which the Qur’an alludes to: 1. defending lives and 2. the necessary aid for the Muslim subjects…we see from this, war in Islam is an evil, and there is no recourse to it except in (cases of) necessity†(41) In his foreword to this work Dr Muhammad Muhammad al-Fahham (d. 1975?), the grand shaykh of Azhar from 1969-1973, commends the author and approves of the book.
Dr Mustafa al-Siba‘i (d. 1964), who was Professor of Law at the University of Damascus and established the Faculty of Shariah there in 1955, wrote: “Jihad in Islam is legislated for two purposes: 1. repelling the enemy to free the (Muslim) community in its land and its religion, and 2. rescuing oppressed people from tyrant rulers†(42)
Sayyid Sabiq (d. 2000), a jurist from the Muslim Brotherhood, a teacher at Azhar as well as Umm al-Qura in Mecca and author of the renowned work Fiqh al-Sunna (Understanding Tradition), wrote: “Since the fundamental principle is peace and war is the exception, there is nothing permitting war in Islam whatever the situation except in two instances: 1. when defending life, honour and property, and land when it is occupied; 2. when defending the call to God if one is hampered along his path, by torturing the one who believes it or by preventing one who intends to engage in it or by stopping the caller from his call†(43)
The Egyptian judge Ali Ali Mansur wrote: “Islam does not approve of offensive warfare with the intention of conquest (fath) or expansion (tawassu)…the war that is legislated in Islam is defensive war, to repel the hostility which an enemy initiated, or to defend an established clause in a treaty or an agreement broken by the opposition, or to protect the call (to Islam)†(44)
Wahba al-Zuhayli (b. 1933), Professor of Islamic jurisprudence at Damascus University, wrote “The jurists of both Sunni and Shiite orientation believed, in the age of juristic innovation of the second century, that the fundamental relationship between Muslims and others is war … on the premise of what they understood from the verses of the Qur’an upon its apparent (meaning) and absolute (rendering), without efforts to reconcile and combine between them…perhaps their pretext for this ruling is their condition of being affected by the state of the Muslims at that time of the necessity of firmness before the enemies who surrounded them from every side†(45). Based on Qur’anic verse 8:61 and others and the Prophet’s biography, Zuhayli goes on to argue the fundamental relationship between Muslim and non-Muslim nations according to the Muslim scriptures is in fact one of peace. The opinions described here have been adopted by ulama throughout the world e.g. the world renowned Indian scholar Abu l-Hasan Ali Nadwi (d. 1999) and Wahiduddin Khan (b. 1925) of Delhi; and from the West, such scholars as Mustafa Ceric, Zaid Shakir and Abd al-Hakim Murad
In his book, al-Jihad fi l-Islam, Ramadan al-Buti (b. 1933) conclusively proves that military jihad has been legislated for the purpose of averting aggression (hiraba) not disbelief (kufr) based on the opinions of the majority of the ulama and texts of the Qur’an and hadiths. He writes “The majority, that is the Hanafis, Malikis and Hanbalis, have adopted (the view) that the ratio legis for military jihad is averting aggression, and al-Shafi‘i adopted (the view) in the most prominent of his two pronouncements that the ratio legis is disbelief, and this is also the madhhab of Ibn Hazm†(46) [references he cites: Bidayat al-Mujtahid 1:369-372, al-Mughni 9:301, Fath al-Qadir 5:452, al-Sharh al-Saghir ‘ala Aqrab al-Masalik 2:275, Mughni al-Muhtaj 4:234, al-Tuhfa 9:231]. He elaborates on this point in terms of evidence from the Qur’an and hadith and finds the minority Shafiite view is based on a weak interpretation of the evidence (47).
Rudolph Peters suggests the idea of the “exclusively defensive character of jihad†may have been a popular understanding even before the modern period: “Although the exclusively defensive character of jihad was only recently put forward by the modernists, there are indications that this concept is much older…The collection of Thousand and One Nights contains the didactic story of Tawaddud, a slave girl that astonishes the ulama by her extensive knowledge of Islam. With regard to jihad, we read: ‘He said: “What is the jihad and what are its essential elements (arkan)?†She answered: “As for its essential elements, they are: an attack on us by the unbelievers, the presence of an Imam, preparedness and constance when one meets the enemyâ€â€™(Alf layla wa layla Vol. 2, p. 309)†(48).
Sorry for the massive cut/paste but it’s just to drive home the point.
omoredia
December 11, 2010 at 3:09 PM
well thanks for that, i am not critizing you guys or muslims. but i find it hard to belive that people just want to kill someone else in cold blood. brothers, it hurts me to see violence and am sure God (Allah) that created man will not rejoice when we kill eachother. Jesus ( dont think i am persuading u) showed love to everyone even though they hated ank killed him, he says love you neighbour as yourself. lets forget about religion but if everyone was like that woulnt this world be a better place. i always question my religion and put and it has been very helpful to do that. i want to ask those muslims that commit terrorism are’nt they reading the same quran and i’m sure are good muslims but still kill people why? if we could talk about this i will really want to know. for me muslims can kill me with a bomb, cut off my head and put it up for display but i cant do the same. i can but if i do and going totally away from christianity that teaches me love even your enemies.
Azzy
December 11, 2010 at 3:55 PM
For a video and discussion on verse 9: 5 see: http://www.loonwatch.com/2010/12/asra-nomani-can-learn-a-thing-or-two-from-lesley-hazelton-about-the-quran/
Here’s a comment from @Awesome:
Here friends, this is an adequate debunking of Leslie’s ‘interpretation’ of v. 9:5, calling for the beheading of all Pagans who are not allied with Muslims
That is hardly adequate. To start, the belief that the Qur’an is applicable to “all times and places†does not necessitate the belief that every verse in it, applies to every circumstance, which is what they want to suggest. Their whole case only works with this implied belief of theirs, when in fact, it’s a strawman they’ve made, by exaggerating Muslim beliefs.
Now for the textual context:
“The abrogation of the pact (is hereby being proclaimed) by Allah and His messenger _ the pact you made with (some of) the polytheist (tribes). So, (Oh idolaters)! you may (stay and) move about in the land (in peace) for four months. You should know that you shall definitely not render Allah powerless. Allah is surely going to disgrace you. An announcement for mankind from Allah and His messenger on the great day of Hajj (the pilgrimage): Allah and His messenger are free of any obligation concerning the Polytheists _ (those accepting partners with Allah). It is (Oh Idolaters!) better for you to (desist and) repent. For if you turn away, remember that you are unable to frustrate (and elude the grip of) Allah. So, warn the unbelievers of a painful punishment! Except for those polytheist with whom you entered into a pact, and who neither violated any of its conditions, nor aided others against you. HONOR (all aspects of) the pact made with them, for the duration of its term. Indeed, Allah loves those who are pious. After the sacred months _ (the grace period of four months) _ have expired, slay them wherever you find them. Seize them, besiege them and lie in ambush for them at all possible places. But if they repent, establish ‘salat’, and pay the ‘zakat’, then let them go their way. Of course, Allah is the most Forgiving and the most Merciful. If any of the idolaters asks you for an asylum, give him refuge till he hears the word of Allah _ (the Qur’an). After that, escort him to a safe place. That, because they are a people who do not know. How can there exist an obligation (of the pact) upon Allah and His messenger in the case of the idolaters? Except for those with whom you entered into a pact in the vicinity of the Holy mosque. So, abide by the pact as long as they remain true (and abide). Indeed, Allah loves those who are dutiful. How (can there be a pact since) whenever they gain an upper hand over you they neither honor the kinship ties, nor the obligation of the pact. With their mouths they (utter words to) appease (and assuage) you, even though their hearts refuse. Most of them are (immoral and) rebellious! They traded away the verses (and signs) of Allah for a small gain. Thus, they prevented (people) from (following) His way. What they used to do was really despicable! In the case of the believers, they do not honor kinship ties, or the pact. Of course, it is they who are the offenders _ (the transgressors).†– Qur’an 9:1-10
So, it seems that fulfilling the pact until it’s appointed term is obligatory if the other side fulfills it. It also seems that it was the disbelievers who took the initiative in not honoring it.
Furthermore, in another verse, we find another stipulation about fighting the unbelievers:
In the path of Allah, fight those who wage a war against you. But do not exceed the limit. Indeed, Allah does not like the transgressors. Kill them wherever you find them. Expel them from where they drove you away. Persecution and oppression are worse than killing. Do not do battle with them near the sacred house of worship (Makkah), unless it is they who engage you in battle there. If they fight you there, then slay them (there). That is the due punishment for the disbelievers. If they desist, then of course Allah is the most Forgiving and the most Merciful. Fight (and confront) them till corruption and repression cease, and until faith in Allah (and justice) prevails! But if they desist, then let there be no aggression, except against the oppressors. The sacred months are (of course) the sacred months. (But) there is retribution for (the violation of) every prohibition. Therefore, if they violate the prohibition (and attack you), then you may do the same in retaliation against the aggression they commit. But, know (for sure) that Allah is indeed with the pious. Spend your wealth for the cause of Allah. Do not, by your own doings, put yourself in harm’s way. Do the right thing. Of course, Allah loves the righteous. – Qur’an 2:190-195
So, as can clearly see about “fighting against unbelieversâ€:
– It is only against those that have already waged war against Muslims
– It is only to bring an end to the corruption, persecution and oppression that is being done against Muslims, by those who have waged war against them
– It is not permissible against those who have stopped, and have opted for peace.
– It is not permissible if their is a pact with them, which they honor.
Who’s left to fight against? Only hostile unbelievers who don’t honor treaties or kinship, and are trying to fight, kill, persecute and oppress Muslims. So, all those “fighting†verses that anti-Islam polemicists love to quote can only be applied correctly against such people.
Leila
December 13, 2010 at 8:46 AM
This is a good post. I am a Muslim by birth but am not orthodox in the way I practice my faith. Obviously, I do not think Islam is an inherently violent religion. But in order to reach this conclusion or to be convinced about it, I didn’t need to dissect Koranic verses and draw on thousands of lines of scholarly interpretations either.
I think one of the big problems the Muslim community faces today is this OVER-RELIANCE on doctrinal texts (eg Koranic verses and hadiths) at the expense of spirituality and connection with God. If you open your heart to God, and realize that the word Islam is etymologically linked to the word for “peace” then you won’t need Islamic scholars to “teach” you what it means to be a moral person, or to explain why you should eschew violence under all but the most exceptional of circumstances.
People of ANY faith will find verses in their holy books calling on believers to commit violent acts under certain circumstances. But the power of these words has an even stronger effect on Muslims because of the status of the Koran as a text that was written at the time of revelation. However, despite this status, we mere mortals must realize that we could never know for sure that we are interpreting our holy texts exactly as God intended them to be read – that’s why there are SOOO many different interpretations out there, including many that terrorists use to justify their acts of violence against so-called infidels. I wish we, as a community, could turn the focus of our religiosity away from this obsession with the text and toward the basics of faith and peaceful living among our co-coreligionists, and among the human community as a whole.
Kevin S.
December 14, 2010 at 5:28 AM
Muslims say that they can only fight during oppression and self defense. This is where it gets tricky
Its apparent that Muslims are fighting American soldiers installed in the Middle East for self defense and against oppression. So according to these Muslims in the East, are the US soldiers there the enemies or are all the US soldiers and the rest of the US enemies? Are they enemies to those Muslims or to all Muslims in the world?
So you mean to tell me that Muslims that conquered the entire Middle East in 700AD was all through religious conversions and none were from violence that had nothing to do with self defense? I don’t believe that one bit. When they tried to conquer Europe, you’re going to tell me that all of it was done through friendly conversions and none it was done through violence? If it was done through violence then it wasn’t done out of self defense like you claim. That just proves that Islam is violent.
Also, please define Oppression. Hows does a Muslim define oppression since that is grounds for killing? Technically if I prevent Muslims from building mosques I am oppressing them so does that mean they can go out and kill me? I am very curious on how you define oppression because it has such a broad meaning.
What about apostasy, when someone leaves the Muslim faith. Isn’t that punishable by death according to the Sharia Law and is that fair or is that barbaric and violent? Where is the peace in religious freedom?
If there is no compulsion in religion then why is it so difficult for Christians to build Churches in Iran, Turkey, and other Middle Eastern Countries? Please explain that one.
Leila
December 14, 2010 at 8:33 AM
I think you might have misplaced this comment as a reply to mine. You might want to move this comment out as a general response to the original poster.
I can’t personally answer your questions with authority, by referring to religious texts and what not. However, I can tell you that as a Muslim woman, I would never support a general call to jihad or violence to fight against all US soldiers or citizens. Even if a hundred clerics tried to claim this would be a legitimate act of self-defense (because global capitalism & Western moral decay are “oppressing” all Muslims, blah blah), the answer is an adamant NO, such people would have absolutely no influence over me, and in fact, I would stand up to fight against them and their hate-mongering, terror-supporting propaganda. I can also tell you that the hundreds of other Muslims I personally know would likewise pay no heed to such calls for violence, no matter how many fundamentalists started preaching it, no matter how many ways they found to interpret the Koran or the hadiths to support their evil intentions.
When it is experienced and lived from the heart, Islam is a religion of peace. Sadly, however, in our complicated modern age, its texts and traditions have been hijacked by a few hateful and misguided people for the purposes of war. Do not think such evil people come remotely close to representing the views of the overwhelming majority of God-loving, and peace-loving Muslims.
Kevin S.
December 14, 2010 at 11:25 PM
Leila, sorry about the wrong response. Anyways you’re coming from your point of view of Islam. How do you know that your view is more accurate and right as compared to the violent radical’s view? You’re also coming from personal experience. People are entitled to their own opinions but not entitled to their own facts.
Well anyways, none of that matters anyways. Just reading a lot of these responses only brought me to 1 conclusion: Radical Islam will never cease to exist and no one will stop it. It will continue to grow or not but never truly stop existing. If Muslims like you agree that these radical Muslims are violent and twisting the religion then the only solution so far is to kill as many of these fake Muslims as much as possible and as fast as possible. Allah detest fake Muslims that twist his words for violence so Allah is using the United States as a force for justice to kill as many of these fake Muslims.
All Muslims can do is to pray to Allah that he vanquishes and rids the earth of evil men that claim to be Muslims. Allah’s sword will strike justice and fear in the hearts of these posing Muslims.
Leila
December 15, 2010 at 4:51 AM
uhh, Kevin, sorry, I totally disagree with your violent “solution” to the problem of radicalism.
Amad
December 15, 2010 at 5:49 AM
if you want to kill all extremists, then there are plenty of takers in all religions…
Radicalism is a reaction. We need to tackle both what it is a reaction to AND the reaction itself.
ordinary guy
December 16, 2010 at 6:23 AM
Every religion has some sort of violence embedded in it. But how come I don’t see radical Christians today that use their Bible as an excuse to kill people? I don’t see radical Jews that use their Torah to kill people? I don’t see radical Hindus that refer to their Vedas to kill people? I only observe that with Islam.
Leila you say that no such people such as clerics or religious books have any influence with you. Most Muslims are like that but how come radical Muslims aren’t like that? What is causing them to be so ignorant as to misread these books and be so gullible? Why the gap?
– Marvin
Leila
December 20, 2010 at 12:01 PM
Hi Marvin, I am very saddened that the religion I was born into, and which I continue to identify with today, has been hijacked by a few sociopathic criminals who have deluded themselves into thinking the political violence they advocate is sanctioned by God.
But I would argue that Islamism, like all other -ISMs has nothing to do with religious conviction or spirituality, but is rather a political ideology. Compare with ZionISM, which for the past 60-70 years at least, has drawn on a few passages in the Torah to justify all sorts of violence against Palestinians, including assassinations, torture, and the use of excessive force against civilians (including women and children). There have been plenty of articles and books that have exposed this violent history, though you won’t hear about them in the mainstream media. But even a quick Wiki search will prove my point: See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zionist_political_violence and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irgun
So, in answer to your question, plenty of radical Jews today DO use the Torah to justify killing people. Radical Christians also draw on the Bible to justify political violence. Here’s a recent example, which I read about last week: http://www.richardsilverstein.com/tikun_olam/2008/12/08/rick-warren-to-speak-to-muslim-convention-after-calling-for-ahmadinejad-assassination/
Of course, Islamism is a particularly complex problem, because it is a political ideology that has developed outside of, and in direct opposition to, state apparatuses. Al-Qaeda is a transnational, global network of terrorists who commit their political crimes independently of the nation-states in which they live, or to which they belong: Bin Laden was not acting as an operative of the Saudi state, but in opposition to it.
In contrast, most Western (Christian-majority) countries and their client states abroad use their massive, military industrial complexes to do their dirty work for them. Although we may remain blissfully ignorant of it, there IS such a thing as state sponsored political violence, and even state-sponsored terrorism. While modern Western governments can no longer use religious rhetoric to justify invading other countries (as they did during the Crusades), they certainly do draw on political ideologies to do so. Look at how many thousands of innocent people in Vietnam, Latin America, and elsewhere died in just the second half of the 20th century as the US tried to “defend” capitalISM from the “threat” of communISM.
That said, I admit that I find it especially egregious when people draw on religious discourse to justify political acts of violence. Such people do nothing but denigrate the religions they claim to be living by, and reduce the timeless, transcendent aspects of true faith to the most most fleeting and un-Godly dimensions of worldly politics.
Kevin S.
December 15, 2010 at 10:55 AM
Leila you agree with me that radical Islam is a problem yet you don’t provide any solutions. You’re thinking reflect the rest of the world. You can only identify the problem but don’t provide any solutions. So what do you think is the solution then?
Amad, that goes for you too. You only state “what” needs to be done yet don’t provide “how” its going to be done.
So many people including Muslims say “we need to do this” and “we need to do that” but never say exactly how its going to be done.
Seriously, what other way are you going to stop a radical Islam? Are you going to invite him to your house and enjoy a cup of coffee with him while you convince him that his theology is wrong? Or better yet are the nice Muslims going to provide a Radical Islam Rehab center? Come on now! Seriously. What other way? You must use violence such as war. Sometimes war is needed for peace. These Muslims are coming after you with guns, bombs, with the intention to chop your head off and you’re gonna sit here and try to convince them with flowery kind words like its suppose to be conflict management or an episode of Sesame Street? That thinking is so delusional, absurd, and you wonder why nothing is working today.
I find it interesting how both of you overlook your own religious books. It provided numerous accounts on how Islam used violence as an answer. Whether you say it was for self defense or oppression the bottom line is that is still used violence PERIOD! You cannot deny that and if you do you are a liar. Muhammed used violence as a solution and it worked. Mimic the prophet, his words, his ways my friends. He provided perfect examples contained in the Qur’an.
Leila
December 20, 2010 at 10:21 AM
“That thinking is so delusional, absurd, and you wonder why nothing is working today”
kevin, I’m not delusional, I simply don’t share your idea that supporting governments who commit mass murder of Muslim populations is the solution. Actually, your “solution” of using war and state-sponsored violence to supposedly “combat” Islamist movements is the model that has been tried over and over again and that has FAILED miserably each time. Just look at the consequences of the war in Iraq.
Here is a very good article that shows just how counterproductive the type of action you support has been: http://www.csmonitor.com/Commentary/Opinion/2010/1209/What-really-drives-suicide-terrorists
I am a private citizen, not a member of the military or FBI or CIA or MI-5. In this capacity, I choose to work, at a community level, to prevent radicalization, and to mobilize peacefully against violent acts committed in the name of my religion – or ANY religion for that matter. I support putting terrorists on trial and in jail and stopping them from advocating hate crimes or proselytizing their violent ideology (and I say “ideology” instead of “theology” very deliberately here). But I will also protest the violent “solutions” proposed by opportunistic politicians and policy makers whose motives for going to war are NOT to combat terrorism but rather to protect Western economic interests and political hegemony in the Middle East and elsewhere.
Obviously, my grass-roots approach will not have immediate results, but I firmly believe that, in the long term, it is the only way to deal with the root of the problem.
Kevin S.
December 20, 2010 at 6:33 PM
Leila, putting a criminal into prison is called the band-aid effect. Its a consequence, not a solution. It solves surface problems. If the prison system actually works, then why are there more criminals prevalent now than ever? Even if you send these radical Muslims to jail, it still wouldn’t solve anything. You see, these radical Muslims believe that Islam is both a political and religious system which are one in the same and can’t be separated. Even if you sent them to jail, they are still passionate about doing the will that they think Allah has for them which is to kill unbelievers and wage war. They think going to jail and being executed in jail is a heroic thing to do and good in the eyes of Allah. That only gives a bigger boost in morale now and much bigger reason to keep fighting harder. In other words, it only fuels the fire and escalates the problem. In fact they believe that the Qur’an encourages them to fight and shed blood as a martyr!
The only reason why you have the work at a community level and even be a citizen is because of war that defended your rights to do all those things. So don’t sit here and tell me that war doesn’t work.
If you’re truly a Muslim women then you must believe in the Qur’an. It has countless examples of how war was used as a means, from pagans to Jews. Doesn’t Muhammad provide perfect examples of how to act? If you’re a citizen in the US then you know that war again was used as a means to a solution. So now you’re binded by a dilemma aren’t you?
These violent Muslims commit violent acts. Violent acts are produced from violent thoughts. The only way to truly combat them is to prevent these thoughts or change these thoughts. An example would be for Muslims to send Islamic evangelists in the middle east to teach the message of peace to these radicals and convert them. But they’re not doing that. Instead they spend all their time defending how peaceful they are, how to properly interpret the Qur’an, and how to convert non-Muslims.
Shouldn’t they invest their time converting these radical Muslims? Makes sense right?
Shailendra
December 22, 2010 at 5:11 AM
You have twisted the Quran according to your own. You have written that don’t fight with them who are not fighting against you, clearly shows that fight is to be initiated. Also please think if every religion starts thinking like Muslims that other religion should not exists then there will be fight every where.
Don Bloss
December 26, 2010 at 9:02 AM
Gentlemen, I ask your pardon. I am a Christian and, therefor, an “other.” One of the early posts in this stream begged forgiveness for posting as a non-believer. He does you a disservice. I have found more truth in these few sentences delivered by you, sincere believers, than I have in several years of hearing about the “evil, violent faith,” Islam. Your words have caused me to repent of some of the ideas I have espoused until reading this stream. I thank you for your posts from the bottom of my heart.
Just as “Christians” have committed atrocities in the past, using their connection to the church to justify their actions, terrorists continue to use Islamic scripture to justify their actions. Granted, and freshly learned from this discussion, the Scripture has been taken out of contest, but is still used as justification.
I look forward with great anticipation to future discussions. Indeed, God is great, and may we all find His way in our lives.
Amad
December 27, 2010 at 1:32 AM
Thanks Don. Your comment reflects the verse of the Quran:
“…And nearest among them in love to the believers wilt thou find those who say, “We are Christians”: because amongst these are men devoted to learning and men who have renounced the world, and they are not arrogant.”
another pacifist who also thinks
October 31, 2012 at 4:25 AM
Amongst the countless pointing fingers, I have found at least one person with hands open and arms wide, embracing understanding. THAT is something to celebrate.
Brian of Oz
December 31, 2010 at 10:57 PM
Very informative. Makes me want to read the Quaran at least the gain a better understanding of Islam. Although my parents will crack if they see me with it. (Ones Catholic and one Anglican).
Hj
March 7, 2012 at 6:12 AM
Surely your not serious Brian.
Dr Sk
March 12, 2012 at 12:45 PM
Hi,
tafseer or exegesis gives you a holistic understanding of the text.surah (called chapter) 78 to 114 is the last 30th part,the shortest and also what everyone studying starts of with.i found these podcasts very helpful and not cumbersome:http://bayyinah.com/podcast/category/juz_amma/and for text : http://www.islamawakened.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=9&Itemid=2
Pingback: Episode: Charity (Sadaqa) | American Muslim: The Series
Hugh Jorgen
March 7, 2012 at 6:02 AM
The Quran contains at least 109 verses that call Muslims to war with non believers. Some are extremely graphic with commands to chop off heads, etc. You only have to look at countries were Islam is dominant (such as Middle East & Pakistan) here other religions suffer brutal persecution. This does not occur in Western (Christian) countries who are tolerant of Islam. In fact I would go as far as saying that violence is so ingrained in Islam that muslims have never stopped being at war, either with other religions or with themsleves. Each year thousands of Christian homes and churches are torched or bombed by muslim mobs. Yet, there is little violent retribution from Christians. What I find strange is that Muslim clerics in the West do not fear for their safety as do their Christian counterparts. A recent fact showed that almost 70% of the world’s refugees are muslims fleeing violence from their homelands and usually seeking a safe passage to a Christian country.
Might
April 19, 2012 at 3:16 AM
It puzzles me too. Wht Isalm so extreme and not forgiving..beheading..cutiing lims…i dont get it…
Saood
September 26, 2012 at 4:17 PM
And what do you have to say about the brutal murders which the the christian world (mainly USA, UK and NATO) is doing in Afghanistan, Iraq and Pakistan (through drones).
Btw, where do you get this 109 verses thing from?. Have you done any research or is it just a hear say? And if you have done it, can you provide me the source?
Mariocruz1
March 12, 2012 at 3:55 AM
Then – why are most of its countries are always – in violence? In today’s modern times, these Muslim countries experience violence more than any other part of this world…
Please explain me this, someone?
Saood
September 26, 2012 at 4:22 PM
Yes you are right there is violence. But there is enough evidence to suggest that there are foreign hands in it.
John Bayley
April 6, 2012 at 11:19 PM
In Australia these beareded men who speak Arabic at the mosque just seem so much out of place. Their appearance and strange beliefs prevent social integration which has been the success of multicultureasim and yet they claim its ok to be different becassue of the freedom we offer. Its true we are free but it takes advantage of the country and the freedom so many fought to obtain, Thats freedom must not be misused and the futer for Australia may well be the same as in America, England, Germany and France. the evidence says it will.
Pingback: Simple Jury Persuasion: The “turban effect” « The Jury Room
scared
June 23, 2012 at 11:15 AM
In my place were all warned of violent muslims, there are schoolmates going missing because some muslim guy was either rumored to have kidnapped her or she was hidden by her family before it happened.
Pingback: The Politics Behind Misunderstanding Islam - IslamiCity | IslamiCity
Eve
July 8, 2012 at 10:48 PM
Islam is violent. Islam is blasphemy. It tolerates and condones violence as part of its stipulations and promotes injustice and cruel dominance. Really sad. I imagine that God would be saddened by these people who claim to honor Him. His pure holiness being defiled by Islam, by men and women with anger and hatred in their hearts, claiming to be representatives of a God of love and justice and mercy. Shameful!
Curious
July 20, 2012 at 8:02 AM
I read from wikipedia that most of the Caliphs ( Islam grand leader ) after Mohammad were assasinated – Umar , Uthman , Ali ..
Rawiah
June 24, 2013 at 11:58 PM
Indeed they were and there were attempts to kill Prophet Muhammad as well. Islam was new at the time and there will always be haters. I know 2 of the best US presidents were assassinated and there have been many attempts against others.
Human
July 27, 2012 at 2:50 PM
DEAR SIR,
Please debate with ali sinha and remove confusion from world on this site…
faithfreedom.org
a pacifist who thinks
September 12, 2012 at 10:17 AM
then why do you not ‘police your own’ in this aspect? you allow it, by your inaction. your crazy politicians wrote some ‘memorandum of understanding’ in kenya in 2007, _ RAILA_MUSLIM_MOU.pdf _ google it up, where the muslims ‘got their way’ in blunt terms.
what has happened? wherever muslims are a large group or even a majority, violence escalates and people DIE. this insanity of following this writing by the group of men named mohamad, whether the first second or third one, and claiming to follow some god/ allah/ dios/ theos/ elohim needs to be counteracted by you who claim special knowledge and authority.
police your own people, fellows! do not tell us how good your religion is when we see the results of mohamadism, islamism or any other form or format of koran followers causes nothing but dishonoring women, murdering their own children in this ‘honor killing’ that is growing, and forced conversion, just as disgusting as the conquistadores who murdered MY ancestors when they came to the ‘new world.
enough.
Aly Balagamwala | DiscoMaulvi
September 12, 2012 at 10:27 AM
DeleteDelete
another pacifist who also thinks
October 30, 2012 at 1:38 AM
The purpose of this article is to answer the question ‘Is Islam a Violent Religion?’. From the content presented by the author, we can make a conclusion that the answer is ‘No’.
The questions you are asking are, as I understand it, ‘Why are there violent Muslims?’ and ‘What are we going to do about violent Muslims?’. These are two huge questions which require much study. Addressing the initial question, as well as the additional two you have asked is an undertaking ill suited to just one post. Perhaps the author, or someone else, would be able to write another post to answer those questions that have been raised. I doubt one post will be enough but any start towards addressing these real and serious questions will be great. As seen by the lively discussions and debate going on here, many will benefit from more posts such as these.
As such, I would like to congratulate the author for his post which was presented in a logical and understandable way. I have learned a great deal from it and I can confidently answer when asked, ‘No, Islam is not a violent religion.’
catem
September 15, 2012 at 6:52 PM
I am just watching footage of the violence that is the Islamic response to a stupid, badly made film that no-one would even know about but for the protests. Yesterday I saw an art work that was just as insulting, although this time it was Buddists who were offended. I was given a pamhlet explaining their position, Can you see the difference?
Chirag Aidasani
September 17, 2012 at 2:00 PM
Islam is a beautiful religion but in why in India some people view it with suspicion i will give you the reason . Firstly the conquerers . The islamic conquest of India was one of the most bloodiest conquests in the history . It was not Islam but the rulers who did so .
It began with the entry of Mahmud of ghazni and in the process were slaughtered millions of inhabitants of the Indian subcontinent and several forcefully converted them being termed infidels . Fine islam does not allow idolatry but does that mean slaughtering innocent men and children and raiding the temples . Countless temples were demolished and the riches were used to fund their own empire . Do you justify their actions ?? Does Hinduism teach satanic things ?? it also tells you to be a humanitarian like tell the truth , be honest , give charity etc if a religion teaches those things isn’t that enough ??
Hindus were suprresed badly during their reign. Even as recently as pre independence in the hyderabad state (where i am from) the population of the state was 85 % hindu but the in the ruling muslim state less than 2% had representation in the government .they were made to pay a tax called “jazia” and were not allowed to practice their religion. This is akin to the atrocities of the British .
Hence a religion like sikhism raised in India . and i blame the rulers who in the name of islam terrorized the native inhabitants of the subcontinent not Islam which i know is a peaceful religion.
Cause and effect
September 29, 2013 at 12:25 AM
Check the real history of the Islamic invasion of India, why do you separate and distance the violent passages of the Koran commanding Muslims to kill non-Muslims from the actual act and process of killing, in the name of Allah.
The first Muslim invaders were mercifully to the defeated Hindus, only when the Caliph, Müllers and Imams’ arrived and enforced the full letter of the law of Islam did the wholesale slaughter of the infidel begin.
Islam has never been and never will be a religion of peace stop deluding your self.
Islam is prophesied in the bibles book of revelations and fullfills the first mystery of 666s, the number of the beast.
The first 6 is 1 x 666 = 666ad, the year Satan manifest himself through Islam to destroy Christianity. The 2nd 6 is 2 x 666 = 1332ad, the year human reason became criteria for truth .
The 3rd 6 is 3 x 666 = 1998ad, the year ecclesiastical masonry opens the door to the anti-Christ.
Wake up and see the real enemy, Satan at work amongst us. THOU SHALT NOT KILL it’s as simply as that, any religion that’s permits killing for any reason bows to the logic and reason of the beast. War is Gods punishment on mankind.
Satan manifests and works through Islam, as Muslims bow down five times a day in a continuous endless Mexican wave around the planet the, their unholy prayers cursing the Jews and Christians give Satan the power he needs to destroy humanity, the bitter fruits of Islam are ripening all over the planet, as Islam rises and slaughters till all is but for Allah/Satan ,Islam will fully turn on itself and destroy the remains of humanity,
Islam is already at war with itself as Shia slaughters Sunni , and vice versa , as both slaughter other sects of Islam.
Agnost
September 20, 2012 at 3:59 AM
What a load of codswallop… What’s the biggest difference between christianity and Islam? Three simple words – ”Thou shalt not kill.’
proud Muslim
September 26, 2012 at 2:24 PM
sure … but you still kill anyway!!
Don
January 30, 2013 at 6:46 PM
Show me where in the world today there is killing of Muslims by Christians invoking the name of Jesus or the New Testament. The killing you refer to is real, but it is done by secular governments waging war for secular reasons, and those committing it do not justify it (much less claim it is mandated) by the teachings of Jesus Christ.. You conflate “Christianity” with “Western governments.” They are not the same thing. And besides, even assuming, arguendo, that Christianity were a violent religion, that says nothing about whether Islam is a violent religion.
'Abd-Allaah
November 3, 2012 at 1:27 PM
I think you’ll find that’s four words, and have you ever read Luke 19:27?
…I thought not.
Don
January 30, 2013 at 6:40 PM
Show me a single Christian who has used this passage to justify violence against non-Christians. Weak.
Mar
October 31, 2012 at 3:51 PM
Ha ha ha ha ha! What happens those who sensibly choose to abandon Islam in any Muslim country? Nothing violent like death right?
Dan
November 23, 2012 at 5:46 AM
Very well written article. I am not a Muslim but have always been curious as to why there are (seemingly) more cases of violence from Muslim groups and individuals than other religions or groups. Your article at least answers the first part of the question i.e. it is not encouraged/condoned by Islam text and philosophy. I still dont understand but I think logical fair reasoning and discussion like this goes a long way in getting rid of the hatred and ignorance to Islam. Just wanted to say thanks for writing your article without anger and with logic.
check your facts.
May 23, 2013 at 7:10 PM
I am friendly with a few Muslims and know many more who do not condone any acts of terror or war. However, Islam, like Christianity is an old religion set in old ways that hasn’t been updated or given a makeover for the new millenium. Women are still second class and in both religions, (one moreso than the other) homosexuality is apparently punishable by death, horrible xenophobia, spreading religion by the sword, “killing the other guy”. Looking the other way when someone in your group does something bad to the other guy. Christians… Muslims… Jews… all worship the same God. A God who apparently wants all his children to anihilate each other to prove who is worshipping him correctly. Why can’t everyone be correct? How do you know you’re not all wrong? think. That’s all anyone has to do is think instead of react. That’s the true way to peace.
Love one another as I have loved you
July 24, 2013 at 6:32 PM
Great article and raises a lot of questions but I’ll try to limit mine – hopefully I’ll get some sensible answers! There seems to be a lot of people out there just looking to hate.
1) Given that Islam is a religion of peace & tolerance, why is it so difficult to be a non-Muslim in an Islamic state? For instance, the almost extinction of Christianity throughout the Middle East (particularly Iraq) in recent decades. It breaks my heart to read about entire churches, packed full of worshipers, locked & burned to the ground – women, children, elderly & all.
2) Many (but not all) religious leaders throughout the world never committed murder or allowed it from their people in any way, shape or form (The Buddha, The Nazarene, etc), yet The Prophet (pbuh) did allow killing under certain circumstances. This does not sit well with me… It does not seem to be an example I believe the world should follow. How would a Muslim respond to this?
I think the biggest problem facing the interaction between the Muslim world and the non-Muslim world is that of secularism and Western ideology of separation of Church & State, which goes against the fundamentals of Islam. But I’m open to someone correcting me!
Charles
November 14, 2013 at 1:20 PM
Speak with 10 who practice the religion, and get 10 interpretations. Hard to understand what is meant when they don’t understand. I read in this article, that the killing of woman and children is not allowed, but who does that leave to be killed. Killing is killing no matter how try to clean it up. Hard to see Islam as a Religion.
Pingback: Why would this country deem it necessary to ban a religion? - Democrats, Republicans, Libertarians, Conservatives, Liberals, Third Parties, Left-Wing, Right-Wing, Congress, President - Page 2 - City-Data Forum
Pingback: Islam Creates Monsters Says Psychologist | The Conservative Papers
David Stevens
July 29, 2014 at 1:19 PM
Hello, when people ask about violence in religion they normally state that the Christians are the most violent of all (if you go back in history it is true) but we live in the here, and now, if we look at many religions they all have pockets of violence, and extremists but the Muslim religion by it’s very teachings tell us that marrying, and having sex with a child is ok, can this be right, I have several Muslim friends and they sit and tell me quite openly that that their faith is only interested in World domination, and cannot co-exist as we are all less than human, and that sex with a girl under the age of twelve is permitted in certain circumstances. My question to everyone is, in todays world, is it ok to molest children, and have sex with them?, also, is World domination peaceful? and as we look at the World today is it not true that most of the slavery (65%) is in Muslim controlled area’s and a lot of the violence is caused by Muslims inflicting their regime on others (infidels)???
Corey
August 22, 2014 at 3:15 PM
So many fallacies committed on this site its outstandingly shocking especially its lopsidedness.
1. If you make any honest evaluation about Islam it’s automatically considered “Islamophobic”, bigoted, and anti-islam propaganda. We’ll, don’t all arguments for and against have a degree of bias? DUH!
2. If you state any acts of violence on Islam, the reply will mostly state an act of violence from a westerner Christian as if it makes the Islamic violent act justified. No, it doesn’t and don’t assume that every commentator is automatically a Western Christian. It’s annoying. You’re judging someone for judging. That’s plain wrong, self-contradicting, and ironic. Please stop bringing up the crusades and Salem witch trials as if it were happening today or if it was even possible now! The hatchet is buried but I can’t say the same for ISIS, Al Qaeda, or Hamas that is currently happening.
3. If you state any facts and numbers against Islam, its automatically wrong, fudged, biased, brought into question, disregarded, avoided, or considered misinterpreted
4. If you cite facts from the news it’s automatically regarded as western propaganda. (OK so if I can’t get it from the news or newspaper, then where exactly am I supposed to get it from then? And where are you getting your sources from to refute that? Are you actually responding from Damascus through real time observation? I’ll bet not)
5. I actually own a copy of the Hadiths and the Koran. But if I cite sources from there supporting my position, then Muslims here will be quick to reply and state that “I am mistranslating it” and that “I am not qualified because I am not a professor” or “or I am not an expert”. We’ll, when you make that subjective statement, you are admitting that “ONLY A MUSLIM PROFESSOR KNOWS THE TRUTH!” So, if that’s the case, then why are you non-professors here correcting my translation then? Did anyone of you graduated from Al-Ahzar with a doctorate in Muslim theology? No, I didn’t think so, therefore you are not qualified to correct me either under your premise. Another contradiction.
By the way, CAIR is all rhetoric and banter- when they say “we condemn Isis for their barbarous acts”, what exactly does condemnation in action look like?”….All I see is silence, a couple of tweets, and a few banners up. Yeah, like that’s really going to make a difference. They spend so much time condemning “extremist” and insisting that Muslims are peaceful but hardly invest in any energy in something tangible and concrete or spell out and identify the plan of action. Again, it’s all rhetoric and banter. For the rest of the 90% peaceful and moderate Muslims out there, what exactly is your game plan to combat with your extremist counterparts that are heavily funded with fully automatic AK 47’s, RPGs, and armored vehicles looking for blood?
The proper question to ask is not “is Islam a violet religion” but “are violent religious extremist are actually Islam in theology?” If they truly aren’t, then isn’t it a grave sin that should be punishable by death by using Allah and Mohammad for a lie? So why aren’t you moderate Muslims punishing them??
Corey
August 22, 2014 at 3:26 PM
THERE WILL NEVER BE A SOLUTION TO THIS PROBLEM:
The reason why this problem will persists and thrive is because of how the religious and democratic system is set up. Governments like the US and Britain will protect religious difference and express religious freedom. However, part of the religion of Islam is that they must spread the Sharia Law which is in direct opposition to that country’s constitution and laws. Islam does not separate state and religion like the US because they are inseparable elements. It’s what make them fully Muslim. So in other words, a country will protect a religion whose duties are to enforce a law that supersedes that country’s own law. In effect, that country is willingly accepting a parasite to its democracy because both laws cannot coincide. But it gets even trickier because Extremist can hide, blend in, or deny their true self by using “taquiya” tactic. So this host country is confused not knowing which Muslims are actually extremists. However, when the host country sets parameters, restrictions, and monitoring it’s considered profiling, unconstitutional, and everyone suffer trading their freedom for heightened security. Consequentially, that country gets weaker and weaker, and radical Islam only gets stronger as they are having larger populations booms and recruiting. THIS IS THE END OF DEMOCRACY.
The other problem is that these extremist believe that their view is not radical but actually correct. However they will never fight a “moderate” Muslim because of their views that they can’t harm another Muslim, extreme or not. Moderate Muslims will do nothing back (because they have nothing to lose and know that extremist will not harm them but protect them) but release rhetorical statements of condemnation which is useless and ineffective. The ignorant Westerner will buy into it not realizing that nothing was even solved. So who’s then left to fight these extremist? Only the Westerners and other democratic countries! They are the damage control, while the moderate sits back safe, perpetuating that Islam is a religion of peace.
Peaceful Moderate Muslims are the victors here! US and the rest of the west will protect their religion because of constitutional rights and will not fight them because they’re the “peaceful ones”. However, the “extremist ones” will spread Islam and do the fighting for them while never harming their moderate brothers. GENIUS!!! JUST PURE GENIUS!!!! America is too stupid to realize this! America created a system that invites, embraces, and protects a conflicting religion that wants to destroy it.
Nasser
October 1, 2014 at 2:19 PM
All over the internet u see confused atheists trying to get a reaction out of muslims then u have a few equally confused christians supporting them against believers and these so called christians dont even bother thinking that when theyre ridiculing a faith theyre actually taking a stance against belief christians are believers atheists are not let atheists attack religion they have no belief or morals arent u christians suppose to be different?
Anon
October 10, 2014 at 1:54 PM
Of course Islam is a religion of Peace. Just ask the Palestinian Liberation Organization, Muslim Brotherhood, Fatah, Hezbollah, Islamic Jihad, Palestinian Authority, Hamas, AL Qaeda, and ISIS responsible for thousands of innocent lives from immoral, inhuman, and barbaric acts of terrorism. Many of these educated muftis, imams, ayatollahs, caliphs just happen to misinterpret the Quran entirely wrong for some reason.
If we are not to judge and generalize all Muslims based on a few of these organizations because they are radical THEN you should not judge all Americans, Westerners, Christians, Israelis, or Jews on a few terrorist acts because those few are just “radicals” too right?
Ton Cek
November 4, 2014 at 5:28 PM
Violence and Islam are interwoven for one main reason. Islam’s adherents have been, throughout history, and to this day, pursuing an imperial objective. This means that they have in common two factors that all pre-industrial empires had. Firstly, they could not acquire large swathes of territory without the use of violence and, secondly, they needed to convert captives into slaves in order to ensure that their empire could function without too many uprisings.Both pre-industrial Islam and pre-industrial Christianity have been collectively responsible for the death and enslavement of hundreds of millions of people on 6 continents in the period from 622 to 1800 CE. This is something that Islamic and Christian apologists cannot deflect. Compare the actions of these two evil religions with China which confined itself to its own territorial borders for most of its history.
Ton Cek
November 4, 2014 at 5:36 PM
Any doubt that the Qur’an is a conquest manifesto is dispelled by the actions of extremists who point to “god’s commands” to conquer and kill infidels. The west is responsible for opening the door to Muslim extremism by invading Iraq in 2003 but the Qur’an is the reason that the world is talking about Muslim extremist violence. Even if there was no oil in the Middle East Islam’s adherents would continue to pursue Islam’s imperialist objectives. Islam is at its core a totalitarian system in the same way as Genghis Khan’s Mongol Hordes, the pre-Industrial Roman Catholic Church, Militarism, Communism, Fascism and the worst aspects of capitalism. All these ideologies have several common features. No form of dissent is allowed. Propaganda is central to the spread of the ideology and history is written to suit the state view. I
Ton Cek
November 4, 2014 at 5:40 PM
The followers of Islam have found a new weapon in their pursuit of their imperialist objective. The enshrined inequality between males and females has ensured that Muslim females have no say in the number of children they want. The husband master has decided that children can become weapons, with which the conversion of so called infidels can be achieved in their own countries over time. They have been aided in this process by politically correct and inept western leaders that are refusing to accept that Islam is a totalitarian ideology. By using the west’s freedoms such as free speech, freedom to practice any religion, freedom to congregate in Muslim only ghettos and so on Islam’s adherents are poised to conquer the west within 3 or so generations.
Ton Cek
November 4, 2014 at 5:44 PM
If the Qur’an was truly the word of god it would have no reference to violence and slavery because it is inconceivable for the creator of the universe to show petty favouritism to any one group of humans in a Universe with billions of sentient species. Should the daycome that the Islamic conquest of the world is achieved taht will be the day when a perpetual Dark Age will descend upon earth and freedom of thought, freedom of speech, freedom of expression, freedom to practice any religion, freedom to dissent and protest will be replaced by a barbaric legal code from the Stone Age when pagan religions first began their hold on humans.
Athea Marcos Amir
November 22, 2014 at 11:11 AM
If you have to apologize to so many people so many times about your religion, then drop it! And, by the way, most Buddhist scholars do not consider Buddhism a religion, but more of an instruction manual for life. Why? Buddhism doesn’t subscribe to the idea of a ‘creator,’ it tells you not be believe anything on authority, it has no object of worship (“If you meet the Buddha on the road, kill him,” means not even to hold up the Buddha himself as an authority! Not to have the ‘stench’ of Buddhism, being too pious and holier-than-thou. ).
For goodness sakes, folks, this is 2014, almost 2015. It’s time to abandon tribalism, superstition, and religion, don’t you think? They are all based on fear and/or control. The world will never be a safe, happy, peaceful place until we wake up to the fact that ‘we’ are the only ones who can help ‘us.’ There is no Santa Claus, Easter Bunny, Loch Ness Monster, or god(ess). The message of Buddhism is simple: WAKE UP! Watch Richard Dawkins, the late Christopher Hitchens, Daniel Dennett, Sam Harris on YouTube. They are not only brilliant but hysterically funny. All this apologia reminds me of the joke, “Apart from that, Mrs. Lincoln, how did you enjoy the play?”
Athea Marcos Amir
November 22, 2014 at 11:32 AM
And, by the way, it just occurred to me that being a so-called “moderate muslim” (i.e., one who ignores the depraved tenets of Islam) is like being a siamese twin with a psycopath attached to you!
Tom Thumb
March 28, 2015 at 9:33 AM
Islam isn’t a violent religion? When you ask Muslims where they get their history about the Quran and what Mohammed did, they’ll refer to hadiths and biographies of Mohammed. The most reliable and authentic ones they refer to are the Sahih Bukhaari , Saheeh Muslim, Karen Armstrong’s biography, and Michael Cook’s Muhammad. The funny thing is that they all state how violent Mohammed was. Isn’t it Muslim’s duty to emulate Mohammed because he’s a “man for all ages”? So why aren’t they stoning Adulterers, drunks, and cutting off hands? Moderate Muslims aren’t really following Mohammed, they are Muslim by Title only. Just go to Dearborn Michigan and see how many young Muslims will hit the clubs up, drink, smoke weed, hook up with non-Muslims, and eat pork all while still claiming to be Muslim. Yeah, OK. Go try to be a “moderate Muslim” in the middle east. Good luck with that. The only reason why most Muslim can claim moderatism is because they live in a country that that defends their right to interpret the Koran. I’ll bet none of you guys are responding from Iran, Afghanistan, or Pakistan.
Aly Balagamwala
March 30, 2015 at 4:29 AM
Dear Tom
I am a Muslim male, living in Pakistan and I consider myself moderate. Do I fit the standards of being “moderate” as set out by the west. Most likely not because as you said yourself ‘Moderate Muslims aren’t really following Mohammed, they are Muslim by Title only.’ Frankly those people are not moderate Muslims but errant ones, may Allah guide them and us to be good Muslims.
Best Regards
Aly
*Comment above is posted in a personal capacity and may not reflect the official views of MuslimMatters or its staff*
Lawrence
November 15, 2015 at 1:32 PM
I have nothing against religions themselves per se, but I wonder how come some are oftentimes used to promote war and violence. For example, over 80% of Egyptians say apostasy should be punished by death. Where does this stem from? Why so many societies with Muslim majority have these kinds of thoughts even if they were not exceptionally poor or people were well educated, such as Iran? Even the most fundamental Christians or say Buddhists don’t usually have so harsh opinions on apostates. People have always fought and would keep fighting even if everyone were atheists. But why in many Muslim majority countries does general populace have so unforgiving opinions? If we assume it doesn’t stem from religion itself, which parts of the culture are to be blamed?
John
February 14, 2017 at 10:47 AM
Killing those who disagree with you , what oath ? How can I trust someone who kills me if I disagree with him?