What Could Possibly Be Wrong About Building A Mosque Named Cordoba at Ground Zero?
By Abdullah Al Araby
The news is out. The Muslims of America are planning to build a $100 million mosque across the street from 9/11’s Ground Zero in New York City. So far, for most Americans there is nothing notable about such news. We are getting used to seeing magnificent multimillion dollar mosques spring up here and there throughout our nation. Little do we realize the extent to which such mosques serve multi-purposes beyond their stated functions as educational centers and places of worship for Muslims. In addition, they are advertisements for gaining converts to Islam. As you will soon understand, the Ground Zero Mosque signals something very significant to the entire Islamic World.
America is the global symbol for religious freedom. We even demonstrate tolerance for religions like Islam that do not show the same tolerance for Americans who want to build churches in Islamic nations. For instance, in Saudi Arabia, Christians are not allowed to build a church on its soil. In Egypt; Coptic Christians need a Presidential Decree of approval to build a church. In addition, such approvals require red tape security clearances that can take decades to obtain.
But, our attitude is, “that is just the way it is in the Islamic World.” For us, the contrast between them and us is expected in matters about religious tolerance.
But, do we really understand the extent of the contrast?
America is a huge country encompassing fifty states. The States are already saturated with over 1200 mosques that have been built in recent years. When Muslims ask for a permit to build a new mosque, nobody ask if there is a need for another mosque. Nobody is required to give an answer. Our attitude is let them build whatever they like, wherever they like. It is of no problem to us. .
However, alarms of some sort ought to arise when a new mosque is planned just a few hundred feet away from where the Twin Towers once stood. Alarms should sound that it was Muslim terrorists that brought down the Twin Towers and took 3,000 lives while doing so. That should spark some pointed questions in the minds of conscientious Americans.
What message is the building of the Ground Zero Mosque sending to Americans? The message is clear; it is a reminder of the defeat of America by Muslims in the Battle of Manhattan on September 11, 2001. The defeat caused the towers of the World Trade Center, the symbol of the American economy, to collapse. In its place, Muslims are planning a 13 story Islamic Center that will cost 100 million dollars. The proposed Islamic Center will consist of a museum, a library, and a mosque. The top floor will feature skyscraper minaret. Five times daily, Muslims will be called to prayer from that minaret. The Arabic prayers will be blasted over loud speakers down upon the very spot where over 20,000 victim body parts were collected in the aftermath of that horrible day.
It is a humiliating message to America. It is an insult to the country that generously provided safe havens to Muslims, many of whom were persecuted in their Islamic mother countries.
And, what message will this send to the families of the victims of September 11, 2001? About 3,000 people were killed on that tragic day. Those people never harbored any animosity towards Islam or Muslims. They never pointed a gun at Muslims. They never uttered unkind words about Muslims. Nevertheless, they found themselves facing terrifying deaths. Some burnt to death. Many died by toxic smoke inhalations. Others jumped to their deaths to get relief from the flames. Countless others were blown to bits by the crashing planes and their body parts were scattered throughout the area. .
But, the insult intensifies with the name the Muslims plan to give their new mosque!
The name of the proposed mosque is The Cordoba Mosque.
A little glance back in Islamic history will reveal the significance of naming a mosque on American soil the Cordoba Mosque. We must travel back in time to the hegira period of 622 A.D. The hegira period began after Mohammad moved his headquarters in Arabia from Mecca to Medina. That is when he was transformed from an eccentric religionist to a Jihad warlord. During that era his armies conquered much of the Mediterranean World including Andalusia in Spain. Huge sections of civilization were conquered by Muslims and became part of the Islamic Empire. It was ruled by the Umayyad dynasty with Damascus as its capital. After the fall of the Umayyad dynasty and the rise of the Abbasid dynasty, a bitter war took place to eliminate the Umayyad rulers in all of the empire. However, Muslims in Andalusia chose a young man of the Umayyad by the name of Abdel Rahman Aldakhel to be their ruler. Aldakhel was one of few Umayyads that was able to escape the Abbasid crush.
Aldakhel ruled Andalusia for 34 years and was credited with many accomplishments. His greatest feat was initiating the project of building the Cordoba Mosque. The mosque started a little after the First Hegira Century. As time passed it was enlarged by subsequent rulers. It was completed 250 years later. It was acclaimed as the benchmark of Islamic architecture.
Until this day, Muslims sing the praises of The Cordoba Mosque. The mosque was said to be an architectural master piece, the best structure ever designed by Muslim engineers.
However, after the fall of Cordoba to Spain, some 774 years ago, the mosque was turned into a Catholic church. From that day until this, it is heavily guarded by Spanish police. Spanish authorities refused to give the mosque back to Muslim rulers. They would not sell it back to them no matter what price was offered. At this juncture in history, Muslims are forbidden to even pray at the site
The picture will get clearer about what the Cordoba title means for the Ground Zero Mosque when you understand the following fact and ask the following questions. The fact is the building site was formerly owned by the Catholic Church. Could the Cordoba Mosque project in Manhattan, New York possibly be a settling of ancient scores with the Christian World for what happened to the ancient Cordoba Mosque in Andalusia, Spain centuries ago? Is the fact that the mosque is to be built a few hundred feet from the site of the Battle of Manhattan significant? Could it be that the Muslims are signaling something that Americans would never guess? Shouldn’t we be a little suspicious to learn that much of the funding is coming from Islamic strongholds that aid and abet terrorists? Is it possible that the building of the Cordoba Mosque near 9/11’s catastrophic site is the Islamic World’s prideful celebration of the defeat of the greatest military force in the world? Does it give them ongoing good cause to rejoice over the two towers of the World Trade Center crumbling into ashes and piles of debris? The Islamic World is very much into symbolisms. On September the 11th, 1683 the Muslim Jihad armies were defeated at Europe’s door. The timing of the 9/11/2001 attack on America’s shores was not coincidental. It was a signal to the home of the free and Christians everywhere that Islam has regained its strength and is back with a vengeance. Are we wise to think there are no correlations between the Muslim loss of the Cordoba Mosque 1000 years ago and rebuilding another of the same name in present day America?
But, of what benefit is for anyone to dig up old memories remindful of bitterness that affected almost everybody. In that event, memory wouldn’t forget the Cathedral of Hagia Sophia that was built in the 6th Century in Istanbul, Turkey. The conquering Muslims turned it into a mosque for 5 centuries. It has subsequently been changed into a museum.
An important question needs to be posed. Is the planned building of the new Cordoba Mosque in New York a genuine attempt to bring healing and peace amongst people of different faiths? Or, is it a call to reopen old wounds and to cause streams of blood to run?
Surely, the building of that mosque does not help the efforts of reconciliation between followers of different religions in America. If I were a Muslim, I would object to building the mosque. My concern would be that building a mosque on the designated site at this time would be inappropriate. Naming the edifice the Cordoba Mosque does not serve the best interest of anyone. If American Muslims and the Islamic World at large really want peace they should realize that building a Cordoba Mosque near Ground Zero is an inflammatory and provocative act of grotesque proportions.
If American Muslims intend to really honor the martyrs of September 11, here is a suggestion that would do it. They can buy full-page ads in major newspapers and on major TV networks around the country to commemorate the 10th anniversary of the 9/11 tragedy. The gist of the ads could state something like this: “On the occasion of the tenth commemoration of the attack of September 11, 2001, we, the Muslims of America, unconditionally condemn the attack as evil attack. We condemn the terrorists and the terrorist organization that planed and funded it. We deeply regret that Islamic religious texts were used to justify violence and the killing of innocent people. We declare that we honor those who died and those who were injured on that day. We send our sincere condolences to their families and loved ones. On behalf of every Muslim in the world, we apologize to the United States.”
Friday, 14 October 2011
American Muslims and the Question of Loyalty
American Muslims and the Question of Loyalty
By Abdullah Al Araby
Today is the fifth of November, 2009, and the hot news that is circulating the American and international media comes from Texas. An American officer of Palestinian Islamic heritage opened fire on his American officers’ colleagues in Ft. Hood, killing at least thirteen and injuring thirty while he was crying “Allaho Akbar” (God is great). A guard at the camp shot him four times to stop him; otherwise the causalities could have been greater.
The details are still coming out but from what we know so far, the name of the attacker is Major Nidal Malik Hasan; he works as a psychiatrist in the armed forces. He volunteered to join the military and was educated at the expense of the American military until finishing medical school and specializing in psychiatry. As for the motive behind the crime, it is believed to being upset after receiving orders to get prepared to go to Afghanistan to join the American forces already there fighting Al Qaeda and Taliban.
This is not the first time when an American Muslim soldier turns his gun towards his mates. There is a long list of similar incidents. As an example, on March 23, 2003, Hassan Akbar killed two of his colleagues: Captain Christopher Seifert and Major Gregory Stone, and 14 other soldiers while they were fighting in Iraq.
This is not a justification to make a blanket statement condemning all American Muslims as being disloyal to America. The United States is home to an estimated three to six million Muslims. Many of them immigrated to the United States fleeing persecution in their Muslim mother countries. The United States accepted them and offered them a safe haven. There is no doubt that the majority of American Muslims is peaceful, productive and law abiding citizens. They pay their taxes and do their fair share in contributing to the prosperity of this country.
But these repeated incidents of betrayal within the military, in addition to other terrorist attacks committed by Muslims, and the attacks that were foiled by our home security forces, as well as the possibility of more acts committed by sleeping cells; all these force Americans to explore the roots behind it. Certainly, there must be a religious ideology that pushes these Muslim fundamentalist zealous to act against the very country that hosted them and extended to them a helping hand.
For sure, those who adopt this line of thinking believe that they owe a loyalty only to Islam. Being loyal to the country that they hold its citizenship carries no weight at all to them. America to them is an infidel country with a majority of non-Muslims population, mostly Christians and Jews. Also, America to them is the country that is currently engaged in fighting Muslim countries in Iraq and Afghanistan. Muslim principals oblige Muslims not to kill another Muslim under any circumstances. In addition, Islam orders Muslims to support their Muslim brothers whether justly or otherwise. Nidal, himself, was quoted as saying that he is a Muslim first and an American second. From the testimony of Imams in the mosques that he frequented, all of them say that he was a good Muslim. Perhaps he was too good of a Muslim to be a good American soldier, as his religion dictates.
Islam has rules regarding all issues of life. One of these issues pertains to immigrating to live among infidels in non-Muslim countries.
Islam divides the world into two camps: the House of Islam and the House of War. The House of Islam is where Muslims live, and the House of War is where non-Muslims live. The Muslims living in the House of Islam are in a constant state of war with non-Muslims living in the House of War until they are defeated and are subjugated to Islam. The general rule is that Muslims are not allowed to live in any place other than the House of Islam. If a Muslim happened to live in a country where the majority is non-Muslim, he/she must leave it to live in an Islamic country. This, unless he is either unable or has a good reason for staying.
These principles are based on what has been mentioned in the Quran, (Sura An Nisa: 97-99)
97. When angels take the souls of those who die in sin against their souls, they say: "In what (plight) Were ye?" They reply: "Weak and oppressed Were we in the earth." They say: "Was not the earth of Allah spacious enough for you to move yourselves away (From evil)?" Such men will find their abode in Hell,- What an evil refuge! -
98. Except those who are (really) weak and oppressed - men, women, and children - who have no means in their power, nor (a guide-post) to their way.
99. For these, there is hope that Allah will forgive: For Allah doth blot out (sins) and forgive again and again.
In The Haddith attributed to Mohammed, the Prophet of Islam says,” I am innocent of any Muslim who resides among the polyesters.”
It is clear that the Muslim is only allowed to live in a non-Muslim country only when there is a good reason to justify it. This is what Muslim scholar Al Kortobgy says, “A Muslim can abandon the necessity to immigrate away from non-Muslim countries only if he lacks the means (money) or the way (transportation) to do so.”
The opinion accepted by most Muslim theologians, is unacceptable for Muslim to continue residing among the infidels unless there is a benefit to Muslims from it. They cite an evidence for it when Al Abbas decided to stay in Mecca among the polyesters even after Mohammed and his companions decided to immigrate to Medina. The reason was that Al Abbas wanted to stay in Mecca to inform Mohammed of what is taking place there. In other words, he was acting as a spy for Mohammed. Other than that, it is not preferred that a Muslim continues living among infidels for fear he may be influenced by their way of life and may imitate them.
Muslim scholars also warn Muslims of obtaining the citizenship of an infidel country lest they may be forced to join their military and participate in wars against Muslim countries as it is going on now in Iraq and Afghanistan.
These Islamic rules cast doubts on the intentions of fundamentalist Muslims when they insist on residing in a non-Muslim country like America. It should make us question their motive, and whether they have an agenda from staying in America.
America must understand that Islam forbids Muslims from participating in its wars especially against Islamic countries. The strange thing is, while these Muslims are fully aware of that, yet they are the ones who volunteer to join the American army. They probably do so to take advantage of all the benefits that they will gain, such as free education. It has been reported that the cost of educating Nidal amounts to about half a million dollars. Nidal actually volunteered to join the military, and to improve his chances to be accepted, he lied in the application maintaining that he doesn’t have any religious affiliation. Statistics says that there are between ten to twenty thousands Muslims in the United States armed forces. Perhaps they wanted to have the cake and eat it too. They wanted to take advantage of the benefits, while they hope to be lucky enough not to be called on for duty. Catastrophes take place when things don’t go exactly as hoped for.
Walid Shoebat, a Christian converted from Islam, who was once a member of Al Fateh Palestinian terrorist group summed it all when he said, “America needs to be awakened from its sleep and its unwillingness to face the issues of fundamentalist Islam in our midst which is the cause of the tragedy at Ft. Hood.” He added, “Some very serious decisions need to be made when it comes to having Muslims protecting our country, as it is impossible to know whether they maybe honorable or foxes in the hen house.”
The bottom line, since you can not differentiate between who is a fundamentalist Muslim and who is not, America has no choice but; ban all Muslims from its military.
top
By Abdullah Al Araby
Today is the fifth of November, 2009, and the hot news that is circulating the American and international media comes from Texas. An American officer of Palestinian Islamic heritage opened fire on his American officers’ colleagues in Ft. Hood, killing at least thirteen and injuring thirty while he was crying “Allaho Akbar” (God is great). A guard at the camp shot him four times to stop him; otherwise the causalities could have been greater.
The details are still coming out but from what we know so far, the name of the attacker is Major Nidal Malik Hasan; he works as a psychiatrist in the armed forces. He volunteered to join the military and was educated at the expense of the American military until finishing medical school and specializing in psychiatry. As for the motive behind the crime, it is believed to being upset after receiving orders to get prepared to go to Afghanistan to join the American forces already there fighting Al Qaeda and Taliban.
This is not the first time when an American Muslim soldier turns his gun towards his mates. There is a long list of similar incidents. As an example, on March 23, 2003, Hassan Akbar killed two of his colleagues: Captain Christopher Seifert and Major Gregory Stone, and 14 other soldiers while they were fighting in Iraq.
This is not a justification to make a blanket statement condemning all American Muslims as being disloyal to America. The United States is home to an estimated three to six million Muslims. Many of them immigrated to the United States fleeing persecution in their Muslim mother countries. The United States accepted them and offered them a safe haven. There is no doubt that the majority of American Muslims is peaceful, productive and law abiding citizens. They pay their taxes and do their fair share in contributing to the prosperity of this country.
But these repeated incidents of betrayal within the military, in addition to other terrorist attacks committed by Muslims, and the attacks that were foiled by our home security forces, as well as the possibility of more acts committed by sleeping cells; all these force Americans to explore the roots behind it. Certainly, there must be a religious ideology that pushes these Muslim fundamentalist zealous to act against the very country that hosted them and extended to them a helping hand.
For sure, those who adopt this line of thinking believe that they owe a loyalty only to Islam. Being loyal to the country that they hold its citizenship carries no weight at all to them. America to them is an infidel country with a majority of non-Muslims population, mostly Christians and Jews. Also, America to them is the country that is currently engaged in fighting Muslim countries in Iraq and Afghanistan. Muslim principals oblige Muslims not to kill another Muslim under any circumstances. In addition, Islam orders Muslims to support their Muslim brothers whether justly or otherwise. Nidal, himself, was quoted as saying that he is a Muslim first and an American second. From the testimony of Imams in the mosques that he frequented, all of them say that he was a good Muslim. Perhaps he was too good of a Muslim to be a good American soldier, as his religion dictates.
Islam has rules regarding all issues of life. One of these issues pertains to immigrating to live among infidels in non-Muslim countries.
Islam divides the world into two camps: the House of Islam and the House of War. The House of Islam is where Muslims live, and the House of War is where non-Muslims live. The Muslims living in the House of Islam are in a constant state of war with non-Muslims living in the House of War until they are defeated and are subjugated to Islam. The general rule is that Muslims are not allowed to live in any place other than the House of Islam. If a Muslim happened to live in a country where the majority is non-Muslim, he/she must leave it to live in an Islamic country. This, unless he is either unable or has a good reason for staying.
These principles are based on what has been mentioned in the Quran, (Sura An Nisa: 97-99)
97. When angels take the souls of those who die in sin against their souls, they say: "In what (plight) Were ye?" They reply: "Weak and oppressed Were we in the earth." They say: "Was not the earth of Allah spacious enough for you to move yourselves away (From evil)?" Such men will find their abode in Hell,- What an evil refuge! -
98. Except those who are (really) weak and oppressed - men, women, and children - who have no means in their power, nor (a guide-post) to their way.
99. For these, there is hope that Allah will forgive: For Allah doth blot out (sins) and forgive again and again.
In The Haddith attributed to Mohammed, the Prophet of Islam says,” I am innocent of any Muslim who resides among the polyesters.”
It is clear that the Muslim is only allowed to live in a non-Muslim country only when there is a good reason to justify it. This is what Muslim scholar Al Kortobgy says, “A Muslim can abandon the necessity to immigrate away from non-Muslim countries only if he lacks the means (money) or the way (transportation) to do so.”
The opinion accepted by most Muslim theologians, is unacceptable for Muslim to continue residing among the infidels unless there is a benefit to Muslims from it. They cite an evidence for it when Al Abbas decided to stay in Mecca among the polyesters even after Mohammed and his companions decided to immigrate to Medina. The reason was that Al Abbas wanted to stay in Mecca to inform Mohammed of what is taking place there. In other words, he was acting as a spy for Mohammed. Other than that, it is not preferred that a Muslim continues living among infidels for fear he may be influenced by their way of life and may imitate them.
Muslim scholars also warn Muslims of obtaining the citizenship of an infidel country lest they may be forced to join their military and participate in wars against Muslim countries as it is going on now in Iraq and Afghanistan.
These Islamic rules cast doubts on the intentions of fundamentalist Muslims when they insist on residing in a non-Muslim country like America. It should make us question their motive, and whether they have an agenda from staying in America.
America must understand that Islam forbids Muslims from participating in its wars especially against Islamic countries. The strange thing is, while these Muslims are fully aware of that, yet they are the ones who volunteer to join the American army. They probably do so to take advantage of all the benefits that they will gain, such as free education. It has been reported that the cost of educating Nidal amounts to about half a million dollars. Nidal actually volunteered to join the military, and to improve his chances to be accepted, he lied in the application maintaining that he doesn’t have any religious affiliation. Statistics says that there are between ten to twenty thousands Muslims in the United States armed forces. Perhaps they wanted to have the cake and eat it too. They wanted to take advantage of the benefits, while they hope to be lucky enough not to be called on for duty. Catastrophes take place when things don’t go exactly as hoped for.
Walid Shoebat, a Christian converted from Islam, who was once a member of Al Fateh Palestinian terrorist group summed it all when he said, “America needs to be awakened from its sleep and its unwillingness to face the issues of fundamentalist Islam in our midst which is the cause of the tragedy at Ft. Hood.” He added, “Some very serious decisions need to be made when it comes to having Muslims protecting our country, as it is impossible to know whether they maybe honorable or foxes in the hen house.”
The bottom line, since you can not differentiate between who is a fundamentalist Muslim and who is not, America has no choice but; ban all Muslims from its military.
top
Tolerant Verses
Tolerant Verses
One of the most popular tactics that Muslims utilize to promote their religion is quotes from the portions of the Quran that Mohammad wrote while he headquartered in Mecca during the first years of Islam. In that stage of Islam’s development it was weak in numbers and influence. At that time he was trying to win the support of the Arabs by peaceful means. His attitudes and strategies completely changed after he moved to Medina. There his movement gained numbers and he was able to organize a strong army and to impose his religion by force. In order to cover the contradictions between the tone of the verses written in Mecca and those written in Medina, Mohammad came up with the doctrine of the abrogator and the abrogated. It nullifies the Quran’s Meccan revelations and replaces them with those of Medina. When Islamists quote the Mecca verses that sound peaceful and conciliatory they know full well that those verses have been rendered obsolete by the more recent Medinian verses. Here are some examples of the Mecca verses that they use:
Say : O ye that reject Faith!
I worship not that which ye worship,
Nor will ye worship that which I worship.
And I will not worship that which ye have been wont to worship,
Nor will ye worship that which I worship.
To you be your Way, and to me mine Sura 109: 1-6
Say, "The truth is from your Lord": Let him who will believe, and let him who will, reject (it): for the wrong-doers We have prepared a Fire whose (smoke and flames), like the walls and roof of a tent, will hem them in: if they implore relief they will be granted water like melted brass, that will scald their faces, how dreadful the drink! How uncomfortable a couch to recline on! Sura 18:29
Let there be no compulsion in religion: Truth stands out clear from Error: whoever rejects evil and believes in Allah hath grasped the most trustworthy hand-hold, that never breaks. And Allah heareth and knoweth all things . Sura 2:256
What do the Quran and Hadith really teach about Apostasy?
In the Quran
Most Quranic references deal with how God looks on apostates and how he is going to punish them in the Day of Judgment. The first verse has an indirect inference about apostasy, but nonetheless is used by Muslims as a basis for punishing apostates
The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger, and strive with might and main for mischief through the land is: execution, or crucifixion, or the cutting off of hands and feet from opposite sides, or exile from the land: that is their disgrace in this world, and a heavy punishment is theirs in the Hereafter; Sura 5:33
But those who reject Faith after they accepted it, and then go on adding to their defiance of Faith,- never will their repentance be accepted; for they are those who have (of set purpose) gone astray. Sura 3:90
Any one who, after accepting faith in Allah, utters Unbelief,- except under compulsion, his heart remaining firm in Faith - but such as open their breast to Unbelief, on them is Wrath from Allah, and theirs will be a dreadful Penalty. Sura 16:106
Those who believe, then reject faith, then believe (again) and (again) reject faith, and go on increasing in unbelief,- Allah will not forgive them nor guide them nor guide them on the way. Sura 4:137
In the Hadith
Ibn Abbaas said: The Messenger of Allah said, “Whoever changes his (Islamic) religion, kill him.” Al-Bukhary (number 6922)
Abd-Allah ibn Masood said: The Messenger of Allah said: “It is not permissible to shed the blood of a Muslim who bears witness that there is no god except Allah and that I am the Messenger of Allah, except in one of three cases: a soul (in case of murder); a married person who commits adultery; and one who leaves his religion and separates from the main body of Muslims.” Sahih Al Bukhary number 6484 and Sahih Muslim number 1676
How Does Islam Deal with Apostates?
An Apostate in Islam is a Muslim who rejects Islam after being either born into it or after embracing it as a convert from some other religion. An apostate is looked upon as worse than an infidel who has never professed faith in Allah and Mohammad as his prophet or in any way practiced Islam.
Apostasy in Islam is equal to treason. In Islam, politics and religion are inseparably intertwined. A famous fundamental expression in Islam says it all, “Islam is a religion and a state.” It is obvious that treason within Islam has spiritual and cultural dimensions. It does not write-off the public rejection of its fundamentals as merely private matters of personal preference in regard to religion. Such actions are viewed as bad influences on Islamic societies as a whole that could escalate into widespread seditions. That is why they deal with it so harshly.
Apostasy within Islam can encompass thoughts of the heart, words spoken and deeds. An example of apostasy of the heart would be most anything that might indicate disbelief in the supremacy of Allah. Associations with any deities such as Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit and claims that such possess divinity that parallels that of Allah would be apostasy by the heart. Apostasy of the tongue would be any words that question the authenticity of the Quran and the tenets of Islam. Serious infractions such as praying to idols, treating the Quran in a casual/disrespectful manner and ceasing to recite one’s 5 daily prayer sessions can be quickly deemed as apostasy by deeds.
There are a few types of situations in which Muslims would not be counted as liable for rejecting the faith. Ignorant mistakes, misunderstandings about Sharia Law and instances of coercion to renounce Islam would fall into this category. The principle of Al Taqeyya makes the provision that any Muslim, who renounces Allah and/or his prophet Mohammad to preserve his own life, is not guilty of apostasy. Such is solely permitted in situations wherein the Muslim was giving lip service as opposed to the true feelings of his heart. (See Sura 16:106)
Islam has two forms of apostasy; the ordinary and the extreme. The ordinary pertains to situations in which the perpetrators did not intend to bring harm and insults to Islam. Under such circumstances most schools of Muslim jurisprudence would give the guilty person three days to express repentance. Those who fail to do so can incur severe punishments including imprisonment, torture and execution. Those who are charged with extreme apostasy aren’t given opportunities to express repentance. There is no waiting period for anyone who is indicted for purposely attempting to bring harm or insults to Islam, the Quran, and Mohammad. We have heard of people executed by family members, Islamic city councils and through the auspices of National Religious-State Islamic governments. In recent years there have been reports of the aforementioned executions from Saudi Arabia, Iran, Pakistan, Egypt and Afghanistan. Unquestionably, some have been carried out secretly in Western democracies.
The various sects within Islam normally have similar policies about the severity of verdicts for female apostates as they would for men. The only difference would be that Shafiites, Malikites and Hanbalites would punish the woman exactly as they punish the man; she would be given 3 days to repent or be executed. However, the Hanafites would be more lenient. They would permit a woman to serve out her sentence through life in prison until she either comes to repentance or dies.
*********
This article has stated the truth about what Islam teaches about apostasy. It has said things that you will never hear about from moderate Muslims. Many inquiring souls in the West venture into Islam. Such people naively think that there is no harm in trying it out to see whether or not it is a religion that suits them. They presume it’s easy in and easy out. Nothing could be further from the truth. The Islamists are very deceptive about the matter. They claim that there is freedom of religion in Islam. When you press them on the issue they say that people are free to join Islam or not. But, do people have the same freedom to leave Islam, if they later discovered that this is not what they wanted? The answer is clear; people have the right to either reject or accept Islam when it’s initially presented but it is practically impossible to get out of Islam without putting one’s own life at risks.
Falling for the Muslim activists’ deceptively persuasive sales pitches to experiment with Islam by becoming a Muslim can be disastrous. Two similarly pronounced Arabic words explain it all. In Arabic it is said that the right to accept Islam is Makfoula, (meaning: guaranteed.) The “K” in that word is pronounced exactly like the English “K” from the tongue and frontal area of the mouth. There is another word, Makkfoula, that is used for those who want to exit Islam. It means denial to do so. The double “KK” is pronounced in Arabic from the throat. That word is closely akin to the Arabic word used for closing a door shut. That is precisely what happens to anyone who is either born a Muslim or naively converts to become one and then attempts to leave the faith. The door is closed and locked behind them, so that they cannot leave without being indicted for the crime of apostasy.
There is no easy in and easy out policy with Islam. Let all beware. It’s like a steel trap; once you’re in, there is no getting out.
top
One of the most popular tactics that Muslims utilize to promote their religion is quotes from the portions of the Quran that Mohammad wrote while he headquartered in Mecca during the first years of Islam. In that stage of Islam’s development it was weak in numbers and influence. At that time he was trying to win the support of the Arabs by peaceful means. His attitudes and strategies completely changed after he moved to Medina. There his movement gained numbers and he was able to organize a strong army and to impose his religion by force. In order to cover the contradictions between the tone of the verses written in Mecca and those written in Medina, Mohammad came up with the doctrine of the abrogator and the abrogated. It nullifies the Quran’s Meccan revelations and replaces them with those of Medina. When Islamists quote the Mecca verses that sound peaceful and conciliatory they know full well that those verses have been rendered obsolete by the more recent Medinian verses. Here are some examples of the Mecca verses that they use:
Say : O ye that reject Faith!
I worship not that which ye worship,
Nor will ye worship that which I worship.
And I will not worship that which ye have been wont to worship,
Nor will ye worship that which I worship.
To you be your Way, and to me mine Sura 109: 1-6
Say, "The truth is from your Lord": Let him who will believe, and let him who will, reject (it): for the wrong-doers We have prepared a Fire whose (smoke and flames), like the walls and roof of a tent, will hem them in: if they implore relief they will be granted water like melted brass, that will scald their faces, how dreadful the drink! How uncomfortable a couch to recline on! Sura 18:29
Let there be no compulsion in religion: Truth stands out clear from Error: whoever rejects evil and believes in Allah hath grasped the most trustworthy hand-hold, that never breaks. And Allah heareth and knoweth all things . Sura 2:256
What do the Quran and Hadith really teach about Apostasy?
In the Quran
Most Quranic references deal with how God looks on apostates and how he is going to punish them in the Day of Judgment. The first verse has an indirect inference about apostasy, but nonetheless is used by Muslims as a basis for punishing apostates
The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger, and strive with might and main for mischief through the land is: execution, or crucifixion, or the cutting off of hands and feet from opposite sides, or exile from the land: that is their disgrace in this world, and a heavy punishment is theirs in the Hereafter; Sura 5:33
But those who reject Faith after they accepted it, and then go on adding to their defiance of Faith,- never will their repentance be accepted; for they are those who have (of set purpose) gone astray. Sura 3:90
Any one who, after accepting faith in Allah, utters Unbelief,- except under compulsion, his heart remaining firm in Faith - but such as open their breast to Unbelief, on them is Wrath from Allah, and theirs will be a dreadful Penalty. Sura 16:106
Those who believe, then reject faith, then believe (again) and (again) reject faith, and go on increasing in unbelief,- Allah will not forgive them nor guide them nor guide them on the way. Sura 4:137
In the Hadith
Ibn Abbaas said: The Messenger of Allah said, “Whoever changes his (Islamic) religion, kill him.” Al-Bukhary (number 6922)
Abd-Allah ibn Masood said: The Messenger of Allah said: “It is not permissible to shed the blood of a Muslim who bears witness that there is no god except Allah and that I am the Messenger of Allah, except in one of three cases: a soul (in case of murder); a married person who commits adultery; and one who leaves his religion and separates from the main body of Muslims.” Sahih Al Bukhary number 6484 and Sahih Muslim number 1676
How Does Islam Deal with Apostates?
An Apostate in Islam is a Muslim who rejects Islam after being either born into it or after embracing it as a convert from some other religion. An apostate is looked upon as worse than an infidel who has never professed faith in Allah and Mohammad as his prophet or in any way practiced Islam.
Apostasy in Islam is equal to treason. In Islam, politics and religion are inseparably intertwined. A famous fundamental expression in Islam says it all, “Islam is a religion and a state.” It is obvious that treason within Islam has spiritual and cultural dimensions. It does not write-off the public rejection of its fundamentals as merely private matters of personal preference in regard to religion. Such actions are viewed as bad influences on Islamic societies as a whole that could escalate into widespread seditions. That is why they deal with it so harshly.
Apostasy within Islam can encompass thoughts of the heart, words spoken and deeds. An example of apostasy of the heart would be most anything that might indicate disbelief in the supremacy of Allah. Associations with any deities such as Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit and claims that such possess divinity that parallels that of Allah would be apostasy by the heart. Apostasy of the tongue would be any words that question the authenticity of the Quran and the tenets of Islam. Serious infractions such as praying to idols, treating the Quran in a casual/disrespectful manner and ceasing to recite one’s 5 daily prayer sessions can be quickly deemed as apostasy by deeds.
There are a few types of situations in which Muslims would not be counted as liable for rejecting the faith. Ignorant mistakes, misunderstandings about Sharia Law and instances of coercion to renounce Islam would fall into this category. The principle of Al Taqeyya makes the provision that any Muslim, who renounces Allah and/or his prophet Mohammad to preserve his own life, is not guilty of apostasy. Such is solely permitted in situations wherein the Muslim was giving lip service as opposed to the true feelings of his heart. (See Sura 16:106)
Islam has two forms of apostasy; the ordinary and the extreme. The ordinary pertains to situations in which the perpetrators did not intend to bring harm and insults to Islam. Under such circumstances most schools of Muslim jurisprudence would give the guilty person three days to express repentance. Those who fail to do so can incur severe punishments including imprisonment, torture and execution. Those who are charged with extreme apostasy aren’t given opportunities to express repentance. There is no waiting period for anyone who is indicted for purposely attempting to bring harm or insults to Islam, the Quran, and Mohammad. We have heard of people executed by family members, Islamic city councils and through the auspices of National Religious-State Islamic governments. In recent years there have been reports of the aforementioned executions from Saudi Arabia, Iran, Pakistan, Egypt and Afghanistan. Unquestionably, some have been carried out secretly in Western democracies.
The various sects within Islam normally have similar policies about the severity of verdicts for female apostates as they would for men. The only difference would be that Shafiites, Malikites and Hanbalites would punish the woman exactly as they punish the man; she would be given 3 days to repent or be executed. However, the Hanafites would be more lenient. They would permit a woman to serve out her sentence through life in prison until she either comes to repentance or dies.
*********
This article has stated the truth about what Islam teaches about apostasy. It has said things that you will never hear about from moderate Muslims. Many inquiring souls in the West venture into Islam. Such people naively think that there is no harm in trying it out to see whether or not it is a religion that suits them. They presume it’s easy in and easy out. Nothing could be further from the truth. The Islamists are very deceptive about the matter. They claim that there is freedom of religion in Islam. When you press them on the issue they say that people are free to join Islam or not. But, do people have the same freedom to leave Islam, if they later discovered that this is not what they wanted? The answer is clear; people have the right to either reject or accept Islam when it’s initially presented but it is practically impossible to get out of Islam without putting one’s own life at risks.
Falling for the Muslim activists’ deceptively persuasive sales pitches to experiment with Islam by becoming a Muslim can be disastrous. Two similarly pronounced Arabic words explain it all. In Arabic it is said that the right to accept Islam is Makfoula, (meaning: guaranteed.) The “K” in that word is pronounced exactly like the English “K” from the tongue and frontal area of the mouth. There is another word, Makkfoula, that is used for those who want to exit Islam. It means denial to do so. The double “KK” is pronounced in Arabic from the throat. That word is closely akin to the Arabic word used for closing a door shut. That is precisely what happens to anyone who is either born a Muslim or naively converts to become one and then attempts to leave the faith. The door is closed and locked behind them, so that they cannot leave without being indicted for the crime of apostasy.
There is no easy in and easy out policy with Islam. Let all beware. It’s like a steel trap; once you’re in, there is no getting out.
top
Apostasy in Islam
Apostasy in Islam
The Point of No Return
By Abdullah Al Araby
For fourteen centuries, Muslims were able to conceal some of their most outrageous teachings from the rest of the world. Their deceptions were hidden behind language, cultural and geographic barriers. Modern technology and new communication methods have made it difficult for Muslims to hide the dark side of Islam any longer. Muslim advocates, especially in the West, are now faced with the tough task of explaining the discrepancies between how they want Islam perceived as a tolerant, civil and peaceful religion; and the realties of some of its basic tenets, which are quite the opposite. They’re finding it hard to maintain the façades and to simultaneously remain faithful to the harsh doctrines that are essential to the practices of authentic Islam.
Damage control has become one of their main objectives in modern societies. It’s not unusual for various types of contradictions to happen as they do so. This was recently demonstrated by some rulings made by Sheikh Ali Gomaa, the Grand Mufti of Egypt. He is Egypt’s superior authority in charge of issuing official fatwas (Islamic religious rulings).
Ali Gomaa issued a wide range of opinions on critical issues of Islam such as Jihad, women’s status and the right of Muslims to change religions. News agencies around the world published them in multiple languages. In regard to a Muslim’s right to renounce Islam and to join another religion that is called apostasy, his initial rulings sounded lenient. The Washington Post-Newsweek forum in English was one of the forums that published his decisions.
Here are excerpts from what he said on the issue of apostasy:
“The essential question before us is: Can a person who is a Muslim choose a religion other than Islam? The answer is yes, they can, because the Quran says, ‘Unto you your religion, and unto me my religion,’ (Quran 109:6) and, ‘Whosoever will, let him believe, and whosever will, let him disbelieve,’ (Quran18:29) and, ‘There is no compulsion in religion. The right direction is distinct from error’ (Quran 2:256).”
He added, “These verses from the Quran discuss a freedom that God affords all people. But from a religious prospective, the act of abandoning one’s religion is a sin punishable by God on the Day of Judgment. If the case in Question is one of merely rejecting faith, then there is no worldly punishment.” He went on to state, “If, however, the crime of undermining the foundations of the society is added to the sin of apostasy, then the case must be referred to a judicial system whose role is to protect the integrity of the society…..According to Islam, it is not permitted for Muslims to reject their faith, so if a Muslim were to leave Islam and adopt another religion, they would thereby be committing a sin in the eyes of Islam. Religious belief and practice is a personal matter, and society only intervenes when that personal matter becomes public and threatens the well-being of its members.”
My first reaction to these statements was that I thought they were balanced and reasonable. I had hopes that Islam was softening its extreme attitudes towards those who leave Islam. It seemed that the Grand Mufti was emphasizing that Muslims do have the freedom to change religions. He emphatically implied that such matters are personal, between man and his Creator. He also asserted that although such conversions are sinful, that God, rather than man, would enact the punishments in the Day of Judgment. He only cited one exception. It would be in instances wherein a person’s conversion to another faith had the potential to undermine the foundations of a society. In such cases he suggested that the courts should get involved to settle the issue. Although I was concerned about that exception, I dismissed it as unimportant. I couldn’t imagine how a person switching religions could be interpreted as an act that could undermine the foundation of an entire society.
My hopes were soon shattered. A few days later, the Grand Mufti, issued another statement. This time he was speaking in Arabic in Cairo and what he said was completely different: “What I actually said was that Islam prohibits a Muslim from changing his religion and it’s a crime that must be punished.”
It was then that I realized that we had all been fooled, again. The Muslim strategy of only speaking half-truths was still alive and well. What is being said in places like Washington to English speaking groups is almost simultaneously retracted and rendered meaningless when they speak in Arabic in places like Cairo. What was originally presented as simply a rare and remote possible exception had become the general rule. Changing religions from Islam to another faith is interpreted as an act of apostasy. The Islamic mindset dictates that such apostasies can undermine the foundations of Muslim societies.
It’s difficult for non-Muslims to understand how a personal decision to change one’s religion by one Muslim or even hundreds could undermine an entire Islamic society. And, assuming that it could, would denial of the facts change anything? Apparently the grand Mufti thought so. However, he must have imagined that he achieved both of his goals. On one hand, it was to polish Islam’s image in the West; and on the other, he spoke the truth about Islamic polices in the Islamic world.
The only way that Islamists like the Mufti can continually get away with such deceptive maneuvers is for us to allow them to do so. There must be clarity about Islam’s consistent track record of doubletalk about thorny issues such as this one. Non-Muslims really need to know the truth about just what constitutes apostasy in the Muslim world.
The Point of No Return
By Abdullah Al Araby
For fourteen centuries, Muslims were able to conceal some of their most outrageous teachings from the rest of the world. Their deceptions were hidden behind language, cultural and geographic barriers. Modern technology and new communication methods have made it difficult for Muslims to hide the dark side of Islam any longer. Muslim advocates, especially in the West, are now faced with the tough task of explaining the discrepancies between how they want Islam perceived as a tolerant, civil and peaceful religion; and the realties of some of its basic tenets, which are quite the opposite. They’re finding it hard to maintain the façades and to simultaneously remain faithful to the harsh doctrines that are essential to the practices of authentic Islam.
Damage control has become one of their main objectives in modern societies. It’s not unusual for various types of contradictions to happen as they do so. This was recently demonstrated by some rulings made by Sheikh Ali Gomaa, the Grand Mufti of Egypt. He is Egypt’s superior authority in charge of issuing official fatwas (Islamic religious rulings).
Ali Gomaa issued a wide range of opinions on critical issues of Islam such as Jihad, women’s status and the right of Muslims to change religions. News agencies around the world published them in multiple languages. In regard to a Muslim’s right to renounce Islam and to join another religion that is called apostasy, his initial rulings sounded lenient. The Washington Post-Newsweek forum in English was one of the forums that published his decisions.
Here are excerpts from what he said on the issue of apostasy:
“The essential question before us is: Can a person who is a Muslim choose a religion other than Islam? The answer is yes, they can, because the Quran says, ‘Unto you your religion, and unto me my religion,’ (Quran 109:6) and, ‘Whosoever will, let him believe, and whosever will, let him disbelieve,’ (Quran18:29) and, ‘There is no compulsion in religion. The right direction is distinct from error’ (Quran 2:256).”
He added, “These verses from the Quran discuss a freedom that God affords all people. But from a religious prospective, the act of abandoning one’s religion is a sin punishable by God on the Day of Judgment. If the case in Question is one of merely rejecting faith, then there is no worldly punishment.” He went on to state, “If, however, the crime of undermining the foundations of the society is added to the sin of apostasy, then the case must be referred to a judicial system whose role is to protect the integrity of the society…..According to Islam, it is not permitted for Muslims to reject their faith, so if a Muslim were to leave Islam and adopt another religion, they would thereby be committing a sin in the eyes of Islam. Religious belief and practice is a personal matter, and society only intervenes when that personal matter becomes public and threatens the well-being of its members.”
My first reaction to these statements was that I thought they were balanced and reasonable. I had hopes that Islam was softening its extreme attitudes towards those who leave Islam. It seemed that the Grand Mufti was emphasizing that Muslims do have the freedom to change religions. He emphatically implied that such matters are personal, between man and his Creator. He also asserted that although such conversions are sinful, that God, rather than man, would enact the punishments in the Day of Judgment. He only cited one exception. It would be in instances wherein a person’s conversion to another faith had the potential to undermine the foundations of a society. In such cases he suggested that the courts should get involved to settle the issue. Although I was concerned about that exception, I dismissed it as unimportant. I couldn’t imagine how a person switching religions could be interpreted as an act that could undermine the foundation of an entire society.
My hopes were soon shattered. A few days later, the Grand Mufti, issued another statement. This time he was speaking in Arabic in Cairo and what he said was completely different: “What I actually said was that Islam prohibits a Muslim from changing his religion and it’s a crime that must be punished.”
It was then that I realized that we had all been fooled, again. The Muslim strategy of only speaking half-truths was still alive and well. What is being said in places like Washington to English speaking groups is almost simultaneously retracted and rendered meaningless when they speak in Arabic in places like Cairo. What was originally presented as simply a rare and remote possible exception had become the general rule. Changing religions from Islam to another faith is interpreted as an act of apostasy. The Islamic mindset dictates that such apostasies can undermine the foundations of Muslim societies.
It’s difficult for non-Muslims to understand how a personal decision to change one’s religion by one Muslim or even hundreds could undermine an entire Islamic society. And, assuming that it could, would denial of the facts change anything? Apparently the grand Mufti thought so. However, he must have imagined that he achieved both of his goals. On one hand, it was to polish Islam’s image in the West; and on the other, he spoke the truth about Islamic polices in the Islamic world.
The only way that Islamists like the Mufti can continually get away with such deceptive maneuvers is for us to allow them to do so. There must be clarity about Islam’s consistent track record of doubletalk about thorny issues such as this one. Non-Muslims really need to know the truth about just what constitutes apostasy in the Muslim world.
ALL CAPTURED HINDUS WILL BE MADE SLAVES
ALL CAPTURED HINDUS WILL BE MADE SLAVES
All the captured Hindu Indians and Srilankans will be made slaves to work for Pakistani Muslims. Every God-abiding Pakistani Muslim will get slaves once we conquer India. All the slaves who embrace Islam will be set free. Slavery is Islamic. Jamaat is the only political party, which does not voice any opposition to the slavery in Pakistan. We went around all over Arabia. We were surprised to know that there are some Hindus in Yemen. These ancient Yemeni Hindus are not Indians. In my opinion, these Hindus are traders from India in the ancient times. I was also surprised to know that they have a Shiva temple in Yemen. Qazi was very unhappy over this. When he talked to the Yemen leaders, he broached this subject. But the Yemeni leaders refused Qazi's suggestion of forced conversion of these people to Islam. I don't know why they refused. I think it may be due to the large population of Hindus from India who work in Yemen and Arabia. He disliked the current leadership of Arabia for this reason.
In his opinion, Arabia should not allow any non-Muslim into the holy lands of Arabia. Arabia should be 100% pure. A large number of Hindus in Arabia is corrupting the Arabians. Though they live as contractors, they have the potential to corrupt the minds of the Arabians.
HINDU TEMPLES POLLUTE MUSLIM LANDS
One such thing is the presence of Arabians in the Qatar Hindu temple. First the king allowed the Hindus to build a temple and church in the holy lands, thereby polluting the Holy Land. Second is that even a member of the Royal family visited that temple to inaugurate that temple. To the horror of Qazi, he had learnt that one of the powerful members of the Qatar Royal family is a devotee of a god called Aayappan. This news resolved Qazi to fight the force of the devil thousand fold.
Q: Such things happen in Pakistan today. I mean a friend of mine goes to a Hindu temple. Another friend goes to church meetings.
A: Yes. One of Qazi's relatives wanted to become a Hindu. He did not have a child for many years and it seems he had prayed to a Hindu God and got the child. Hence he felt thankful to that god and wanted to become a Hindu. Qazi got to know of this and called him and threatened him with dire consequences. That relative did not become a Hindu. But that incident made Qazi read more about apostasy.
PUNISHMENT FOR APOSTASY IS DEATH
Quran and Hadith clearly say the punishment for abandonment of Islam is death. Since Sharia is not the law in Pakistan, and the current Pakistani Constitution grants the right to change religion, it is legally correct to declare oneself as Hindu or Christian. But once the JI takes over the government, it will make Sharia as the Constitution. Then Pakistan will also legally execute any person who leaves Islam and joins Ahmaddiah, Christianity or Hinduism the same way Iran and Taliban treats its apostates. He also opined that the presence of the Hindu temples in Pakistan is the root cause of the problem and hence we want to destroy all the Hindu temples and Churches in Pakistan.
Q: This brings us into another area. Right now the Internet is becoming widespread. Even Saudi Arabia is connected with the outside world. Destroying the temples may be good, but how can we insulate the Pakistani and Muslim people against the corrupting knowledge totally?
A: JI had taken a principled stand on the matter of science and religion. Religion is far superior to science.
ALL THE WORLD?S KNOWLEDGE IS IN QURAN AND HADITHS
Whatever man needs to know is in the Quran and Hadiths. Knowing more will create problems like the Atom bomb and Television.
MUSIC TV AND PHOTOGRAPHY ARE SATANIC AND HARAM Quran and Hadiths are explicit in denouncing pictures. Yet the lure of Satan in the form of photography and television is eating our lives.
Music previously was confined only to the vocal singing. Now science and technology made the music widespread at a cheaper price. These are the lures of Satan. We have to be on guard against these harami things.
SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY ARE BAD FOR CIVILIZATION
Hence, more science and technology is bad for the civilization. I had completed civil engineering. Hence I am privy to scientific knowledge. I can tell you how corrupting that is. It even makes you question the glorious Quran.
EARTH IS FLAT There are many Hadiths, which say that the earth is flat. But any science will tell you the earth is a sphere. But you can use the same science like the relativity theory to prove that the earth is flat. It is the same case with evolution. But the point being that doubt is sown in the minds of the people on the validity of the Quran as the word of God. More and more we work hard to prove the Quran's scientific correctness, more and more people will get apprehensive of the truth of the Quran. This is an abomination.
WHEN ISLAM TALKS OF GET EDUCATED IT MEANS QURANIC EDUCATION
This is why when we talk of education, we talk of religious education and not scientific education.
It is true that science grew after the Prophet's revolution in Arabia. That was the start of science. Now each and every science is filled with anti-god stuff. If you want to become a doctor, you have to read evolution. If you have to read any engineering, you have to believe in the billions of years old universe theory which effectively says that human beings came to the world only just one or two million years back.
Q: But we still need the arms and knowledge of the Western world, which believes in science. And again you had referred to television as evil. If we abolish photography how can we have passports or identification cards?
A: Yes. That is strategic. With the help of Allah, we will be given oil for them to run their cars and we will have arms in that place. We will use their arms to destroy them in the course of time.
PHOTOGRAPHY WILL BE BANNED UNDER JI
As far as photos are concerned, they will be banned as it was done in Afghanistan under Taliban. If there is no need for people to go out of Pakistan, where is the need for the passports? For those who have to travel to other countries like the leaders of the revolution, they only will be given the passport with photos. For that, we will allow limited photography licensed only to the government. And the biggest corruption in today's Pakistan is Indian satellite TV and Indian cinemas and Indian songs. We have to abolish these too.
ARABIC WILL BE MADE OFFICIAL LANGUAGE OF PAKISTAN
Q: Currently we have a lot of opposition from Mohajirs regarding reservations. What kind of reservation policy will the JI will have in Pakistan?
A: We approach that problem as the problem of language. Urdu-speaking Muslims and Sindhi-speaking Muslims are fighting now. We plan to abolish all the regional languages like Pashto, Sindhi, Baluchi, Urdu, Punjabi and Brahvi. We want all the people of Pakistan to speak Arabic which is our divine language. This will make everyone equal before everyone else and there would not be any need for language or region based reservations. We also hope that this will make the Quran and Hadiths easier to understand and will make the people follow the Quran and Hadiths to the letter.
Q: There could be language riots. One such language riot resulted in Bangladesh.
A: Bangladesh was not a result of language riot. The very idea that they are Muslims will bring the Bangladeshis to Arabic. We already fund heavily the Arabic language courses all over India, Bangladesh and Pakistan. From Morocco to Iraq speaks in Arabic, I don't see any reason why from Morocco to Burma we will not bring Arabic to the people. Even Bangladesh will start speaking in Arabic. That time there won't be any Bangladesh where the country name itself has the name of the language. Yes. Right now our aim is just for reunification without touching on the language issue of Bengali. JI of Bangladesh is working towards this aim.
Q: The secular journalists of Pakistan oppose the JI. For example the Dawn and News are very critical of the JI. How do you see their role in the future?
A: Ardheshir Cowasjee is able to work only because of the present Constitution of Pakistan. When Sharia becomes the Constitution, he cannot even approach the court, as he is a kafir. We see secular journalists as our main enemy in the current struggle to reach power. These secular journalists are digging our statements we made during the pre-Independence days and trying to beat us. Of course we opposed the creation of Pakistan during the British times. But that was a different Jamaat. Our history starts with Independence.
SECULARS ARE KAFIRS
Secular journalists are not Muslims even though some of them are carrying Muslim names. Let them come to us and let us ask questions on the Quran and Hadiths. We will prove each and every thing we say is from Quran and Hadiths. Let them prove what we say as wrong from the Quranic angle. Then we will accept them. But they cannot. They cannot match us in any debate concerning the Quran and Hadiths. We can comprehensively prove that they are indeed non-Muslims.! They are like Quadianis who say that the Muslim need not take up Jihad as an obligation. That is pure nonsense.
Q: Thanks for your time.
A: May Allah's blessings be with you.
top
All the captured Hindu Indians and Srilankans will be made slaves to work for Pakistani Muslims. Every God-abiding Pakistani Muslim will get slaves once we conquer India. All the slaves who embrace Islam will be set free. Slavery is Islamic. Jamaat is the only political party, which does not voice any opposition to the slavery in Pakistan. We went around all over Arabia. We were surprised to know that there are some Hindus in Yemen. These ancient Yemeni Hindus are not Indians. In my opinion, these Hindus are traders from India in the ancient times. I was also surprised to know that they have a Shiva temple in Yemen. Qazi was very unhappy over this. When he talked to the Yemen leaders, he broached this subject. But the Yemeni leaders refused Qazi's suggestion of forced conversion of these people to Islam. I don't know why they refused. I think it may be due to the large population of Hindus from India who work in Yemen and Arabia. He disliked the current leadership of Arabia for this reason.
In his opinion, Arabia should not allow any non-Muslim into the holy lands of Arabia. Arabia should be 100% pure. A large number of Hindus in Arabia is corrupting the Arabians. Though they live as contractors, they have the potential to corrupt the minds of the Arabians.
HINDU TEMPLES POLLUTE MUSLIM LANDS
One such thing is the presence of Arabians in the Qatar Hindu temple. First the king allowed the Hindus to build a temple and church in the holy lands, thereby polluting the Holy Land. Second is that even a member of the Royal family visited that temple to inaugurate that temple. To the horror of Qazi, he had learnt that one of the powerful members of the Qatar Royal family is a devotee of a god called Aayappan. This news resolved Qazi to fight the force of the devil thousand fold.
Q: Such things happen in Pakistan today. I mean a friend of mine goes to a Hindu temple. Another friend goes to church meetings.
A: Yes. One of Qazi's relatives wanted to become a Hindu. He did not have a child for many years and it seems he had prayed to a Hindu God and got the child. Hence he felt thankful to that god and wanted to become a Hindu. Qazi got to know of this and called him and threatened him with dire consequences. That relative did not become a Hindu. But that incident made Qazi read more about apostasy.
PUNISHMENT FOR APOSTASY IS DEATH
Quran and Hadith clearly say the punishment for abandonment of Islam is death. Since Sharia is not the law in Pakistan, and the current Pakistani Constitution grants the right to change religion, it is legally correct to declare oneself as Hindu or Christian. But once the JI takes over the government, it will make Sharia as the Constitution. Then Pakistan will also legally execute any person who leaves Islam and joins Ahmaddiah, Christianity or Hinduism the same way Iran and Taliban treats its apostates. He also opined that the presence of the Hindu temples in Pakistan is the root cause of the problem and hence we want to destroy all the Hindu temples and Churches in Pakistan.
Q: This brings us into another area. Right now the Internet is becoming widespread. Even Saudi Arabia is connected with the outside world. Destroying the temples may be good, but how can we insulate the Pakistani and Muslim people against the corrupting knowledge totally?
A: JI had taken a principled stand on the matter of science and religion. Religion is far superior to science.
ALL THE WORLD?S KNOWLEDGE IS IN QURAN AND HADITHS
Whatever man needs to know is in the Quran and Hadiths. Knowing more will create problems like the Atom bomb and Television.
MUSIC TV AND PHOTOGRAPHY ARE SATANIC AND HARAM Quran and Hadiths are explicit in denouncing pictures. Yet the lure of Satan in the form of photography and television is eating our lives.
Music previously was confined only to the vocal singing. Now science and technology made the music widespread at a cheaper price. These are the lures of Satan. We have to be on guard against these harami things.
SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY ARE BAD FOR CIVILIZATION
Hence, more science and technology is bad for the civilization. I had completed civil engineering. Hence I am privy to scientific knowledge. I can tell you how corrupting that is. It even makes you question the glorious Quran.
EARTH IS FLAT There are many Hadiths, which say that the earth is flat. But any science will tell you the earth is a sphere. But you can use the same science like the relativity theory to prove that the earth is flat. It is the same case with evolution. But the point being that doubt is sown in the minds of the people on the validity of the Quran as the word of God. More and more we work hard to prove the Quran's scientific correctness, more and more people will get apprehensive of the truth of the Quran. This is an abomination.
WHEN ISLAM TALKS OF GET EDUCATED IT MEANS QURANIC EDUCATION
This is why when we talk of education, we talk of religious education and not scientific education.
It is true that science grew after the Prophet's revolution in Arabia. That was the start of science. Now each and every science is filled with anti-god stuff. If you want to become a doctor, you have to read evolution. If you have to read any engineering, you have to believe in the billions of years old universe theory which effectively says that human beings came to the world only just one or two million years back.
Q: But we still need the arms and knowledge of the Western world, which believes in science. And again you had referred to television as evil. If we abolish photography how can we have passports or identification cards?
A: Yes. That is strategic. With the help of Allah, we will be given oil for them to run their cars and we will have arms in that place. We will use their arms to destroy them in the course of time.
PHOTOGRAPHY WILL BE BANNED UNDER JI
As far as photos are concerned, they will be banned as it was done in Afghanistan under Taliban. If there is no need for people to go out of Pakistan, where is the need for the passports? For those who have to travel to other countries like the leaders of the revolution, they only will be given the passport with photos. For that, we will allow limited photography licensed only to the government. And the biggest corruption in today's Pakistan is Indian satellite TV and Indian cinemas and Indian songs. We have to abolish these too.
ARABIC WILL BE MADE OFFICIAL LANGUAGE OF PAKISTAN
Q: Currently we have a lot of opposition from Mohajirs regarding reservations. What kind of reservation policy will the JI will have in Pakistan?
A: We approach that problem as the problem of language. Urdu-speaking Muslims and Sindhi-speaking Muslims are fighting now. We plan to abolish all the regional languages like Pashto, Sindhi, Baluchi, Urdu, Punjabi and Brahvi. We want all the people of Pakistan to speak Arabic which is our divine language. This will make everyone equal before everyone else and there would not be any need for language or region based reservations. We also hope that this will make the Quran and Hadiths easier to understand and will make the people follow the Quran and Hadiths to the letter.
Q: There could be language riots. One such language riot resulted in Bangladesh.
A: Bangladesh was not a result of language riot. The very idea that they are Muslims will bring the Bangladeshis to Arabic. We already fund heavily the Arabic language courses all over India, Bangladesh and Pakistan. From Morocco to Iraq speaks in Arabic, I don't see any reason why from Morocco to Burma we will not bring Arabic to the people. Even Bangladesh will start speaking in Arabic. That time there won't be any Bangladesh where the country name itself has the name of the language. Yes. Right now our aim is just for reunification without touching on the language issue of Bengali. JI of Bangladesh is working towards this aim.
Q: The secular journalists of Pakistan oppose the JI. For example the Dawn and News are very critical of the JI. How do you see their role in the future?
A: Ardheshir Cowasjee is able to work only because of the present Constitution of Pakistan. When Sharia becomes the Constitution, he cannot even approach the court, as he is a kafir. We see secular journalists as our main enemy in the current struggle to reach power. These secular journalists are digging our statements we made during the pre-Independence days and trying to beat us. Of course we opposed the creation of Pakistan during the British times. But that was a different Jamaat. Our history starts with Independence.
SECULARS ARE KAFIRS
Secular journalists are not Muslims even though some of them are carrying Muslim names. Let them come to us and let us ask questions on the Quran and Hadiths. We will prove each and every thing we say is from Quran and Hadiths. Let them prove what we say as wrong from the Quranic angle. Then we will accept them. But they cannot. They cannot match us in any debate concerning the Quran and Hadiths. We can comprehensively prove that they are indeed non-Muslims.! They are like Quadianis who say that the Muslim need not take up Jihad as an obligation. That is pure nonsense.
Q: Thanks for your time.
A: May Allah's blessings be with you.
top
INDIA WILL BE MADE A 100% MUSLIM NATION
INDIA WILL BE MADE A 100% MUSLIM NATION
Q: Coming back to the same point, if India was to become many countries, how do you deal with the individual Hindu States? They may even become big enemies of Pakistan. Or they may again re-group to challenge Pakistan.
A: Given the differences between the nationalities in India, the options for Pakistan are endless. Qazi's vision is to make the entire India a 100% Muslim Nation. A United India, where Hindus are majority is an impediment to that. Like Prophet Mohammad (PBUH) made Muslims out of pagans of Arabia, Qazi also wants to make Muslims out of the pagans of India.
Q: This is a great vision since this was not even possible for the Muslim dynasties and Moguls who ruled India for the last 700 years.
A: True. That is because they had never really established the Muslim Empire. Though the Kings were Muslims, they had entertained the Hindus in positions of power. When you make an unequivocal statement that only Muslims are voters and declare that India is an Islamic Republic, then automatically the people will become Muslims. Little bit of terror had to be applied to the heart of Hindus and Christians. I will give you a best example. The portions which now constitute Pakistan had 25% Hindu population before Independence.
TERRORIZATION IS THE BEST CONVERSION TOOL
After Independence, a lot of Hindus migrated to India. Yet after the migration, the Pakistani Hindu population was 15%. Do you know what is the percentage now? It is less than 1%. How was this made possible? How did the Hindus convert to Islam in a short span of 20 years whereas for 700 years they had never converted to Islam? That is purely because of the terror of the Partition.
TERROR FORCED HINDUS TO CONVERT TO ISLAM IN PAKISTAN
That terror forced the Hindus who remained in Pakistan to become Muslims. Pure and simple. JI used similar techniques in Punjab and Sindh. Each time a riot breaks out in India, we had used that pretext to strike terror among the Hindus, Christians and Ahmaddiahs. The similar terror will be at the heart of every non-Muslim, both Hindu as well as Christian, in the coming years in the entire of India.
PRPOHET SUCCEEDED WITH TERROR SO CAN WE
Qazi is an analytical genius who knows every strategy that was used by Prophet Mohammad (PBUH) and which will be and should be used in India to achieve the total submission to Allah.
Q: Do you envision a possibility that when Kashmir becomes part of Pakistan, there could be large-scale riots in India against Indian Muslims? Hence unwittingly Kashmir could lead to more deaths of Indian Muslims and damage Islamic Ummah.
ANY MUSLIM ASSOCIATING WITH A POLYTHEIST BECOMES A POLYTHEIST
A: Yes that is a possibility. But our ideology is based on Quran and Hadiths. Prophet Mohammad (PBUH) in numerous Hadiths and Allah in Quran had said that any Muslim who associates with a polytheist is a polytheist. Muslims cannot be friendly with a non-Muslim. This includes the Christians, Jews and Hindus. Also Mohammad (PBUH) says that even if the Muslim ruler is not good, the Muslims stay with the ruler rather than go out to a non-Muslim country. Hadiths and Quran are very explicit regarding this. All the Muslims who did not migrate to Pakistan during Partition are in essence Hindus. They may think that they are Muslims. But not before Allah.
They are as self-deluded as the Ahmaddiahs who think they are Muslims when everyone knows that they are not Muslims. Hence the Muslims of India who had decided to stay in India during Partition are not Muslims and their progeny are not Muslim (since they did not migrate to Muslim lands).
Another thing that I noticed in my journeys in India is that the Hindu farmers generally offer their entire harvest to their gods at the end of their harvesting season. This makes the entire crop as haram for Muslims. Yet these so-called Muslims of India are forced to eat this food which was already offered to some other God other than Allah.
This is explicitly forbidden in Quran.
MUSLIMS GOING TO NON MUSLIM COUNTRIES TO SETTLE DOWN ARE KAFIRS
And this is one of the serious problems of living in non-Muslim countries. Prophet Mohammad (PBUH) knew such things; that is why he ordered Muslims not to live in non-Muslim areas. Yet knowingly these so-called Muslims live in India. AGAIN ALL THE MUSLIMS WHO MIGRATE TO OTHER NON MUSLIM COUNTRIES AND US ARE NON MUSLIMS . Only the Muslims who intend to come back are Muslims not the ones who decide to stay in such countries. Hence we do not care if such Indian Muslims die in the riots.
But due to strategy reasons we do have excellent relations with these Muslims. All the Muslims who work for Pakistan and for the glory of Ummah are real Muslims. They are our front line troops in non-Muslim countries. Hence we have to distribute the arms and ammunitions to these real Muslims in case riots come to their door.
The Kashmiri Muslims are pure Muslims who are toiling under the yoke of Hindu rule. They are victimized by the international conspiracy to keep them under the Hindu rule. That issue is part of the incomplete Partition, whereas the Indian Muslims have accepted Partition and stayed on in India knowingly.
JAMAT WILL BRING SLAVERY BACK TO PAKISTAN
Arabians own slaves. Though Allah says that the slaves should be treated in a nice manner, he did not advocate the abolition of slavery. If slavery is bad as considered in today's world, Allah certainly would have said that slavery is wrong. Prophet Mohammad (PBUH) also said that the slaves should be treated in a good manner and the slaves should be released often. But if there is no slavery, how can anyone release slaves? Hence the re-introduction of slavery in Pakistan is one of the future plans of the Jamaat.
Q: Coming back to the same point, if India was to become many countries, how do you deal with the individual Hindu States? They may even become big enemies of Pakistan. Or they may again re-group to challenge Pakistan.
A: Given the differences between the nationalities in India, the options for Pakistan are endless. Qazi's vision is to make the entire India a 100% Muslim Nation. A United India, where Hindus are majority is an impediment to that. Like Prophet Mohammad (PBUH) made Muslims out of pagans of Arabia, Qazi also wants to make Muslims out of the pagans of India.
Q: This is a great vision since this was not even possible for the Muslim dynasties and Moguls who ruled India for the last 700 years.
A: True. That is because they had never really established the Muslim Empire. Though the Kings were Muslims, they had entertained the Hindus in positions of power. When you make an unequivocal statement that only Muslims are voters and declare that India is an Islamic Republic, then automatically the people will become Muslims. Little bit of terror had to be applied to the heart of Hindus and Christians. I will give you a best example. The portions which now constitute Pakistan had 25% Hindu population before Independence.
TERRORIZATION IS THE BEST CONVERSION TOOL
After Independence, a lot of Hindus migrated to India. Yet after the migration, the Pakistani Hindu population was 15%. Do you know what is the percentage now? It is less than 1%. How was this made possible? How did the Hindus convert to Islam in a short span of 20 years whereas for 700 years they had never converted to Islam? That is purely because of the terror of the Partition.
TERROR FORCED HINDUS TO CONVERT TO ISLAM IN PAKISTAN
That terror forced the Hindus who remained in Pakistan to become Muslims. Pure and simple. JI used similar techniques in Punjab and Sindh. Each time a riot breaks out in India, we had used that pretext to strike terror among the Hindus, Christians and Ahmaddiahs. The similar terror will be at the heart of every non-Muslim, both Hindu as well as Christian, in the coming years in the entire of India.
PRPOHET SUCCEEDED WITH TERROR SO CAN WE
Qazi is an analytical genius who knows every strategy that was used by Prophet Mohammad (PBUH) and which will be and should be used in India to achieve the total submission to Allah.
Q: Do you envision a possibility that when Kashmir becomes part of Pakistan, there could be large-scale riots in India against Indian Muslims? Hence unwittingly Kashmir could lead to more deaths of Indian Muslims and damage Islamic Ummah.
ANY MUSLIM ASSOCIATING WITH A POLYTHEIST BECOMES A POLYTHEIST
A: Yes that is a possibility. But our ideology is based on Quran and Hadiths. Prophet Mohammad (PBUH) in numerous Hadiths and Allah in Quran had said that any Muslim who associates with a polytheist is a polytheist. Muslims cannot be friendly with a non-Muslim. This includes the Christians, Jews and Hindus. Also Mohammad (PBUH) says that even if the Muslim ruler is not good, the Muslims stay with the ruler rather than go out to a non-Muslim country. Hadiths and Quran are very explicit regarding this. All the Muslims who did not migrate to Pakistan during Partition are in essence Hindus. They may think that they are Muslims. But not before Allah.
They are as self-deluded as the Ahmaddiahs who think they are Muslims when everyone knows that they are not Muslims. Hence the Muslims of India who had decided to stay in India during Partition are not Muslims and their progeny are not Muslim (since they did not migrate to Muslim lands).
Another thing that I noticed in my journeys in India is that the Hindu farmers generally offer their entire harvest to their gods at the end of their harvesting season. This makes the entire crop as haram for Muslims. Yet these so-called Muslims of India are forced to eat this food which was already offered to some other God other than Allah.
This is explicitly forbidden in Quran.
MUSLIMS GOING TO NON MUSLIM COUNTRIES TO SETTLE DOWN ARE KAFIRS
And this is one of the serious problems of living in non-Muslim countries. Prophet Mohammad (PBUH) knew such things; that is why he ordered Muslims not to live in non-Muslim areas. Yet knowingly these so-called Muslims live in India. AGAIN ALL THE MUSLIMS WHO MIGRATE TO OTHER NON MUSLIM COUNTRIES AND US ARE NON MUSLIMS . Only the Muslims who intend to come back are Muslims not the ones who decide to stay in such countries. Hence we do not care if such Indian Muslims die in the riots.
But due to strategy reasons we do have excellent relations with these Muslims. All the Muslims who work for Pakistan and for the glory of Ummah are real Muslims. They are our front line troops in non-Muslim countries. Hence we have to distribute the arms and ammunitions to these real Muslims in case riots come to their door.
The Kashmiri Muslims are pure Muslims who are toiling under the yoke of Hindu rule. They are victimized by the international conspiracy to keep them under the Hindu rule. That issue is part of the incomplete Partition, whereas the Indian Muslims have accepted Partition and stayed on in India knowingly.
JAMAT WILL BRING SLAVERY BACK TO PAKISTAN
Arabians own slaves. Though Allah says that the slaves should be treated in a nice manner, he did not advocate the abolition of slavery. If slavery is bad as considered in today's world, Allah certainly would have said that slavery is wrong. Prophet Mohammad (PBUH) also said that the slaves should be treated in a good manner and the slaves should be released often. But if there is no slavery, how can anyone release slaves? Hence the re-introduction of slavery in Pakistan is one of the future plans of the Jamaat.
What Islam Wants
What Islam Wants
Let's Hear From Pakistan Jamat-e-Islami Leader, Maulana Nabiullah Khan
"Jamhooria Islamia", a monthly Baluchi magazine published from Panj-gar, published an interview with Maulana Nawabzadaa Nabiullah Khan, a confidant of and adviser to the Amir of leading Pakistani Islamic party, Jamaat-e-Islami, Maulana Qazi Ahmed, which was conducted by Jalil Amir. The following constitutes are excerpts from that conversation which reveals the fundamentalist ideology and designs of the organisation and its leader.
EQUALITY OF MEN AND WOMEN IS STUPIDITY
Q: The women issue is very controversial nowadays. Taliban and some fundamentalist organizations restrict the freedom of women while some progressive Muslim intellectuals are insisting that the women are equal to men in all spheres. What are Qazi's views on women?
A: As I said earlier, the Prophet Mohammad's (PBUH) views on women are the exact views of Qazi Ahmed and the Jamat. Equality of men and women is stupidity. What men can do, women cannot do. Women are weak physically and mentally compared to men. Men have to take care of women all the time.
WOMEN MUST STAY HOME
Women should not have a life outside the family. Education can be provided to them, but not to compete with men in public.
NO VOTING RIGHTS FOR WOMEN UNDER SHARIA
Qazi had said once that when JI comes to power in Pakistan, he will abolish the voting rights of women and minorities. Only the Muslim men can participate in voting or standing for elections. When I asked the proof from Hadiths, he had quoted many Hadiths in support of that. I asked him why is it that it is never talked about openly in the public by the Jamaat? Qazi had said that the hints are all over the place. But JI did not make it a big issue since the women who currently have the voting rights may vote against JI in the elections if such a thing is said openly.
NON MUSLIMS IN MUSLIM COUNTRIES MUST PAY JIZYA
Q: That brings us to the question of minorities. Will they have to pay Jizya tax?
A: Yes. They have to pay the tax. As explained by Qazi Ahmed , the idea of Jizya is not protection money. But it is a monetary force on the non-Muslim to convert to Islam. Once the Jamaat comes to power, the minorities will be induced (forced) to become Muslims either by monetary or psychological factors.
ALL INDIAN HINDUS WILL BE CONVERTED INTO ISLAM
JI is already equating India with Hindus so that the Hindus of Pakistan will be forced to become Muslims. This was a very successful strategy during the Babri Masjid riots. JI was actively involved in destroying the Hindu temples in Punjab and Sindh. We ordered the destruction of the Hindu family property too. But our main aim was to destroy the Hindu temples. We wrote in the JI pamphlets that destroying each pagan temple makes a Muslim move closer to the heaven of Allah. We used the Hadiths in all the pamphlets. Babar destroyed the Ram temple in Ayodhya because he was a true believer. The same way, every Muslim should take it upon himself to destroy the Hindu temples in Pakistan. O! ur idea was to encourage the Muslims of India also to destroy the Hindu temples in India. But this was not met with much success since the Hindu police in India started attacking the Muslims who were doing Allah's duty.
Q: What kind of government does JI envisage for Pakistan?
A: It will be the Sharia government. Sharia will be made our constitution so that the eminent Muslim scholars who had completed the schooling in Madrasas will be appointed as the Judges in every court. Qazi wanted to make the presidium on the same model as the Khalifa. Presently our idea is that the entire top leadership of JI as well as all three military Generals will be part of the presidium for which the Qazi will be the Khalifa.
OUR MOTTO IS CONSTANT JIHAD
Our motto is "Constant Jihad". The idea is to keep Pakistan in a constant state of Jihad all the time. Qazi's vision is that Pakistan will be! the centre of the new Islamic Empire that stretches from Burma to Afghanistan and from Srilanka to Tajikistan including Kashmir
Towards that end, the Jamaat will use all tactics from terrorism in the kafir-controlled areas to negotiations in the Muslim controlled areas. Already the Jamaat leaders of Bangladesh and Jamaat leaders of India have accepted the primacy of Pakistani leadership in this regard.
SRI LANKA AND BURMA WILL BE PRESSURIZED TO CONVERT TO ISLAM
Q: What about Srilanka and Burma?
A: Both are Buddhist nations. For that matter even Baluchistan and Afghanistan were Buddhist once while Sindh and Punjab were Hindu earlier. Buddhists are generally weaker in matters of faith. Hence we hope they will become Muslim with a little pressure. But that will happen only after Jamaat conquers first Pakistan and then India.
Q: What are the plans for India? It looks like the entire India policy of the Jamaat revolves around Kashmir.
A: Yes that is true. But that is for a very good reason. See Kashmir is like a keystone that sits on top of the arch. It is true that the arch holds the entire weight of the keystone. But if you remove the keystone, then the whole arch falls down. That is why it is called the keystone. Kashmir is the keystone for India. Once you remove that, then India can no longer be secular and it will not be a united country either. Once Kashmir is taken out, these militancy movements will break India by asking the similar freedom for Nagaland, Kerala, Mizoram, Meghalaya, Manipur, Assam, Jharkand, Tamil Nadu, West Bengal and Khalistan.
Let's Hear From Pakistan Jamat-e-Islami Leader, Maulana Nabiullah Khan
"Jamhooria Islamia", a monthly Baluchi magazine published from Panj-gar, published an interview with Maulana Nawabzadaa Nabiullah Khan, a confidant of and adviser to the Amir of leading Pakistani Islamic party, Jamaat-e-Islami, Maulana Qazi Ahmed, which was conducted by Jalil Amir. The following constitutes are excerpts from that conversation which reveals the fundamentalist ideology and designs of the organisation and its leader.
EQUALITY OF MEN AND WOMEN IS STUPIDITY
Q: The women issue is very controversial nowadays. Taliban and some fundamentalist organizations restrict the freedom of women while some progressive Muslim intellectuals are insisting that the women are equal to men in all spheres. What are Qazi's views on women?
A: As I said earlier, the Prophet Mohammad's (PBUH) views on women are the exact views of Qazi Ahmed and the Jamat. Equality of men and women is stupidity. What men can do, women cannot do. Women are weak physically and mentally compared to men. Men have to take care of women all the time.
WOMEN MUST STAY HOME
Women should not have a life outside the family. Education can be provided to them, but not to compete with men in public.
NO VOTING RIGHTS FOR WOMEN UNDER SHARIA
Qazi had said once that when JI comes to power in Pakistan, he will abolish the voting rights of women and minorities. Only the Muslim men can participate in voting or standing for elections. When I asked the proof from Hadiths, he had quoted many Hadiths in support of that. I asked him why is it that it is never talked about openly in the public by the Jamaat? Qazi had said that the hints are all over the place. But JI did not make it a big issue since the women who currently have the voting rights may vote against JI in the elections if such a thing is said openly.
NON MUSLIMS IN MUSLIM COUNTRIES MUST PAY JIZYA
Q: That brings us to the question of minorities. Will they have to pay Jizya tax?
A: Yes. They have to pay the tax. As explained by Qazi Ahmed , the idea of Jizya is not protection money. But it is a monetary force on the non-Muslim to convert to Islam. Once the Jamaat comes to power, the minorities will be induced (forced) to become Muslims either by monetary or psychological factors.
ALL INDIAN HINDUS WILL BE CONVERTED INTO ISLAM
JI is already equating India with Hindus so that the Hindus of Pakistan will be forced to become Muslims. This was a very successful strategy during the Babri Masjid riots. JI was actively involved in destroying the Hindu temples in Punjab and Sindh. We ordered the destruction of the Hindu family property too. But our main aim was to destroy the Hindu temples. We wrote in the JI pamphlets that destroying each pagan temple makes a Muslim move closer to the heaven of Allah. We used the Hadiths in all the pamphlets. Babar destroyed the Ram temple in Ayodhya because he was a true believer. The same way, every Muslim should take it upon himself to destroy the Hindu temples in Pakistan. O! ur idea was to encourage the Muslims of India also to destroy the Hindu temples in India. But this was not met with much success since the Hindu police in India started attacking the Muslims who were doing Allah's duty.
Q: What kind of government does JI envisage for Pakistan?
A: It will be the Sharia government. Sharia will be made our constitution so that the eminent Muslim scholars who had completed the schooling in Madrasas will be appointed as the Judges in every court. Qazi wanted to make the presidium on the same model as the Khalifa. Presently our idea is that the entire top leadership of JI as well as all three military Generals will be part of the presidium for which the Qazi will be the Khalifa.
OUR MOTTO IS CONSTANT JIHAD
Our motto is "Constant Jihad". The idea is to keep Pakistan in a constant state of Jihad all the time. Qazi's vision is that Pakistan will be! the centre of the new Islamic Empire that stretches from Burma to Afghanistan and from Srilanka to Tajikistan including Kashmir
Towards that end, the Jamaat will use all tactics from terrorism in the kafir-controlled areas to negotiations in the Muslim controlled areas. Already the Jamaat leaders of Bangladesh and Jamaat leaders of India have accepted the primacy of Pakistani leadership in this regard.
SRI LANKA AND BURMA WILL BE PRESSURIZED TO CONVERT TO ISLAM
Q: What about Srilanka and Burma?
A: Both are Buddhist nations. For that matter even Baluchistan and Afghanistan were Buddhist once while Sindh and Punjab were Hindu earlier. Buddhists are generally weaker in matters of faith. Hence we hope they will become Muslim with a little pressure. But that will happen only after Jamaat conquers first Pakistan and then India.
Q: What are the plans for India? It looks like the entire India policy of the Jamaat revolves around Kashmir.
A: Yes that is true. But that is for a very good reason. See Kashmir is like a keystone that sits on top of the arch. It is true that the arch holds the entire weight of the keystone. But if you remove the keystone, then the whole arch falls down. That is why it is called the keystone. Kashmir is the keystone for India. Once you remove that, then India can no longer be secular and it will not be a united country either. Once Kashmir is taken out, these militancy movements will break India by asking the similar freedom for Nagaland, Kerala, Mizoram, Meghalaya, Manipur, Assam, Jharkand, Tamil Nadu, West Bengal and Khalistan.
The Quran's Doctrine of Abrogation
The Quran's Doctrine of Abrogation
Prepared by Abdullah Al Araby
In an attempt to polish Islam's image, Muslim activists usually quote verses from the Quran that were written in the early days of the Islamic movement while Mohammed lived in Mecca. Those passages make Islam appear loving and harmless because they call for love, peace and patience. Such is a deception. The activists fail to tell gullible people that such verses, though still in the Quran, were nullified, abrogated, rendered void by later passages that incite killing, decapitations, maiming, terrorism and religious intolerance. The latter verses were penned while Mohammed’s headquarters was based in Medina.
When speaking with people of Christianized/Western societies, Muslim activists deliberately hide a major Islamic doctrine called "al-Nasikh wal-Mansoukh" (the Abrogator and the Abrogated). This simply means that in situations wherein verses contradict one another, the early verses are overridden by the latter verses. The chronological timing in which a verse was written determines its authority to establish policies within Islam. Non-Muslims cannot afford to be ignorant about the full implications of the Abrogator and the Abrogated Doctrine (al-Nasikh wal-Mansoukh). When Islamic spokesmen say that Islam is a religion of peace and that the Quran does not support such things as human rights infractions, gender bias and terrorism, they are lying. This means that the Western politicians and liberal journalists, who continually spout that Islam is a noble religion of peace, are in reality propagating a deception that they have been deceived into parroting.
This presents problems for naïve people who are not familiar with Islam and the Quran. They don’t know that the surahs/chapters of the Quran are not arranged in chorological order in regard to the timing in which they were written. Therefore an activist who is out to deceive them can turn to various places throughout the Quran and read verses that sound peaceful, tolerant, reasonable and loving. The impression is that the entire Quran promotes peace, love, equality and tolerance for all. That is far from the truth. Most Muslims fully understand that the few Quranic verses that seemingly promote equality, peace and justice are more often than not overridden/ nullified by later verses that validate such things as terrorism and legalistic restrictions on routine human and women’s rights.
THE DOCTRINE OF THE ABROGATOR AND THE ABROGATED IN THE QURAN (Al Nasikh Wal Mansoukh)
This doctrine is based on two verses that Allah allegedly instructed Mohammed to put into the Quran.
"None of Our revelations do We abrogate or cause to be forgotten, but We substitute something better or similar: Knowest thou not that Allah Hath power over all things?" Surah 2: 106
"When We substitute one revelation for another, and Allah knows best what He reveals (in stages), they say, "Thou art but a forger": but most of them understand not." Surah 16:101
The documentation for the information that I am offering in this piece is found in one of Islam's classical reference books in the Arabic language. It is titled "al-Nasikh wal-Mansoukh" (The Abrogator and the Abrogated) and was authored by the revered Muslim scholar Abil-Kasim Hibat-Allah Ibn-Salama Abi-Nasr. The book goes through every Surah (chapter) in the Quran and cites in great detail every verse that was cancelled-out/overridden by particular verses that were written later. The author noted that out of 114 Surahs (chapters) of the Quran, there are only 43 Surahs that were not affected by this concept. The implications are very revealing. It means that those who would be inclined to accept the Quran as reliable can take only 43 chapters of the Quran at face value. The majority of its chapters cannot be taken at face value. The cancelled verses are mixed in with the authoritative verses and only schooled Islamist know which is which.
The following are English translation excerpts from the reference book’s original Arabic
THREE KINDS OF ABROGATION:
1) Verses in which both the wording and application were abrogated/nullified.
There is an example of this found in a narration by Ans Ibn Abdel Malik. He said that during the life of Mohammed, they used to read a Surah that was equal in size to that of Surah 9 (the repentance). He further stated that he only remembered one verse from that Surah/chapter. - “If the son of Adam has two valleys of gold he would covet to have a third one, if he has three he would covet to have a fourth one. Nothing would fill the belly of the son of Adam except dirt, and Allah would accept the repentance of those who repent.”
Another example is the narration of Ibn Abdullah Ibn Massoud. He said that Mohammed recited a verse for him that he memorized and wrote in his Quran. When he checked his Quran the following day, he discovered that the verse had disappeared. Mohammed explained what had happened to ibn Massoud. He told him that the verse had been lifted during the previous day.
2) Verses in which the wording was abrogated (nullified) but the application was not.
These are verses wherein the wording was nullified, but the inferences/possible applications of those words remained intact.
There is an example of this form in a narration about Omar Ibn Al Khattab. He said, “If I didn’t hate that people would say we added to the Quran which was not part of it, I would have insisted in including the verse of stoning. By God we have recited it by the Apostle of God.”
3) Verses in which the application was abrogated (nullified), but the wording was not.
These are verses wherein the wording remained the same, but the authority to consider such in the formation of Islamic polices were nullified
There are sixty-three Surahs/chapters in the Quran that mention such things as praying in the direction of Jerusalem, regulations about fasting and the forgiveness that is available to polytheists
FOUR DEGREES OF ABROGATION
1. Surahs that were not influenced by applications of the doctrine of the Abrogator and the Abrogated. (43 Surahs)
Surahs 1, 12, 36, 49, 55, 57, 61, 62, 66, 67, 68, 69, 71, 72, 77, 78, 79, 82, 83, 84, 85, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 97, 98, 99, 100, 101, 102, 104, 105, 106, 107,109, 108, 110, 112, 113, and 114
2. Surahs that maintained the authority of the Abrogator, but their original wording was not abrogated/nullified.(6 Surahs)
Surahs 48, 59, 63, 64, 65, and 87
3. Surahs that had their wording abrogated/nullified, but maintained their authority for applications. (40 Surahs)
Surahs 6, 7 10, 11, 13, 15 16 17, 18, 20, 23, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 34, 35, 37, 38, 39, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 51, 53, 54, 60, 68, 70, 74, 75, 76, 77, 86, 80, 88, and 109
4. Surahs that have had both their authority for applications and their wording abrogated. (24 Surahs)
Surahs 2, 3, 5, 8, 9, 14, 18, 19, 21, 22, 24, 25, 26, 33, 34, 40, 42, 51, 52, 56, 58, 73, 103, and 108
THE VERSE OF THE SWORD
The verse that Abrogated (nullified) the Peace Verses.
An example of the abrogation: There are 124 versus that call for tolerance and patience that have been cancelled and replaced by one, single verse. This verse is called the verse of the sword:
"But when the forbidden months are past, then fight and slay the Pagans wherever ye find them, and seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem (of war)....." Surah 9:5
Verses that support the verse of the Sword
1) “Fight them, and Allah will punish them by your hands, cover them with shame, help you (to victory) over them, heal the breasts of believers” (Surah 9:14).
2) “O ye who believe! Truly the Pagans are unclean; so let them not, after this year of theirs, approach the Sacred Mosque” (Surah 9:28).
3) “The Jews call ‘Uzayr a son of God, and the Christians call Christ the son of God. That is saying from their mouth; (in this) they but imitate the Unbelievers of old used to say. Allah’s curse be on them: how they are deluded away from the Truth!” (Surah 9:30).
4) “O Prophet! Strive hard against the Unbelievers and the Hypocrites, and be firm against them. Their abode is Hell – an evil refuge indeed” (Surah 9:73).
5) “O ye who believe! Fight the Unbelievers who gird you about, and let them find firmness in you: and know that Allah is with those who fear Him” (Surah 9:123).
Some of the verses abrogated by the verse of the Sword:
1) “Those who believe (in the Qua’an), and the Christians and the Sabians – any who believe in Allah and the Last Day, and work righteousness, shall have their reward with their Lord: on them shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve” (Surah 2:62).
2) “Quite a number of the People of the Book wish they could turn you (people) back to infidelity after ye have believed, from selfish envy, after the Truth hath become manifest unto them: but forgive and overlook, till Allah accomplish his purpose” (Surah 2:109).
3) “But because of their breach of their Covenant, We cursed them, and made their hearts grow hard; they change the words from their (right) places and forget a good part of the Message that was sent them, nor wilt thou cease to find them – barring a few – ever bent on (new) deceits: but forgive them, and overlook (their misdeeds): for Allah loveth those who are kind” (Surah 5:13).
4) “Leave alone those who take their religion to be mere play and amusement, and are deceived by the life of this world. But proclaim (to them) this (truth): that every soul delivers itself to ruin by its own acts: it will find for itself no protector or intercessor except Allah: if it offered every ransom, (or reparation), none will be accepted: such is (the end of) those who deliver themselves to ruin by their own acts: they will have for drink (only) boiling water, and for punishment, one most grievous: for they persisted in rejecting Allah” (Surah 6:70).
5) “But if the enemy incline towards peace, do thou (also) incline towards peace, and trust in Allah” (Surah 8:61)
6) “And dispute ye not with the People of the Book, except with means better (than mere disputation), unless it be with those of them who inflict wrong (and injury); but say, ‘We believe in the revelation which has come down to us and in that which came down to you; our God and your God is One; and it is to Him we bow (in Islam)” (Surah 29:46).
7) “And remember We took a covenant from the Children of Israel (to this effect): worship none but Allah” (Surah 2:83).
8) “Say: Will ye dispute with us about Allah, seeing that He is our Lord and your Lord; that we are responsible for our doings and ye for yours; and that we are sincere (in our faith) in Him?” (Surah 2:139)
9) “Fight in the cause of Allah those who fight you, but do not transgress limits; for Allah loveth not transgressors” (Surah 2:190)
10) “But fight them at the Sacred Mosque, unless they (first) fight you there” (Surah 2:191)
11) “But if they cease, Allah is Oft-Forgiving Most Merciful” (Surah 2:192).
12) “But there is no compulsion in religion” (Surah 2:256).
13) “So if they dispute with thee, say: ‘I have submitted my whole self to Allah and so have those who follow me,’ And say to the People of the Book and so to those who are unlearned: ‘do ye (also) submit yourself? If they do, they are in right guidance, but if they turn back, thy duty is to convey the Message” (Surah 3:20).
14) “Let not the Believers take for friends or helpers unbelievers rather than believers; if any do that, in nothing will there be help from Allah: except by way of precaution, that ye may guard yourself from them” (Surah 3:28).
15) “Those men – Allah knows what is in their hearts; so keep clear of them, but admonish them, and speak to them a word to reach their souls” (Surah 4:63) .
16) “He who obeys the Messenger, obeys Allah: but if any turn away, we have not sent thee to watch over their (evil deeds)” (Surah 4:80).
17) “But Allah records their nightly (plots): so keep clear of them, and put thy trust in Allah” (Surah 4:81).
18) “Then fight in Allah’s cause – thou art held responsible only for thyself” (Surah 4:84).
19) “Except those who join a group between whom and you there is a treaty (of peace), or those who approach you with hearts restraining them from fighting you as well as fighting their own people. If Allah had pleased, He could have given them power over you, and they would have fought you: therefore, if they withdraw from you but fight you not, and (instead) send you (guarantees of ) peace, then Allah hath opened no way for you (to war against them)” (Surah 4:90).
20) “O ye who believe! Violate not the sanctity of the Symbols of Allah, nor of the Sacred Month” (Surah 5:2).
Other verses that were abrogated by the verse of the sword:
Surah 5: 99
Surah 6: 66; 104; 106- 108; 112; 135; 158
Surah 7:183; 199
Surah 10: 41, 46, 99, 108, 109
Surah 11: 121
Surah 13: 40
Surah 15: 3, 85, 88, 94
Surah 16: 82, 125, 127
Surah 17: 54
Surah 19: 84
Surah 20: 130, 135
Surah 22: 68
Surah 23: 54, 96
Surah 24: 54
Surah 28: 55
Surah 30: 60
Surah 32: 30
Surah 33:48
Surah 34: 25
Surah 39: 15
Surah 41: 34
Surah 42: 6, 15, 48
Surah 43: 83, 89
Surah 44: 59
Surah 45: 14
Surah 46: 35
Surah 50: 39
Surah 52: 48
Surah 53: 29
Surah 58: 8-9, 11
Surah 73: 10
Surah 76: 8
Surah 86: 17
Surah 88: 22- 24
Surah 109: 6
One cannot help but wonder; why was there a need for changes in the Quran, if it really contained God’s words? If Allah is indeed all-powerful and all-knowing, why would he need to revise and correct himself so often?
top
Prepared by Abdullah Al Araby
In an attempt to polish Islam's image, Muslim activists usually quote verses from the Quran that were written in the early days of the Islamic movement while Mohammed lived in Mecca. Those passages make Islam appear loving and harmless because they call for love, peace and patience. Such is a deception. The activists fail to tell gullible people that such verses, though still in the Quran, were nullified, abrogated, rendered void by later passages that incite killing, decapitations, maiming, terrorism and religious intolerance. The latter verses were penned while Mohammed’s headquarters was based in Medina.
When speaking with people of Christianized/Western societies, Muslim activists deliberately hide a major Islamic doctrine called "al-Nasikh wal-Mansoukh" (the Abrogator and the Abrogated). This simply means that in situations wherein verses contradict one another, the early verses are overridden by the latter verses. The chronological timing in which a verse was written determines its authority to establish policies within Islam. Non-Muslims cannot afford to be ignorant about the full implications of the Abrogator and the Abrogated Doctrine (al-Nasikh wal-Mansoukh). When Islamic spokesmen say that Islam is a religion of peace and that the Quran does not support such things as human rights infractions, gender bias and terrorism, they are lying. This means that the Western politicians and liberal journalists, who continually spout that Islam is a noble religion of peace, are in reality propagating a deception that they have been deceived into parroting.
This presents problems for naïve people who are not familiar with Islam and the Quran. They don’t know that the surahs/chapters of the Quran are not arranged in chorological order in regard to the timing in which they were written. Therefore an activist who is out to deceive them can turn to various places throughout the Quran and read verses that sound peaceful, tolerant, reasonable and loving. The impression is that the entire Quran promotes peace, love, equality and tolerance for all. That is far from the truth. Most Muslims fully understand that the few Quranic verses that seemingly promote equality, peace and justice are more often than not overridden/ nullified by later verses that validate such things as terrorism and legalistic restrictions on routine human and women’s rights.
THE DOCTRINE OF THE ABROGATOR AND THE ABROGATED IN THE QURAN (Al Nasikh Wal Mansoukh)
This doctrine is based on two verses that Allah allegedly instructed Mohammed to put into the Quran.
"None of Our revelations do We abrogate or cause to be forgotten, but We substitute something better or similar: Knowest thou not that Allah Hath power over all things?" Surah 2: 106
"When We substitute one revelation for another, and Allah knows best what He reveals (in stages), they say, "Thou art but a forger": but most of them understand not." Surah 16:101
The documentation for the information that I am offering in this piece is found in one of Islam's classical reference books in the Arabic language. It is titled "al-Nasikh wal-Mansoukh" (The Abrogator and the Abrogated) and was authored by the revered Muslim scholar Abil-Kasim Hibat-Allah Ibn-Salama Abi-Nasr. The book goes through every Surah (chapter) in the Quran and cites in great detail every verse that was cancelled-out/overridden by particular verses that were written later. The author noted that out of 114 Surahs (chapters) of the Quran, there are only 43 Surahs that were not affected by this concept. The implications are very revealing. It means that those who would be inclined to accept the Quran as reliable can take only 43 chapters of the Quran at face value. The majority of its chapters cannot be taken at face value. The cancelled verses are mixed in with the authoritative verses and only schooled Islamist know which is which.
The following are English translation excerpts from the reference book’s original Arabic
THREE KINDS OF ABROGATION:
1) Verses in which both the wording and application were abrogated/nullified.
There is an example of this found in a narration by Ans Ibn Abdel Malik. He said that during the life of Mohammed, they used to read a Surah that was equal in size to that of Surah 9 (the repentance). He further stated that he only remembered one verse from that Surah/chapter. - “If the son of Adam has two valleys of gold he would covet to have a third one, if he has three he would covet to have a fourth one. Nothing would fill the belly of the son of Adam except dirt, and Allah would accept the repentance of those who repent.”
Another example is the narration of Ibn Abdullah Ibn Massoud. He said that Mohammed recited a verse for him that he memorized and wrote in his Quran. When he checked his Quran the following day, he discovered that the verse had disappeared. Mohammed explained what had happened to ibn Massoud. He told him that the verse had been lifted during the previous day.
2) Verses in which the wording was abrogated (nullified) but the application was not.
These are verses wherein the wording was nullified, but the inferences/possible applications of those words remained intact.
There is an example of this form in a narration about Omar Ibn Al Khattab. He said, “If I didn’t hate that people would say we added to the Quran which was not part of it, I would have insisted in including the verse of stoning. By God we have recited it by the Apostle of God.”
3) Verses in which the application was abrogated (nullified), but the wording was not.
These are verses wherein the wording remained the same, but the authority to consider such in the formation of Islamic polices were nullified
There are sixty-three Surahs/chapters in the Quran that mention such things as praying in the direction of Jerusalem, regulations about fasting and the forgiveness that is available to polytheists
FOUR DEGREES OF ABROGATION
1. Surahs that were not influenced by applications of the doctrine of the Abrogator and the Abrogated. (43 Surahs)
Surahs 1, 12, 36, 49, 55, 57, 61, 62, 66, 67, 68, 69, 71, 72, 77, 78, 79, 82, 83, 84, 85, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 97, 98, 99, 100, 101, 102, 104, 105, 106, 107,109, 108, 110, 112, 113, and 114
2. Surahs that maintained the authority of the Abrogator, but their original wording was not abrogated/nullified.(6 Surahs)
Surahs 48, 59, 63, 64, 65, and 87
3. Surahs that had their wording abrogated/nullified, but maintained their authority for applications. (40 Surahs)
Surahs 6, 7 10, 11, 13, 15 16 17, 18, 20, 23, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 34, 35, 37, 38, 39, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 51, 53, 54, 60, 68, 70, 74, 75, 76, 77, 86, 80, 88, and 109
4. Surahs that have had both their authority for applications and their wording abrogated. (24 Surahs)
Surahs 2, 3, 5, 8, 9, 14, 18, 19, 21, 22, 24, 25, 26, 33, 34, 40, 42, 51, 52, 56, 58, 73, 103, and 108
THE VERSE OF THE SWORD
The verse that Abrogated (nullified) the Peace Verses.
An example of the abrogation: There are 124 versus that call for tolerance and patience that have been cancelled and replaced by one, single verse. This verse is called the verse of the sword:
"But when the forbidden months are past, then fight and slay the Pagans wherever ye find them, and seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem (of war)....." Surah 9:5
Verses that support the verse of the Sword
1) “Fight them, and Allah will punish them by your hands, cover them with shame, help you (to victory) over them, heal the breasts of believers” (Surah 9:14).
2) “O ye who believe! Truly the Pagans are unclean; so let them not, after this year of theirs, approach the Sacred Mosque” (Surah 9:28).
3) “The Jews call ‘Uzayr a son of God, and the Christians call Christ the son of God. That is saying from their mouth; (in this) they but imitate the Unbelievers of old used to say. Allah’s curse be on them: how they are deluded away from the Truth!” (Surah 9:30).
4) “O Prophet! Strive hard against the Unbelievers and the Hypocrites, and be firm against them. Their abode is Hell – an evil refuge indeed” (Surah 9:73).
5) “O ye who believe! Fight the Unbelievers who gird you about, and let them find firmness in you: and know that Allah is with those who fear Him” (Surah 9:123).
Some of the verses abrogated by the verse of the Sword:
1) “Those who believe (in the Qua’an), and the Christians and the Sabians – any who believe in Allah and the Last Day, and work righteousness, shall have their reward with their Lord: on them shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve” (Surah 2:62).
2) “Quite a number of the People of the Book wish they could turn you (people) back to infidelity after ye have believed, from selfish envy, after the Truth hath become manifest unto them: but forgive and overlook, till Allah accomplish his purpose” (Surah 2:109).
3) “But because of their breach of their Covenant, We cursed them, and made their hearts grow hard; they change the words from their (right) places and forget a good part of the Message that was sent them, nor wilt thou cease to find them – barring a few – ever bent on (new) deceits: but forgive them, and overlook (their misdeeds): for Allah loveth those who are kind” (Surah 5:13).
4) “Leave alone those who take their religion to be mere play and amusement, and are deceived by the life of this world. But proclaim (to them) this (truth): that every soul delivers itself to ruin by its own acts: it will find for itself no protector or intercessor except Allah: if it offered every ransom, (or reparation), none will be accepted: such is (the end of) those who deliver themselves to ruin by their own acts: they will have for drink (only) boiling water, and for punishment, one most grievous: for they persisted in rejecting Allah” (Surah 6:70).
5) “But if the enemy incline towards peace, do thou (also) incline towards peace, and trust in Allah” (Surah 8:61)
6) “And dispute ye not with the People of the Book, except with means better (than mere disputation), unless it be with those of them who inflict wrong (and injury); but say, ‘We believe in the revelation which has come down to us and in that which came down to you; our God and your God is One; and it is to Him we bow (in Islam)” (Surah 29:46).
7) “And remember We took a covenant from the Children of Israel (to this effect): worship none but Allah” (Surah 2:83).
8) “Say: Will ye dispute with us about Allah, seeing that He is our Lord and your Lord; that we are responsible for our doings and ye for yours; and that we are sincere (in our faith) in Him?” (Surah 2:139)
9) “Fight in the cause of Allah those who fight you, but do not transgress limits; for Allah loveth not transgressors” (Surah 2:190)
10) “But fight them at the Sacred Mosque, unless they (first) fight you there” (Surah 2:191)
11) “But if they cease, Allah is Oft-Forgiving Most Merciful” (Surah 2:192).
12) “But there is no compulsion in religion” (Surah 2:256).
13) “So if they dispute with thee, say: ‘I have submitted my whole self to Allah and so have those who follow me,’ And say to the People of the Book and so to those who are unlearned: ‘do ye (also) submit yourself? If they do, they are in right guidance, but if they turn back, thy duty is to convey the Message” (Surah 3:20).
14) “Let not the Believers take for friends or helpers unbelievers rather than believers; if any do that, in nothing will there be help from Allah: except by way of precaution, that ye may guard yourself from them” (Surah 3:28).
15) “Those men – Allah knows what is in their hearts; so keep clear of them, but admonish them, and speak to them a word to reach their souls” (Surah 4:63) .
16) “He who obeys the Messenger, obeys Allah: but if any turn away, we have not sent thee to watch over their (evil deeds)” (Surah 4:80).
17) “But Allah records their nightly (plots): so keep clear of them, and put thy trust in Allah” (Surah 4:81).
18) “Then fight in Allah’s cause – thou art held responsible only for thyself” (Surah 4:84).
19) “Except those who join a group between whom and you there is a treaty (of peace), or those who approach you with hearts restraining them from fighting you as well as fighting their own people. If Allah had pleased, He could have given them power over you, and they would have fought you: therefore, if they withdraw from you but fight you not, and (instead) send you (guarantees of ) peace, then Allah hath opened no way for you (to war against them)” (Surah 4:90).
20) “O ye who believe! Violate not the sanctity of the Symbols of Allah, nor of the Sacred Month” (Surah 5:2).
Other verses that were abrogated by the verse of the sword:
Surah 5: 99
Surah 6: 66; 104; 106- 108; 112; 135; 158
Surah 7:183; 199
Surah 10: 41, 46, 99, 108, 109
Surah 11: 121
Surah 13: 40
Surah 15: 3, 85, 88, 94
Surah 16: 82, 125, 127
Surah 17: 54
Surah 19: 84
Surah 20: 130, 135
Surah 22: 68
Surah 23: 54, 96
Surah 24: 54
Surah 28: 55
Surah 30: 60
Surah 32: 30
Surah 33:48
Surah 34: 25
Surah 39: 15
Surah 41: 34
Surah 42: 6, 15, 48
Surah 43: 83, 89
Surah 44: 59
Surah 45: 14
Surah 46: 35
Surah 50: 39
Surah 52: 48
Surah 53: 29
Surah 58: 8-9, 11
Surah 73: 10
Surah 76: 8
Surah 86: 17
Surah 88: 22- 24
Surah 109: 6
One cannot help but wonder; why was there a need for changes in the Quran, if it really contained God’s words? If Allah is indeed all-powerful and all-knowing, why would he need to revise and correct himself so often?
top
Nikah”
Nikah”
The Islamic “N” Word;
What Does It Exactly Mean?
By Abdullah Al Araby
Those who master the Arabic language, and who have read the Quran in the original Arabic, are usually stunned when they read it translated into a foreign language. They can’t help but notice that there are numerous discrepancies between the original Arabic and the translation. Careful examinations would lead one to discern that these are not merely routine human errors. Analytical thinking uncovers the reality that the discrepancies are part of a deliberate, intentional plot to deceive. The translator‘s objective is to distract the foreign readers and prospective converts from the cruelties and prejudices of the Quran.
Certain words, concepts and phrases in the original Arabic Quran sound strange to foreign readers. Arabic speaking Muslims have become accustomed to them. However, when one attempts accurate literal translation of these, the result is rather shocking. You will have in hand a book that contains strange expressions and vulgar language. What was supposed to be a “holy” book would become X-rated, unsuitable for family-oriented use and children reading material.
Muslim translators facing this dilemma, found themselves in a position demanding meticulous cleverness. It would take a lot of patching and polishing to make their translations of the Quran read as a “holy” book should.. Their aim was to present the outside world a version of the Quran that would attract people to Islam rather than repel them from it.
The intentional mistranslation of the Quran is a massive subject that needs to be explored and dealt with in a separate thesis. For the purpose of this article we will give just a few examples before zeroing in on the topic of this article.
In Sura 112:1
"Say: He is Allah, the One and Only..”. In the original Arabic, the word which was translated "Only" in this verse was actually "One of." The translator couldn't literarily translate it, because it would have implied "shirk" (associating other Deities with Allah).
In Sura 33:056
“Allah and His angels send blessings on the Prophet: O ye that believe! Send ye blessings on him, and salute him with all respect.”
The phrase “send blessings” was originally “pray upon”. The translator didn’t think it is appropriate to say that God and His Angels would pray upon (inferring praying to) the prophet Mohamed, so he had to change it to “send blessings.”
This is an example of the difficulty translators sometimes face when trying to literarily translate the Quran, and how they have to deviate from the original text to present something that makes sense. We are not trying to say here that Muslims believe that God or Muslims pray to Mohammed.
In Sura 24: 30, & 31
“Say to the believing men that they should lower their gaze and guard their modesty: that will make for greater purity for them: And Allah is well acquainted with all that they do…… And say to the believing women that they should lower their gaze and guard their modesty….”;
”The phrase “their modesty” was originally a word which means the specific private parts of a man or a woman. The translator didn’t think it is appropriate to literarily translate the word.
In Sura 4:34
“As to those women on whose part ye fear disloyalty and ill-conduct, admonish them (first), (Next), refuse to share their beds, (And last) beat them (lightly); but if they return to obedience, seek not against them Means (of annoyance): For Allah is Most High, great (above you all).”
This verse actually gives a husband the right to beat his wife if he deems her disobedient. The translator attempted to reduce the shocking effect of such teaching and substituted his own inventions. First, he introduced the concept that the discipline progresses in stages; (first, next, and last). The stages do not exist in the original Arabic. The verse in its original form implies that a husband can choose one or all of three responses, if he thinks his wife is disobedient. The stages are the product of the translator’s devious imagination. Even his terminology about the degree of severity permitted in beating a wife is also deceptive. The qualifying word lightly does not exist in the original Arabic Quran. His plot was to soften and qualify the concept of beating one’s wife by adding in the word lightly. The Arabic Quran says “beat them,” period.
Another word in the list of serious intentional mistranslation is the Arabic word “Nikah.” The word has been translated as “marriage.” But those who understand Arabic know that this is not the exact meaning of the word. There is another word that is normally translated as marriage, and correctly so. It is the Arabic word “Zawag.” It is also mentioned in the Quran, as in the following verses:
“Then when Zaid had dissolved (his marriage) with her, with the necessary (formality), We joined her in marriage to thee: in order that (in future) there may be no difficulty to the Believers in (the matter of) marriage with the wives of their adopted sons, when the latter have dissolved with the necessary (formality) (their marriage) with them. And Allah's command must be fulfilled.” Sura 33: 37
The Arabic word “Nikah” is also translated as “marriage" in many other verses in the Quran as in the following:
“If ye fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly with the orphans, Marry women of your choice, Two or three or four” Sura 4: 3
“Let no man guilty of adultery or fornication marry and but a woman similarly guilty, or an Unbeliever: nor let any but such a man or an Unbeliever marry such a woman: to the Believers such a thing is forbidden.” Sura 24: 3
“And when ye ask (Mohammed’s wives) for anything ye want, ask them from before a screen: that makes for greater purity for your hearts and for theirs. Nor is it right for you that ye should annoy Allah's Messenger, or that ye should marry his widows after him at any time. Truly such a thing is in Allah's sight an enormity.” Sura 33: 53
Other verses where this word is also used are:
Sura 2: 221, 230, 232, 235 & 237; Sura 4: 6, 22 ,25 & 127; Sura 24:3, 27, 32, 33, 60 & 127; Sura 33: 49 & 50
The meaning of “Nikah”
What exactly does “Nikah” mean? The word Nikah doesn’t exactly mean “Marriage.” Let’s explore what the word means from the classical Islamic reference books according to the opinion of recognized Islamic scholars.
From: Dictionary of the Quranic phrases and its meaning; Sheik Mousa Ben Mohammed Al Kaleeby, Cairo, Maktabat Al Adab, 2002
The definition of “Nikah” is the penetration of one thing by another. Examples would be as in saying the seed (N) the soil or sleep (N) the eye. It also can mean the entwining of two objects one with the other. An example would be saying the trees (N) each other, meaning they entwined with one another.
From: Kitab (Book of) Al Nikah. Commentary of Imam Ahmed Ben Ali Ben Hagar Al Askalani, Beirut, Dar Al Balagha, 1986
Linguistically, “Nikah” means embracing or penetrating. When it is pronounced “Nokh” it refers to a woman’s vagina. It is mainly used in the context of “sexual intercourse.” When it was used in reference to marriage it is because sex is a necessity in marriage. Al Fassi said,”If someone says a certain man (N) a certain woman, it means he married her, and if he says a man (N) his wife, it means he has sexual intercourse with her.” The word can also be used metaphorically as with expressions: the rain (N) the ground, or, the sleep (N) the eyes, or, the seed (N) the soil, or, the pebble (N) the camel’s hoof. When it was used in the context of marriage it is because sexual intercourse is the purpose of marriage. It is necessary in marriage to “taste the honey” (an Islamic expression meaning literal intercourse). This is the how the word has generally been used in the Quran except in the verse that says, “Make trial of orphans until they reach the age of (N)” Sura 4: 6. In that instance it pertains to the age of puberty. The Shafia and Hanafi schools of jurisprudence assert that the word nikah when used as a fact conveys that sexual intercourse has occurred. And when used as a figure of speech it denotes marriage. The reason for this variance is because it is offensive to mention the word “intercourse,” so a metonymic word is used to substitute it
In conclusion.
There is a word in Arabic that correctly translates “marriage.” It is “zawag.” However, “Nikah, the (N) word,” which is more commonly used in translations of the Quran to mean marriage, carries entirely different implications. “Nikah” implies that the emphasis in the relationship between a man and his wife solely sexual. This degrades marriage. It is another proof about how Islam looks down on marriage and the role women play in it. It enforces the Islamic concept that a wife's primary role in Islam is that of a sex object, created to satisfy the husband’s sexual appetites. On the other hand, marriage in the Christian tradition is a union between a husband and his wife based on mutual love, respect and equality. It is two people of the opposite sex becoming one, not just for sex, but to be the nucleus for a family that shares ALL of life’s challenges. While sex is an important part of marriage, it is tragic to consider it primary. Marriage is a life-long relationship that supposed to lovingly endure beyond the perimeters of sex.
“And, Allah knows best,” as the Muslims would say.
The Islamic “N” Word;
What Does It Exactly Mean?
By Abdullah Al Araby
Those who master the Arabic language, and who have read the Quran in the original Arabic, are usually stunned when they read it translated into a foreign language. They can’t help but notice that there are numerous discrepancies between the original Arabic and the translation. Careful examinations would lead one to discern that these are not merely routine human errors. Analytical thinking uncovers the reality that the discrepancies are part of a deliberate, intentional plot to deceive. The translator‘s objective is to distract the foreign readers and prospective converts from the cruelties and prejudices of the Quran.
Certain words, concepts and phrases in the original Arabic Quran sound strange to foreign readers. Arabic speaking Muslims have become accustomed to them. However, when one attempts accurate literal translation of these, the result is rather shocking. You will have in hand a book that contains strange expressions and vulgar language. What was supposed to be a “holy” book would become X-rated, unsuitable for family-oriented use and children reading material.
Muslim translators facing this dilemma, found themselves in a position demanding meticulous cleverness. It would take a lot of patching and polishing to make their translations of the Quran read as a “holy” book should.. Their aim was to present the outside world a version of the Quran that would attract people to Islam rather than repel them from it.
The intentional mistranslation of the Quran is a massive subject that needs to be explored and dealt with in a separate thesis. For the purpose of this article we will give just a few examples before zeroing in on the topic of this article.
In Sura 112:1
"Say: He is Allah, the One and Only..”. In the original Arabic, the word which was translated "Only" in this verse was actually "One of." The translator couldn't literarily translate it, because it would have implied "shirk" (associating other Deities with Allah).
In Sura 33:056
“Allah and His angels send blessings on the Prophet: O ye that believe! Send ye blessings on him, and salute him with all respect.”
The phrase “send blessings” was originally “pray upon”. The translator didn’t think it is appropriate to say that God and His Angels would pray upon (inferring praying to) the prophet Mohamed, so he had to change it to “send blessings.”
This is an example of the difficulty translators sometimes face when trying to literarily translate the Quran, and how they have to deviate from the original text to present something that makes sense. We are not trying to say here that Muslims believe that God or Muslims pray to Mohammed.
In Sura 24: 30, & 31
“Say to the believing men that they should lower their gaze and guard their modesty: that will make for greater purity for them: And Allah is well acquainted with all that they do…… And say to the believing women that they should lower their gaze and guard their modesty….”;
”The phrase “their modesty” was originally a word which means the specific private parts of a man or a woman. The translator didn’t think it is appropriate to literarily translate the word.
In Sura 4:34
“As to those women on whose part ye fear disloyalty and ill-conduct, admonish them (first), (Next), refuse to share their beds, (And last) beat them (lightly); but if they return to obedience, seek not against them Means (of annoyance): For Allah is Most High, great (above you all).”
This verse actually gives a husband the right to beat his wife if he deems her disobedient. The translator attempted to reduce the shocking effect of such teaching and substituted his own inventions. First, he introduced the concept that the discipline progresses in stages; (first, next, and last). The stages do not exist in the original Arabic. The verse in its original form implies that a husband can choose one or all of three responses, if he thinks his wife is disobedient. The stages are the product of the translator’s devious imagination. Even his terminology about the degree of severity permitted in beating a wife is also deceptive. The qualifying word lightly does not exist in the original Arabic Quran. His plot was to soften and qualify the concept of beating one’s wife by adding in the word lightly. The Arabic Quran says “beat them,” period.
Another word in the list of serious intentional mistranslation is the Arabic word “Nikah.” The word has been translated as “marriage.” But those who understand Arabic know that this is not the exact meaning of the word. There is another word that is normally translated as marriage, and correctly so. It is the Arabic word “Zawag.” It is also mentioned in the Quran, as in the following verses:
“Then when Zaid had dissolved (his marriage) with her, with the necessary (formality), We joined her in marriage to thee: in order that (in future) there may be no difficulty to the Believers in (the matter of) marriage with the wives of their adopted sons, when the latter have dissolved with the necessary (formality) (their marriage) with them. And Allah's command must be fulfilled.” Sura 33: 37
The Arabic word “Nikah” is also translated as “marriage" in many other verses in the Quran as in the following:
“If ye fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly with the orphans, Marry women of your choice, Two or three or four” Sura 4: 3
“Let no man guilty of adultery or fornication marry and but a woman similarly guilty, or an Unbeliever: nor let any but such a man or an Unbeliever marry such a woman: to the Believers such a thing is forbidden.” Sura 24: 3
“And when ye ask (Mohammed’s wives) for anything ye want, ask them from before a screen: that makes for greater purity for your hearts and for theirs. Nor is it right for you that ye should annoy Allah's Messenger, or that ye should marry his widows after him at any time. Truly such a thing is in Allah's sight an enormity.” Sura 33: 53
Other verses where this word is also used are:
Sura 2: 221, 230, 232, 235 & 237; Sura 4: 6, 22 ,25 & 127; Sura 24:3, 27, 32, 33, 60 & 127; Sura 33: 49 & 50
The meaning of “Nikah”
What exactly does “Nikah” mean? The word Nikah doesn’t exactly mean “Marriage.” Let’s explore what the word means from the classical Islamic reference books according to the opinion of recognized Islamic scholars.
From: Dictionary of the Quranic phrases and its meaning; Sheik Mousa Ben Mohammed Al Kaleeby, Cairo, Maktabat Al Adab, 2002
The definition of “Nikah” is the penetration of one thing by another. Examples would be as in saying the seed (N) the soil or sleep (N) the eye. It also can mean the entwining of two objects one with the other. An example would be saying the trees (N) each other, meaning they entwined with one another.
From: Kitab (Book of) Al Nikah. Commentary of Imam Ahmed Ben Ali Ben Hagar Al Askalani, Beirut, Dar Al Balagha, 1986
Linguistically, “Nikah” means embracing or penetrating. When it is pronounced “Nokh” it refers to a woman’s vagina. It is mainly used in the context of “sexual intercourse.” When it was used in reference to marriage it is because sex is a necessity in marriage. Al Fassi said,”If someone says a certain man (N) a certain woman, it means he married her, and if he says a man (N) his wife, it means he has sexual intercourse with her.” The word can also be used metaphorically as with expressions: the rain (N) the ground, or, the sleep (N) the eyes, or, the seed (N) the soil, or, the pebble (N) the camel’s hoof. When it was used in the context of marriage it is because sexual intercourse is the purpose of marriage. It is necessary in marriage to “taste the honey” (an Islamic expression meaning literal intercourse). This is the how the word has generally been used in the Quran except in the verse that says, “Make trial of orphans until they reach the age of (N)” Sura 4: 6. In that instance it pertains to the age of puberty. The Shafia and Hanafi schools of jurisprudence assert that the word nikah when used as a fact conveys that sexual intercourse has occurred. And when used as a figure of speech it denotes marriage. The reason for this variance is because it is offensive to mention the word “intercourse,” so a metonymic word is used to substitute it
In conclusion.
There is a word in Arabic that correctly translates “marriage.” It is “zawag.” However, “Nikah, the (N) word,” which is more commonly used in translations of the Quran to mean marriage, carries entirely different implications. “Nikah” implies that the emphasis in the relationship between a man and his wife solely sexual. This degrades marriage. It is another proof about how Islam looks down on marriage and the role women play in it. It enforces the Islamic concept that a wife's primary role in Islam is that of a sex object, created to satisfy the husband’s sexual appetites. On the other hand, marriage in the Christian tradition is a union between a husband and his wife based on mutual love, respect and equality. It is two people of the opposite sex becoming one, not just for sex, but to be the nucleus for a family that shares ALL of life’s challenges. While sex is an important part of marriage, it is tragic to consider it primary. Marriage is a life-long relationship that supposed to lovingly endure beyond the perimeters of sex.
“And, Allah knows best,” as the Muslims would say.
THE TERROR OF ISLAM
THE TERROR OF ISLAM
By Abdullah Al Araby
It happens almost daily, from Bali, to Moscow, to Tel Aviv, and it is a daily occurrence in Europe. Now it is beginning to be a serious threat to our peaceful way of life in the United States. The word is TERRORISM, and almost every time you hear or read about it, it is attached to the word “Islamic.”
Islam: A religion of peace?
Muslim activists emphasize that Islam is a religion of peace. They say that “Islam” is derived from the Arabic word “Salam,” meaning peace, while Islam, in fact, means “Surrender” (to the will of Allah).
To prove that Islam stands for peace, Muslims often quote certain verses out of the early period of the Quranic revelation. Here are some of them.
“Let there be no compulsion in religion.” Surah 2: 256
“And have patience with what they (opponents) say, and leave them with noble (dignity).” Surah 73:10
However, what Muslim advocates deliberately fail to say is that the peaceful verses from the Meccan period have been abrogated (nullified) and replaced by the militant verses of the Medinan period. These verses were written after Mohammed moved to Medina, abandoned his peaceful approach and resorted to using the sword. As an example of the abrogation, 124 verses of the Quran that call for tolerance, peace, and patience have been canceled and replaced by this one single verse:
"Fight and slay the Pagans wherever ye find them, and seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem (of war.)” Surah 9:5
Islamic violence around the world
The following are news items taken from newspapers in recent years:
August 5, 2003, JAKARTA, Indonesia
A powerful car bomb exploded outside the Marriott hotel in downtown Jakarta on Tuesday, killing 13 people and wounding nearly 149 in what an official said was likely a suicide attack. A Dutch citizen was reportedly among the dead and two Americans were believed hurt.
November 28, 2002 - Mombassa, Kenya
“A statement attributed to al-Qaeda claimed responsibility for the car-bombing of an Israeli-owned hotel in Kenya and the attempt to shoot down an Israeli airliner in the same day. The statement called the attack a “Ramadan Greeting” to the Palestinian people.”
October 14, 2002 - Bali, Indonesia
“In the tourist island of Bali, bombs were exploded by a Muslim group known as Jemiah Islami. The bombs were detonated in the “Sari Club and Hotel” and at the public “Kuta Beach,” killing 200, mainly western tourists and wounding 500 that were mainly local Hindus. In poverty stricken Muslim Indonesia the island of Bali is an oasis of hope, generating 70% of the nation’s tourism revenue.”
September 11, 2001 - New York, USA
“Thousands of Americans are missing and presumed dead in the worst terrorist attack by Muslim extremists in the United States history. Two hijacked airliners on a suicide mission crashed into New York's Twin Towers, causing their collapse. A third crashed into the Pentagon, and a fourth went down in western Pennsylvania, its mission believed to have been thwarted by passengers."
October 12, 2000 - Aden, Yemen
“Muslim extremists crashed a small boat, loaded with explosives, into the Navy destroyer USS Cole, docked in the port of Aden, Yemen. The explosion blew a 40X40 hole in the ship killing 17 American sailors and injuring dozens of others.”
August 7, 1998 - Kenya and Tanzania
“Bombs placed by Muslim extremists exploded at U.S embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, killing at least 224 people, including 12 Americans. Washington responded with cruise missile attacks on sites allegedly linked to Osama bin Laden.”
November 17, 1997 - Luxor, Egypt
“Muslim militants marched into Southern Egypt’s Temple of Hatshepsut and massacred 58 tourists. The incident was one of the deadliest acts of terrorism directed specifically at tourists."
June 25, 1996 - Khober, Saudi Arabia
“A Muslim extremist truck bomb exploded outside the Khobar Towers housing complex near Dhahran, Saudi Arabia. 19 U.S. Air Force personnel are killed and more than 500 Americans and Saudis are injured.”
October 19, 1994 - Tel Aviv, Israel
“A powerful bomb, apparently placed by Islamic militants opposed to the Arab-Israeli peace negotiations, blew up a crowded bus during the morning rush hour in the heart of Tel Aviv, Israel. 22 people were killed and 48 were injured.”
July 18, 1994 - Buenos Aires, Argentina
“A huge bomb placed by Muslim extremists exploded destroying a seven-story downtown building housing two Jewish groups in Buenos Aires, Argentina. At least 26 people were killed and 127 were injured.”
February 26, 1993 – New York, USA
“A tremendous underground explosion rocks the 110-story twin towers of Manhattan's World Trade Center killing at least five people and injuring more than 1000. Tens of thousands of workers are sent fleeing for their lives down crowded smoke-filled stairs. Authorities believe that the explosion was caused by a bomb placed by Muslim extremists.”
May 4, 1992 - Mansheit Nasser, Egypt
“13 Egyptian Christians were shot dead by Muslim fundamentalists in Mansheit Nasser, Egypt. Ten Christian farmers were ambushed and murdered while working in their fields. A Christian teacher was shot in the local school while teaching a class of ten-year olds. A Christian doctor was shot dead outside his home.”
top
Silencing the opposition
Muslims have been taught not to question Allah and his Apostle. They are ordered to accept and practice their sayings regardless of how irrational they may sound. They were also taught to react violently toward anyone who questioned or criticized Allah or Mohammed.
Mohammed was a prime example of this to his followers; he had no tolerance for anyone who uttered the slightest insult about him. The poetess, Asmaa bint Marwan, was killed for uttering a few verses of poetry against Mohammed. A Muslim assassin, acting on Mohammed's orders, crept in at night to the women's bed, while her suckling baby was attached to her breast. The man plucked the baby from her breast and then plunged his sword into her abdomen. Another example was Abu Afak, an old man of 120 years of age, was murdered for composing poetry critical of the Prophet.
The essential problem is that the fruit of Mohammed's legacy exists today. As Muslims get deeper into Islam, they simply try to follow in the footsteps of their prime example by dealing in force against anything that they perceive as anti-Islam. Shaikh Abdul Aziz al-Alshaikh, the Grand Mufti of Saudi Arabia the highest official cleric in the country, issued a fatwa (sanction) which was published in the government’s religious magazine “Al-Dawa,” in May 11, 2000. The Fatwa was in an answer to a Muslim’s question, “If there were websites on the Internet that are hostile to Islam, and broadcast immoral materials, is it permissible for me to send it viruses to disable these websites and destroy them?” Abdel Aziz answered, “If these websites are hostile to Islam and you could encounter its evilness with goodness, and respond to it, refute its falsehood, and show its void content; that would be the best option. But if you are unable to respond to it, and you wanted to destroy it and you have the ability to do so, its ok to destroy it because it is an evil website.”
There are many examples of violent acts committed against intellectuals who in the course of their creative work stumbled into forbidden domains, and committed the unpardonable sin of speaking their mind against Islam or the prophet Mohammed.
On November 26, 2002, the deputy governor of a largely Islamic state in northern Nigeria called on Muslims to kill the Nigerian writer of a newspaper article about the Miss World beauty pageant1. The article sparked deadly riots that killed about 215 and injured over 500 people. 4,500 lost their homes in reaction to the article. Isioma Daniel, a Lagos-based fashion writer, was commenting on Muslims objection to the beauty pageant and reportedly wrote that Mohammed would have approved of the pageant: “What would Mohammed think? In all honesty, he would probably have chosen a wife from among them.” This comment was seen by Muslims as an insult to their prophet. A Muslim leader issued an edict, “If she (Daniel) is Muslim, she has no option except to die. But if she is a non-Muslim, the only way out for her is to convert to Islam.” Daniel now is in hiding
On November 5, 2002, Professor Hashem Aghajari, was sentenced to death in Tehran2. He was charged for questioning the hard-line clergy’s interpretation of the Quran. In a speech, Aghajari had said that the clerics’ teachings on Islam were considered sacred simply because they were part of history, and he questioned why clerics were the only ones authorized to interpret Islam. Aghajari’s speech provoked organized street rallies by hard-liners in several cities.
On July 30, 2001, well-known Egyptian feminist writer, Nawal Al-Saadawi, appeared in court. A case had been filed against her in May, calling for a divorce from her husband, Sherif Hitata, in relation to comments she had made on religious issues3. The complaints against her were based on the “Hisba” law. It is an Islamic legal procedure that allows an individual to file complaints, on behalf of society, against another individual.
In 1995, Dr. Nasr Hamed Abu Zeid, a university professor in Cairo, was faced with similar charges. On June 14, 1995, a Court of Appeal ruled that he had insulted the Islamic faith in his writings4. It ordered his wife to divorce him on the grounds that, as a Muslim, she should not remain married to an apostate. The Court of Cassation upheld the ruling in August of 1996. Dr. Nasr and his wife are currently living in exile in Europe and continue to challenge their forced divorce before a judicial appeals body in Egypt.
On June 4, 1994, Taslima Nasrin, 32, a Bangladesh feminist and writer, fled her Dhaka apartment and went into hiding5. A warrant was issued for her arrest after a newspaper in India quoted her as saying that the Quran should be revised. She was accused of offending the religious sentiments of Muslims. Nasrin denied making such statement, saying that she had not called for a revision of the Quran, but of Islamic law, known as Sharia. Despite her denial and clarification, Muslims radicals intensified their campaign against her. A Muslim leader in Khulna, 30 miles south of Dhaka, offered $2,500 in cash for her assassination. The government finally charged her with “intent to deliberately and maliciously outrage the religious feelings of Muslims.”
In 1988 Naguib Mahfouz received his Nobel Prize for Literature for his novel, “Children of Gebelawi”. Islamic fundamentalist later condemned the novel as blasphemous6. This caused an uproar akin to the later reaction against Salman Rushdie's, Satanic Verses. In 1994 the Nobel Prize laureate was stabbed in the neck with a kitchen knife. Two Egyptian Islamic militants were sentenced to death in 1995 for attempting to kill him. Upon questioning, the assailants admitted that they had never read the novel, and that they had acted upon a religious fatwa (edict) made by their leaders.
In June 1992 a member of Gamaa Islamiya assassinated Dr. Farag Fouda7, an Egyptian university professor, an intellectual, and a staunch advocate of secularism. His assassin confessed that he was motivated by a debate between Fouda, Ghazali and Hodeibi, and a statement made by a council of Azhar scholars calling Fouda “a follower of the non-religious current and extremely hostile to anything Islamic.” He reported that he felt that the assassination was his duty for the fulfillment of Islamist objectives. Farag Fouda was the first to warn against the ideas of the Taliban and Al-Qaeda.
In 1988, Salman Rushdie, an Anglo-Indian novelist received his Whitbread Award for his novel “The Satanic Verses.” Later, the novel was criticized by Islamists around the world, banned in India and South Africa, and burned on the streets of Bradford, Yorkshire, UK. The Ayotollah Khomeini issued a fatwa (an edict) to execute the writer and the publisher of the book8. An aid to Khomeini offered a million-dollar reward for Rushdie’s death. In 1990 Rushdie published an essay titled “In Good Faith” to appease his critics and issued an apology in which he reaffirmed his respect for Islam. However, Iranian clerics did not withdraw their death threat. In 1993 the publisher was wounded in an attack outside his house. Rushdie went into hiding. In 1997 the price on Rushdie’s head was doubled. A few years later the highest Iranian state prosecutor, Morteza Moqtadale, renewed the death sentence. During this period of fatwa, violent protest broke out in India, Pakistan, and Egypt causing several deaths.
The items that I have mentioned are just a few examples out of thousands of terrorist attacks. They all have one element in common: they were all committed by Muslim extremists. While there are extremists in other groups who are capable of committing acts of violence, it seems that violence committed by Muslim extremists exceeds the violence of all other groups combined.
top
Why do Muslim extremists act this way?
Are Muslims acting this way because they are inherently inhuman, savage, and evil? Of course not; Muslims are ordinary people, just like anybody else. They are fathers, brothers and sons. They are doctors, engineers and lawyers. They are your co-workers, and your next-door neighbors. Only the Muslims who hold extremist views are capable of committing these acts of violence.
So, what goes on in their minds, causing them to act violently?
To understand this, one must understand an important and dangerous Islamic teaching called “Jihad” (Holy war). It is important to understand that not every Arab is a Muslim, not every Muslim is an Arab, and not every Muslim is an extremist. We are not trying to attack a group of people here; we are only exposing a teaching within a religion that could have a serious effect on all society. |
It is also important to know that in exercising Jihad, Muslims may not think they are trying to maliciously hurt others, but rather they think that they are only obeying God's commandments. And, by doing so, they are assuring themselves of a place in Paradise.
Jihad (Holy War)
Jihad is one of many sacred duties Muslims perform. The word “Jihad” is an Arabic word, which means, “struggle.” Jihad can mean the struggle within oneself to be a better Muslim, but it can also mean fighting in the name of Allah. In this sense Jihad is the struggle for the cause of spreading Islam, using all means available to Muslims including force. This kind of Jihad is often referred to as “Holy War.”
In resorting to force, Muslims will not have any problem finding passages in the Quran (believed by Muslims to be Allah's word), and the Hadith (Mohammed's sayings), that not only condone violence, but demand it. Somebody counted the times the word “kill” and other words derived from it that appeared in the Quran and Hadith and found them to be about 24,400 times.
It is bad enough if a religion calls on adherents to kill themselves, but what right do they have to kill others? If Allah gives Muslims the right to kill, what kind of God is he that orders followers to kill innocent people on his behalf?
top
Jihad in the Quran
Allah orders Muslims in the Quran to terrorize non-Muslims on His behalf:
“Strike terror (into the hearts of) the enemies of Allah and your enemies.” Surah 8:60
“Fight (kill) them (non-Muslims), and Allah will punish (torment) them by your hands, cover them with shame.” Surah 9:14
“I will instill terror into the hearts of the unbelievers, smite ye above their necks and smite all their finger-tips off them It is not ye who slew them; it was Allah.” Surah 8:12, 17
“But when the forbidden months are past, then fight and slay the Pagans wherever ye find them, and seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem (of war); but if they repent, and establish regular prayers and practice regular charity, then open the way for them: for Allah is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful.” Surah 9:5
“Fight (kill) those who believe not in Allah, nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.”
Surah 9:29
Jihad in the “Hadith”
In the Hadith, Mohammed also urges Muslims to practice Jihad. Mohammed once was asked: “what is the best deed for the Muslim next to believing in Allah and His Apostle?” His answer was: “To participate in Jihad in Allah's cause.” Al Bukhari vol. 1:25
Mohammed was quoted as saying: “I have been ordered to fight with the people till they say, none has the right to be worshipped but Allah.” Al Bukhari vol. 4:196
Mohammed also said, “the person who participates in (Holy Battles) in Allah's cause and nothing compels him to do so except belief in Allah and His Apostle, will be recompensed by Allah either with a reward, or booty (if he survives) or will be admitted to paradise (if he is killed).” Al Bukhari vol. 1:35
top
Mohammed’s Example
When the prophet of Islam started preaching his new religion in Mecca, he was conciliatory to Christians and Jews. He told them: “We believe in what has been sent down to us and sent down to you, our God is the same as your God.” Surah 29:45
This attitude changed completely after he gained strength. Allah then allegedly told him to “Fight People of the Book (Christians and Jews), who do not accept the religion of the truth (Islam), until they pay tribute (penalty tax) by hand, being inferior.” Surah 9:29
Comparing Christians to the Jews, it seems that Mohammed hated the Jews more. The Quran clearly states:
“Strongest among men in enmity to the believers wilt thou find theJews and Pagans; 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.” Surah 5: 82
During his lifetime, Mohammed devoted much of his efforts to get rid of the Jews. He stated. “You (Jews) should know that the earth belongs to Allah and his apostle, and I want to expel you from this land (the Arabian Peninsula), so, if anyone owns property, he is permitted to sell it.” Al-Bukhari vol. 4:392
At that time, there were three Jewish tribes in Medina. Mohammed’s men besieged two of them, the Bani Qaynqa and the Bani-al-Nudair tribes. Their access to food supplies was blocked until they surrendered on Mohammed's terms. His terms for their lives to be spared were that they had to deposit all their belongings at a certain place for distribution among Muslims and then emigrate from Medina.
The third tribe, Bani Qurayza, was not as lucky. During the War of the Trench, Abu Sofyan led a siege against Mohammed’s forces. Afterward, it was alleged that Bani Qurayza agreed to provide help from within to Abu Sofyan's forces. The alleged help never materialized and the siege eventually ended. Nonetheless, Mohammed never forgave them for their willingness to help his enemies.
The Muslims turned against the Bani Qurayza tribe and blocked their streets for twenty-five days. Then the Jewish tribe expressed readiness to accept the surrender terms that had been afforded to the other two Jewish tribes. Their belongings were to be confiscated and they were to be granted safe conduct for their departure from the area10.
Mohammed, however, would not consent to this. Instead he appointed as an arbiter Saad iben Moaz, a man who was known to be on bad terms with Bani Qurayza. Saad ruled that all Bani Qurayza's men should be beheaded, that the women and children should be sold as slaves and that all their property should be divided among the Muslims. Trenches were dug in the bazaar of Medina for disposal of the eight to nine hundred Jewish bodies whom Mohammed and his men had spent the night slaughtering. (See Ibn Hisham: The Prophet's biography; vol. 2 pages 240 & 241).
top
In Conclusion:
These are historical facts that occurred 14 centuries ago. They represent a dangerous tendency for violence in the Muslim mentality. More serious is that Muslim fundamentalists are trying to repeat these acts of violence in this 21st century.
In doing so they are terrorizing individuals and governments as well. Islamic violent protests occur around the world whenever Islam is being criticized. As a result, governments around the globe have started to enact laws under the pretext of “hate crimes.” These laws prosecute anyone who criticizes Islam or Muslims. The laws have, in fact, very little to do with hate crimes. They are designed only to appease Muslims, and quell their wrath, for the sake of peace and tranquility in society.
Nothing is mentioned about the criticism Christianity receives from Muslim religious leaders in the media of the Islamic world and of the West as well. But Christians are tolerant of criticism against their religion; no riots, nobody gets killed, and no buildings get burned. No wonder, nobody cares about hate crimes against Christians.
Once again we are being held hostage. One of the weapons that are being used to keep us as hostages is terror, and more terror.
top
By Abdullah Al Araby
It happens almost daily, from Bali, to Moscow, to Tel Aviv, and it is a daily occurrence in Europe. Now it is beginning to be a serious threat to our peaceful way of life in the United States. The word is TERRORISM, and almost every time you hear or read about it, it is attached to the word “Islamic.”
Islam: A religion of peace?
Muslim activists emphasize that Islam is a religion of peace. They say that “Islam” is derived from the Arabic word “Salam,” meaning peace, while Islam, in fact, means “Surrender” (to the will of Allah).
To prove that Islam stands for peace, Muslims often quote certain verses out of the early period of the Quranic revelation. Here are some of them.
“Let there be no compulsion in religion.” Surah 2: 256
“And have patience with what they (opponents) say, and leave them with noble (dignity).” Surah 73:10
However, what Muslim advocates deliberately fail to say is that the peaceful verses from the Meccan period have been abrogated (nullified) and replaced by the militant verses of the Medinan period. These verses were written after Mohammed moved to Medina, abandoned his peaceful approach and resorted to using the sword. As an example of the abrogation, 124 verses of the Quran that call for tolerance, peace, and patience have been canceled and replaced by this one single verse:
"Fight and slay the Pagans wherever ye find them, and seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem (of war.)” Surah 9:5
Islamic violence around the world
The following are news items taken from newspapers in recent years:
August 5, 2003, JAKARTA, Indonesia
A powerful car bomb exploded outside the Marriott hotel in downtown Jakarta on Tuesday, killing 13 people and wounding nearly 149 in what an official said was likely a suicide attack. A Dutch citizen was reportedly among the dead and two Americans were believed hurt.
November 28, 2002 - Mombassa, Kenya
“A statement attributed to al-Qaeda claimed responsibility for the car-bombing of an Israeli-owned hotel in Kenya and the attempt to shoot down an Israeli airliner in the same day. The statement called the attack a “Ramadan Greeting” to the Palestinian people.”
October 14, 2002 - Bali, Indonesia
“In the tourist island of Bali, bombs were exploded by a Muslim group known as Jemiah Islami. The bombs were detonated in the “Sari Club and Hotel” and at the public “Kuta Beach,” killing 200, mainly western tourists and wounding 500 that were mainly local Hindus. In poverty stricken Muslim Indonesia the island of Bali is an oasis of hope, generating 70% of the nation’s tourism revenue.”
September 11, 2001 - New York, USA
“Thousands of Americans are missing and presumed dead in the worst terrorist attack by Muslim extremists in the United States history. Two hijacked airliners on a suicide mission crashed into New York's Twin Towers, causing their collapse. A third crashed into the Pentagon, and a fourth went down in western Pennsylvania, its mission believed to have been thwarted by passengers."
October 12, 2000 - Aden, Yemen
“Muslim extremists crashed a small boat, loaded with explosives, into the Navy destroyer USS Cole, docked in the port of Aden, Yemen. The explosion blew a 40X40 hole in the ship killing 17 American sailors and injuring dozens of others.”
August 7, 1998 - Kenya and Tanzania
“Bombs placed by Muslim extremists exploded at U.S embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, killing at least 224 people, including 12 Americans. Washington responded with cruise missile attacks on sites allegedly linked to Osama bin Laden.”
November 17, 1997 - Luxor, Egypt
“Muslim militants marched into Southern Egypt’s Temple of Hatshepsut and massacred 58 tourists. The incident was one of the deadliest acts of terrorism directed specifically at tourists."
June 25, 1996 - Khober, Saudi Arabia
“A Muslim extremist truck bomb exploded outside the Khobar Towers housing complex near Dhahran, Saudi Arabia. 19 U.S. Air Force personnel are killed and more than 500 Americans and Saudis are injured.”
October 19, 1994 - Tel Aviv, Israel
“A powerful bomb, apparently placed by Islamic militants opposed to the Arab-Israeli peace negotiations, blew up a crowded bus during the morning rush hour in the heart of Tel Aviv, Israel. 22 people were killed and 48 were injured.”
July 18, 1994 - Buenos Aires, Argentina
“A huge bomb placed by Muslim extremists exploded destroying a seven-story downtown building housing two Jewish groups in Buenos Aires, Argentina. At least 26 people were killed and 127 were injured.”
February 26, 1993 – New York, USA
“A tremendous underground explosion rocks the 110-story twin towers of Manhattan's World Trade Center killing at least five people and injuring more than 1000. Tens of thousands of workers are sent fleeing for their lives down crowded smoke-filled stairs. Authorities believe that the explosion was caused by a bomb placed by Muslim extremists.”
May 4, 1992 - Mansheit Nasser, Egypt
“13 Egyptian Christians were shot dead by Muslim fundamentalists in Mansheit Nasser, Egypt. Ten Christian farmers were ambushed and murdered while working in their fields. A Christian teacher was shot in the local school while teaching a class of ten-year olds. A Christian doctor was shot dead outside his home.”
top
Silencing the opposition
Muslims have been taught not to question Allah and his Apostle. They are ordered to accept and practice their sayings regardless of how irrational they may sound. They were also taught to react violently toward anyone who questioned or criticized Allah or Mohammed.
Mohammed was a prime example of this to his followers; he had no tolerance for anyone who uttered the slightest insult about him. The poetess, Asmaa bint Marwan, was killed for uttering a few verses of poetry against Mohammed. A Muslim assassin, acting on Mohammed's orders, crept in at night to the women's bed, while her suckling baby was attached to her breast. The man plucked the baby from her breast and then plunged his sword into her abdomen. Another example was Abu Afak, an old man of 120 years of age, was murdered for composing poetry critical of the Prophet.
The essential problem is that the fruit of Mohammed's legacy exists today. As Muslims get deeper into Islam, they simply try to follow in the footsteps of their prime example by dealing in force against anything that they perceive as anti-Islam. Shaikh Abdul Aziz al-Alshaikh, the Grand Mufti of Saudi Arabia the highest official cleric in the country, issued a fatwa (sanction) which was published in the government’s religious magazine “Al-Dawa,” in May 11, 2000. The Fatwa was in an answer to a Muslim’s question, “If there were websites on the Internet that are hostile to Islam, and broadcast immoral materials, is it permissible for me to send it viruses to disable these websites and destroy them?” Abdel Aziz answered, “If these websites are hostile to Islam and you could encounter its evilness with goodness, and respond to it, refute its falsehood, and show its void content; that would be the best option. But if you are unable to respond to it, and you wanted to destroy it and you have the ability to do so, its ok to destroy it because it is an evil website.”
There are many examples of violent acts committed against intellectuals who in the course of their creative work stumbled into forbidden domains, and committed the unpardonable sin of speaking their mind against Islam or the prophet Mohammed.
On November 26, 2002, the deputy governor of a largely Islamic state in northern Nigeria called on Muslims to kill the Nigerian writer of a newspaper article about the Miss World beauty pageant1. The article sparked deadly riots that killed about 215 and injured over 500 people. 4,500 lost their homes in reaction to the article. Isioma Daniel, a Lagos-based fashion writer, was commenting on Muslims objection to the beauty pageant and reportedly wrote that Mohammed would have approved of the pageant: “What would Mohammed think? In all honesty, he would probably have chosen a wife from among them.” This comment was seen by Muslims as an insult to their prophet. A Muslim leader issued an edict, “If she (Daniel) is Muslim, she has no option except to die. But if she is a non-Muslim, the only way out for her is to convert to Islam.” Daniel now is in hiding
On November 5, 2002, Professor Hashem Aghajari, was sentenced to death in Tehran2. He was charged for questioning the hard-line clergy’s interpretation of the Quran. In a speech, Aghajari had said that the clerics’ teachings on Islam were considered sacred simply because they were part of history, and he questioned why clerics were the only ones authorized to interpret Islam. Aghajari’s speech provoked organized street rallies by hard-liners in several cities.
On July 30, 2001, well-known Egyptian feminist writer, Nawal Al-Saadawi, appeared in court. A case had been filed against her in May, calling for a divorce from her husband, Sherif Hitata, in relation to comments she had made on religious issues3. The complaints against her were based on the “Hisba” law. It is an Islamic legal procedure that allows an individual to file complaints, on behalf of society, against another individual.
In 1995, Dr. Nasr Hamed Abu Zeid, a university professor in Cairo, was faced with similar charges. On June 14, 1995, a Court of Appeal ruled that he had insulted the Islamic faith in his writings4. It ordered his wife to divorce him on the grounds that, as a Muslim, she should not remain married to an apostate. The Court of Cassation upheld the ruling in August of 1996. Dr. Nasr and his wife are currently living in exile in Europe and continue to challenge their forced divorce before a judicial appeals body in Egypt.
On June 4, 1994, Taslima Nasrin, 32, a Bangladesh feminist and writer, fled her Dhaka apartment and went into hiding5. A warrant was issued for her arrest after a newspaper in India quoted her as saying that the Quran should be revised. She was accused of offending the religious sentiments of Muslims. Nasrin denied making such statement, saying that she had not called for a revision of the Quran, but of Islamic law, known as Sharia. Despite her denial and clarification, Muslims radicals intensified their campaign against her. A Muslim leader in Khulna, 30 miles south of Dhaka, offered $2,500 in cash for her assassination. The government finally charged her with “intent to deliberately and maliciously outrage the religious feelings of Muslims.”
In 1988 Naguib Mahfouz received his Nobel Prize for Literature for his novel, “Children of Gebelawi”. Islamic fundamentalist later condemned the novel as blasphemous6. This caused an uproar akin to the later reaction against Salman Rushdie's, Satanic Verses. In 1994 the Nobel Prize laureate was stabbed in the neck with a kitchen knife. Two Egyptian Islamic militants were sentenced to death in 1995 for attempting to kill him. Upon questioning, the assailants admitted that they had never read the novel, and that they had acted upon a religious fatwa (edict) made by their leaders.
In June 1992 a member of Gamaa Islamiya assassinated Dr. Farag Fouda7, an Egyptian university professor, an intellectual, and a staunch advocate of secularism. His assassin confessed that he was motivated by a debate between Fouda, Ghazali and Hodeibi, and a statement made by a council of Azhar scholars calling Fouda “a follower of the non-religious current and extremely hostile to anything Islamic.” He reported that he felt that the assassination was his duty for the fulfillment of Islamist objectives. Farag Fouda was the first to warn against the ideas of the Taliban and Al-Qaeda.
In 1988, Salman Rushdie, an Anglo-Indian novelist received his Whitbread Award for his novel “The Satanic Verses.” Later, the novel was criticized by Islamists around the world, banned in India and South Africa, and burned on the streets of Bradford, Yorkshire, UK. The Ayotollah Khomeini issued a fatwa (an edict) to execute the writer and the publisher of the book8. An aid to Khomeini offered a million-dollar reward for Rushdie’s death. In 1990 Rushdie published an essay titled “In Good Faith” to appease his critics and issued an apology in which he reaffirmed his respect for Islam. However, Iranian clerics did not withdraw their death threat. In 1993 the publisher was wounded in an attack outside his house. Rushdie went into hiding. In 1997 the price on Rushdie’s head was doubled. A few years later the highest Iranian state prosecutor, Morteza Moqtadale, renewed the death sentence. During this period of fatwa, violent protest broke out in India, Pakistan, and Egypt causing several deaths.
The items that I have mentioned are just a few examples out of thousands of terrorist attacks. They all have one element in common: they were all committed by Muslim extremists. While there are extremists in other groups who are capable of committing acts of violence, it seems that violence committed by Muslim extremists exceeds the violence of all other groups combined.
top
Why do Muslim extremists act this way?
Are Muslims acting this way because they are inherently inhuman, savage, and evil? Of course not; Muslims are ordinary people, just like anybody else. They are fathers, brothers and sons. They are doctors, engineers and lawyers. They are your co-workers, and your next-door neighbors. Only the Muslims who hold extremist views are capable of committing these acts of violence.
So, what goes on in their minds, causing them to act violently?
To understand this, one must understand an important and dangerous Islamic teaching called “Jihad” (Holy war). It is important to understand that not every Arab is a Muslim, not every Muslim is an Arab, and not every Muslim is an extremist. We are not trying to attack a group of people here; we are only exposing a teaching within a religion that could have a serious effect on all society. |
It is also important to know that in exercising Jihad, Muslims may not think they are trying to maliciously hurt others, but rather they think that they are only obeying God's commandments. And, by doing so, they are assuring themselves of a place in Paradise.
Jihad (Holy War)
Jihad is one of many sacred duties Muslims perform. The word “Jihad” is an Arabic word, which means, “struggle.” Jihad can mean the struggle within oneself to be a better Muslim, but it can also mean fighting in the name of Allah. In this sense Jihad is the struggle for the cause of spreading Islam, using all means available to Muslims including force. This kind of Jihad is often referred to as “Holy War.”
In resorting to force, Muslims will not have any problem finding passages in the Quran (believed by Muslims to be Allah's word), and the Hadith (Mohammed's sayings), that not only condone violence, but demand it. Somebody counted the times the word “kill” and other words derived from it that appeared in the Quran and Hadith and found them to be about 24,400 times.
It is bad enough if a religion calls on adherents to kill themselves, but what right do they have to kill others? If Allah gives Muslims the right to kill, what kind of God is he that orders followers to kill innocent people on his behalf?
top
Jihad in the Quran
Allah orders Muslims in the Quran to terrorize non-Muslims on His behalf:
“Strike terror (into the hearts of) the enemies of Allah and your enemies.” Surah 8:60
“Fight (kill) them (non-Muslims), and Allah will punish (torment) them by your hands, cover them with shame.” Surah 9:14
“I will instill terror into the hearts of the unbelievers, smite ye above their necks and smite all their finger-tips off them It is not ye who slew them; it was Allah.” Surah 8:12, 17
“But when the forbidden months are past, then fight and slay the Pagans wherever ye find them, and seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem (of war); but if they repent, and establish regular prayers and practice regular charity, then open the way for them: for Allah is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful.” Surah 9:5
“Fight (kill) those who believe not in Allah, nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.”
Surah 9:29
Jihad in the “Hadith”
In the Hadith, Mohammed also urges Muslims to practice Jihad. Mohammed once was asked: “what is the best deed for the Muslim next to believing in Allah and His Apostle?” His answer was: “To participate in Jihad in Allah's cause.” Al Bukhari vol. 1:25
Mohammed was quoted as saying: “I have been ordered to fight with the people till they say, none has the right to be worshipped but Allah.” Al Bukhari vol. 4:196
Mohammed also said, “the person who participates in (Holy Battles) in Allah's cause and nothing compels him to do so except belief in Allah and His Apostle, will be recompensed by Allah either with a reward, or booty (if he survives) or will be admitted to paradise (if he is killed).” Al Bukhari vol. 1:35
top
Mohammed’s Example
When the prophet of Islam started preaching his new religion in Mecca, he was conciliatory to Christians and Jews. He told them: “We believe in what has been sent down to us and sent down to you, our God is the same as your God.” Surah 29:45
This attitude changed completely after he gained strength. Allah then allegedly told him to “Fight People of the Book (Christians and Jews), who do not accept the religion of the truth (Islam), until they pay tribute (penalty tax) by hand, being inferior.” Surah 9:29
Comparing Christians to the Jews, it seems that Mohammed hated the Jews more. The Quran clearly states:
“Strongest among men in enmity to the believers wilt thou find theJews and Pagans; 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.” Surah 5: 82
During his lifetime, Mohammed devoted much of his efforts to get rid of the Jews. He stated. “You (Jews) should know that the earth belongs to Allah and his apostle, and I want to expel you from this land (the Arabian Peninsula), so, if anyone owns property, he is permitted to sell it.” Al-Bukhari vol. 4:392
At that time, there were three Jewish tribes in Medina. Mohammed’s men besieged two of them, the Bani Qaynqa and the Bani-al-Nudair tribes. Their access to food supplies was blocked until they surrendered on Mohammed's terms. His terms for their lives to be spared were that they had to deposit all their belongings at a certain place for distribution among Muslims and then emigrate from Medina.
The third tribe, Bani Qurayza, was not as lucky. During the War of the Trench, Abu Sofyan led a siege against Mohammed’s forces. Afterward, it was alleged that Bani Qurayza agreed to provide help from within to Abu Sofyan's forces. The alleged help never materialized and the siege eventually ended. Nonetheless, Mohammed never forgave them for their willingness to help his enemies.
The Muslims turned against the Bani Qurayza tribe and blocked their streets for twenty-five days. Then the Jewish tribe expressed readiness to accept the surrender terms that had been afforded to the other two Jewish tribes. Their belongings were to be confiscated and they were to be granted safe conduct for their departure from the area10.
Mohammed, however, would not consent to this. Instead he appointed as an arbiter Saad iben Moaz, a man who was known to be on bad terms with Bani Qurayza. Saad ruled that all Bani Qurayza's men should be beheaded, that the women and children should be sold as slaves and that all their property should be divided among the Muslims. Trenches were dug in the bazaar of Medina for disposal of the eight to nine hundred Jewish bodies whom Mohammed and his men had spent the night slaughtering. (See Ibn Hisham: The Prophet's biography; vol. 2 pages 240 & 241).
top
In Conclusion:
These are historical facts that occurred 14 centuries ago. They represent a dangerous tendency for violence in the Muslim mentality. More serious is that Muslim fundamentalists are trying to repeat these acts of violence in this 21st century.
In doing so they are terrorizing individuals and governments as well. Islamic violent protests occur around the world whenever Islam is being criticized. As a result, governments around the globe have started to enact laws under the pretext of “hate crimes.” These laws prosecute anyone who criticizes Islam or Muslims. The laws have, in fact, very little to do with hate crimes. They are designed only to appease Muslims, and quell their wrath, for the sake of peace and tranquility in society.
Nothing is mentioned about the criticism Christianity receives from Muslim religious leaders in the media of the Islamic world and of the West as well. But Christians are tolerant of criticism against their religion; no riots, nobody gets killed, and no buildings get burned. No wonder, nobody cares about hate crimes against Christians.
Once again we are being held hostage. One of the weapons that are being used to keep us as hostages is terror, and more terror.
top
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)