|
Also on this page, Parts
Two and
Three of "Is Islam a Tolerant Religion?"
[Editor's note: Jacob Thomas brings the ability to
translate from Arabic into crystal clear English.
That makes this trilogy of articles very valuable since
he has gone to an article few of us would ever know
about, and he extracts from the article but also the
ensuing comments. We in the West need to know that
there are Muslims out there who are properly critical of
Islam, and we need to know what they say. Thanks
to Jacob Thomas, we have this superb article set to read
and reference.]
Is
Islam a Tolerant Religion?
Part I
At the end of my article posted in
July/August 2006 , and entitled: “Reformation in
Islam: “Islam of Mecca” versus “Islam of Medina,”
I wondered whether “many other would-be reformers
will join the call for making the Meccan Qur’an,
the only standard for politics in Islam!” Well, I
did not have to wait long. The Elaph.com website
posted on 18 June an article with this title:
“Is Islam a Tolerant Religion?”
I
would like to share with you certain parts of that
article, followed by my analysis, and comments. The
author was very bold to tackle this subject, since it is
taboo to suggest the absence of tolerance in the Muslim
faith. He set forth his case by asking:
“Is Islam a tolerant religion?”
Yes, this is a question being repeatedly
asked nowadays, and it requires a proper answer. Now, if
it is true that Islam is a tolerant religion, am I then
allowed to ask this question? Or, would opening up this
subject lead many Muslims to hurl at me all kinds of
insults and charges, calling me a kafir, and a heretic?
“For example, recently I contributed an article on
“The Arab States and Terrorism.” An angry reader
responded with these threatening words: “You, an enemy
of the Creator [better watch out]…” Did that indicate a
spirit of tolerance among Muslims, to call another
person an “enemy of God,” simply because he held to a
different opinion?
“Now someone may respond, ‘That was the attitude of just
one individual, so why are you generalizing his remarks
as if they applied to all Muslims?’ However, the
behavior and attitude of Muslims towards the “Other,”
proves the opposite. The remark I alluded to was not
merely one man’s personal opinion. Rather, it has become
the rule among most Muslims. In fact the history of
Islam is filled with bloodletting due to the intolerance
vis-à-vis others who hold to different opinions.
“We notice that the mindset that seeks to destroy the
“Other,” as well as the rise of Islamic terrorism during
the last two decades, has placed Muslims in a bloody
confrontation with the world. This violent behavior has
left a strong impression among non-Muslims and those
enlightened [moderate] Muslims, that Islam is a religion
that advocates violence, and the rejection of the
‘Other.’ Islam is seen as a faith that does not tolerate
any criticism, and rejects all values of modernity and
cultural evolution. Islam seems to adhere only to
teachings that are firmly anchored in the past. In other
words, Islam recognizes neither the present, nor the
future. It is perceived as a religion that glorifies
death rather than life. The radicals have transformed
jihad into a synonym of Irhab
[terrorism,] to such an extent, that Islam and
Irhab have become two sides of the same coin.
Muslims, in the view of non-Muslims, are now presumed to
be terrorists, unless proven otherwise! Is it not
therefore, the duty of moderate Muslims to act quickly
and seek to rectify this view of Islam, and to show that
Muslims are human beings who want to live at peace, just
like the followers of other world religions?
“I
firmly believe that it is high time we face the
question, “Is Islam a Tolerant Religion?” To call
a person who poses this question, a kafir, or an
atheist, or participating in Crusader
or Zionist plots, is a proof of the inability of
most Muslims to face the real problem.
“I
do expect to get responses from those who claim that
Islam is a tolerant religion, and who would refer me to
several religious texts, in the Qur’an, and the
Sunna, that prove their point. On the other hand,
there are many more texts that prove the very opposite.
So, the problem that faces Muslims today is that those
who yield authority in Muslim countries refer to the
second set of texts, namely to those that advocate
intolerance vis-à-vis the ‘Other,’
or, the ‘Different.’ Furthermore, there has
always been a great gulf separating words from deeds
throughout the history of Islam; and this gulf has
widened during the present time.
“It is a well-known fact that Islam has a
different position, for example, regarding the United
Nations Declaration on Human Rights, even though
most Arab and Muslim states have signified their
agreement with the declaration. The UN speaks about
equality between human beings, and condemns any
discrimination based on religion, sect, or gender.
However, most Muslim states have declared their
opposition to such UN positions, on the ground that they
are incompatible with their religious texts. For
example, Christians, Jews, and Zoroastrians have faced
clear discrimination in Islamic countries, even though
these groups happen to be the original inhabitants of
the lands conquered by Islam! Muslims regard them as
“Dhimmis” who live now within Islamic states, and
who must pay the Jizya, ‘an yadin, wa-hom saghiroon,”
i.e. “they pay the tribute readily, being brought
low. (9:29)” [saghiroon
may be translated, minimized! JT]
“There are also certain Hadiths that approve of this
discrimination against Dhimmis. We mention one that
purports the Prophet as saying,
‘Don’t initiate a greeting with Jews and Christians, and
if you happen to pass by them, force him to walk on the
narrowest part of the road.’ Another hadith
attributed to Muhammad is; ‘There can be no two
religions in Arabia.’ We learn also that the second
Caliph, Umar ibn al-Khattab, forced all Jews and
Christians to leave Arabia during his term, 634-644.
“At present, as the Islamist movement keeps spreading,
you can add a lot more about the plight of the
minorities living within the Muslim world. In April
2006, the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood leader Muhammad
Mahdi stated to the weekly Rose el-Youssef, ‘To
[Expletive] with Egypt, and to those within Egypt. I’d
rather be governed by an Indonesian Muslim, than by a
Coptic Egyptian.’ It should be noted that the Copts
happen to be the original inhabitants of Egypt. Where is
the spirit of tolerance?
“Then there is a great deal to say about discrimination
against women. In spite of the fact that women don’t
differ from men except physiologically, and possess the
same intellectual abilities, and in some instances even
surpass men in such gifts, women in Islam are considered
as
‘deficient in mind and religion.’ The testimony of a
woman in the courts is worth only half a man’s
testimony. The same thing pertains in matters of
inheritance, for a ‘man’s portion is worth as much as
two women’s portions.’ When it comes to the rights
of a divorced woman, her husband is responsible for her
needs for three months only. In fact, a woman’s status
is on par with animals. This classification is supported
by an authentic hadith, ‘A man’s prayer is nullified
when a dog, or a donkey, or a woman, happens to pass
by.’ Please tell me, is this a manifestation of a
spirit of tolerance?
“Of course, there are many texts that call for
tolerance, pluralism, and the right to be different in
Islam. The problem is that the preachers of violence and
intolerance have a list of sacred texts that support
their position. Furthermore, they claim that those texts
that call for violence and the abolition of the
‘Other’ [reference is here to the Medinan surahs of
the Qur’an] possess a priority in importance, on the
ground that they ‘descended’ after the Meccan surahs,
[and thus have abrogated the Meccan surahs.]
“For example, we may refer to those
wonderful Ayas that call for tolerance, pluralism, and
the right of dissension, such as, ‘Had Allah willed
He could have made you (all) one nation, but He sendeth
whom He will astray and guideth whom He will, and ye
will indeed be asked of what ye used to do’
(16:93) M. M. Pickthall Translation
“And if thy Lord had willed, He verily
would have made mankind one nation, yet they cease not
differing. (11:118) MMP
“Call unto the way of thy Lord with
wisdom and fair exhortation, and reason with them in the
better way. Lo! thy Lord is Best Aware of him who
strayeth from His way, and He is Best Aware of those who
go aright.”
(16:125) MMP
“Say: (It is) the truth from the Lord of
you (all). Then whosoever will, let him believe, and
whosoever will, let him disbelieve. (18:29) MMP
“In support of the position of tolerance in Islam, this
saying is attributed to the Prophet:
“Differences among my people are a sign of mercy.”
“However, what is actually taking place in the Muslim
world, is exactly the very opposite of the texts quoted
above. For example, the Algerian Islamists [members of
the Front Islamique du Salut or FIS] declared during the
1990s, ‘Anyone who opposes us by his writings will be
answered by our guns.’ Practically, this attitude
was manifested in most Arab and Islamic countries for
the last two decades. It has led to the assassination of
tens of Arab lay intellectuals who were advancing the
cause of democracy. Not to forget the murder of about
250,000 people in Algeria alone due to the acts of the
Islamists. Around one thousand Iraqis are assassinated
every month by jihadists. And, in the Islamic Republic of
Iran, tens of freedom-loving intellectuals are
languishing in prisons, among them the author, Dr. Hashem Aghajeri. In Lebanon, Hizbollah declared that its
leader, Nasrallah is above criticism. So, when a TV
program made fun of that declaration, his followers took
to the streets and threatened all those who dared to
dissent from their position.
“Doubtless, those who are on the side of jihadism and
intolerance chose some of these sacred texts in support
of their views.
“O Prophet! Exhort the believers to
fight. If there be of you twenty steadfast they shall
overcome two hundred, and if there be of you a hundred
(steadfast) they shall overcome a thousand of those who
disbelieve, because they (the disbelievers) are a folk
without intelligence. (8:65)
MMP
“Make ready for them all thou canst of
(armed) force and of horses tethered, that thereby ye
may dismay the enemy of Allah and your enemy, and others
beside them whom ye know not. Allah knoweth them.
Whatsoever ye spend in the way of Allah it will be
repaid to you in full, and ye will not be wronged.”
(8:60) MMP
“Warfare is ordained for you, though it
is hateful unto you; but it may happen that ye hate a
thing which is good for you, and it may happen that ye
love a thing which is bad for you. Allah knoweth, ye
know not.” (2:216) MMP
“Fight in the way of Allah, and know that
Allah is Hearer, Knower.”
(2:244) MMP
“You shall fight back against those who
do not believe in GOD, nor in the Last Day, nor do they
prohibit what GOD and His messenger have prohibited, nor
do they abide by the religion of truth - among those who
received the scripture - until they pay the due tax,
willingly or unwillingly.”
(9:29) Khalifa’s translation.
“Fight against such of those who have
been given the Scripture as believe not in Allah nor the
Last Day, and forbid not that which Allah hath forbidden
by His messenger, and follow not the Religion of Truth,
until they pay the tribute readily, being brought low.”
(9:29) MMP
“Now it is beyond doubt that those leaders of Irhab
rely on such verses from the Qur’an and instill them
into the minds of young men changing them into human
robots, simply programmed for murder in the name of
Allah!
“Thus, in order for the Muslim world to live at peace
with the other civilizations, it is of utmost importance
that the religious leaders of Islam face honestly this
question: “Is Islam a religion of peace?” We need
a serious response from them in order to curb the
activities of the Jihadists and Irhabists who have
highjacked Islam. They must move quickly to clarify
Islam’s position regarding this mad violence that has
gripped the Muslim world, and spilled into many other
lands. They have to cleanse Islam from all the vestiges
of Irhab; otherwise, all of us will be paying a heavy
price for their inaction. Is there anyone, anybody
listening to me?”
Analysis
No doubt, the author of this article is very concerned
about the rising tide of intolerance in Islam, coupled
with the inability or unwillingness of Muslim religious
leaders to do anything about it. He cites his own
experience after writing an article about the “Arab
States and Terrorism.”
The response of one reader was symptomatic of the
general attitude of Islam regarding any criticism of its
position vis-à-vis dissenters or non-conformists. This
attitude has tarnished the image of Islam worldwide.
He then alluded to the possible responses of many who
would remind him of the texts drawn from the Qur’an and
the Hadith that advocated tolerance. While such texts
are certainly part and parcel of the Islamic tradition,
there are many more texts that advocate intolerance
towards non-Muslims. It is these texts that are quoted
by Islamists and Irhabists in support of their campaign
to bring the whole world --- even by force--- within
Daru’l
Islam.
My Comments
I consider the appearance of this article an extremely
important event. It questions the much-vaunted claim
that Islam is tolerant, or that Islam is a religion of
peace, an extremely important event. Here is an honest,
moderate Arab Muslim intellectual issuing a clarion call
to anyone who would listen to deal with the urgent
question,
“Is Islam a Tolerant Religion?”
What I especially appreciated in his article is the fact
that he did not hesitate to refer to the history of
Islam and its sacred texts, as he deals with this
crucial topic. When that history is read honestly, and
passages in the Qur’an and Hadith are allowed to speak
for themselves, one can hardly substantiate the claim
that Islam is a tolerant religion. In fact, the history
of Islam, both ancient and modern, is replete with
instances of murders and assassinations all done “fi
sabeel Allah” (in or for the cause of Allah.) I could
cite for instance, the murder of Ali by the
Khawarej in 661; the assassination of his son
Hussein under the Umayyad
caliphate; and the blood bath that took place in
750 when the founder of the Abbasid
dynasty, Al-Saffah (the Butcher)
eliminated all but one member of the Umayyad
family.
However, the most important aspect of the article is the
admission of its author that the Qur’an is filled with
exhortations to kill, or persecute the Infidels. These
verses “descended” in Medina, i.e. after Muhammad had
established his Islamic state. Thus, as no religious
leader in Al-Azhar
or elsewhere has declared the Medinan texts of the
Qur’an that advocate war and violence as no longer
normative, the problem will persist. They are part and
parcel of the one Qur’an, and their teachings are just
as authoritative as the chapters that came earlier in
Mecca. Sad to say, the plaintive question of the article
remains: “Is
there anybody listening to me?”
Another comment I would like to make relates to those
Western leaders, and others who make comments on Islam
and its relation to the rest of the world. Please, don’t
make facile and uninformed statements such as
“Islam is a peaceful religion.”
If you cannot say, for prudent reasons, the whole truth
about Islam, you could refrain from making irresponsible
or uninformed comments about this faith. Furthermore,
please read the words and testimonies of insiders, like
the articles that are posted on the Tanweer
website, and don’t rely on those Western “scholars”
who paint a rosy picture of Islam.
Finally, I would like to make a modest proposal to the
citizens of the United States as the mid-term elections
of 2006 approach. Please ask pointed questions about
Islam, of all those seeking election, or re-election,
for House and Senate seats. See if they subscribe to the
simplistic and erroneous mantra, “Islam is a
religion of peace.”
But above all, be very concerned about candidates for
the office of President and Vice-President of the United
States in 2008. We know that any president relies on the
advice of “experts” before making his final decision on
crucial international matters. Still he himself must
possess a proper knowledge of the issue.
During the Cold War era, no candidate for the highest
offices in America, who manifested a poor knowledge of
the true nature of Marxist ideology, would have had any
chance of being elected. Now we face a more serious
challenge to our way of life, and the threat comes from
within Islam. All candidates aspiring for these high
offices should be graded about their awareness of the
true nature of Islam. No one who parrots the worn-out
cliché
“Islam is a religion of peace,” is worthy our
vote. The outcome is too serious a matter:
it has to do with our
future, and the future of our children and
grandchildren.
~~~~~
Is
Islam a Tolerant Religion?
Part II
In my
article, “Is Islam a Tolerant Religion?” I
did not expect it to be Part One of a series on this
subject. The
Elaph.com website gave no indication of a
continued discussion of the topic. However, I discovered
Part II of this trilogy on 29 June of the Arabic online
daily Elaph. As is my method in my
contributions to 6th Column against
Jihad,
I begin with excerpts from the article, and end with my
analysis and comments.
The
author began his second installment by describing the
reactions he received after posting Part One.
“After publishing the first part of my article, “Is
Islam a Tolerant Religion?” I received 96 responses;
most of them in favor of its contents, while some
registered their violent disagreement with it. They
considered that the mere posing of the question was a
provocative act, an unwarranted criticism of Islam, and
ultimately, an insult directed at Allah Himself. I was
advised to cease and desist from any further discussion
of the subject!
“It is evident that the Islamists, who consider
themselves as custodians of the truth, regard anyone who
disagrees with them as being absolutely ignorant. One of
my critics wrote, ‘The very title of your article was
extremely provocative, and prejudices the very basis of
any dialogue before it can even begin.’
“Another person sent this e-mail, ‘If you
would come to Gaza and see the sufferings of the
Palestinian people, you would understand why they become
suicide bombers.’ My answer is:
My dear brother, I’m with you; I do
sympathise with the plight of the Palestinians. But what
does that have to do with a Saudi or a Yemeni going to
Iraq, and killing himself and many other worshippers at
a mosque? Please tell me, what does the tragedy of
Palestinians have to do with the brutal murder of a
young Algerian girl at the gate of her school, merely
for not wearing the hijab? What’s the connection between
the pro-Israeli policies of the United States and the
murder of 250,000 Algerians by their own people?
“Actually, those criminal Jihadists use the Palestinian
problem and the sacred texts of Islam, as a pretext to
justify their crimes against innocent people. To blame
our problems and the root causes of Irhab on America and
Israel is a clear proof of our moral and intellectual
bankruptcy. The real problem resides in our religious
teachings and our social heritage.
“Others who disagreed with my previous article insisted
that we should leave the discussion of such topics to
the specialists among our religious leadership. I don’t
agree at all. In fact, nowadays Islam has been
highjacked by the new
Khawarej,* and finds itself in a bloody and
asymmetrical confrontation with the entire world. Should
we fail to deal with this situation, greater tragedies
await us. Are we to leave the reformation of Islam to
the likes of Sheikh Youssef al-Qaradawi, Rashed Al-Ghanoushi,
Ali Khamanei, Muqtada al-Sadr, and hundreds of
similar imams who incite Irhabis to commit their
crimes? It is the duty of liberal writers and moderate
religious authorities to join in the discussion of the
subject I mentioned in my first article.
“The trouble with the Islamists is that they cannot
stand any criticism. They consider their heritage, their
culture, their political and religious leaderships, to
be sacrosanct and above reproach. Woe to any one who
dares to criticize a religious authority anywhere in the
Arab or Muslim world; as we witnessed when a television
program made fun of the head of Hezbollah’s party,
Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah! Recently, a reporter in Egypt
was sentenced to one year in prison for having
criticized President Hosni Mubarak. And let’s not forget
the plight of another Egyptian, Ayman Noor. He was
sentenced to a seven year term in jail, for having
dared, in the presidential elections, to compete with
Mubarak for the presidency of Egypt! Any criticism of a
political leader, or opposition to his policies, becomes
an unforgivable sin in Arab and Muslim societies.
“Unfortunately, the lack of freedom of speech and of
democratic institutions, has religious roots based on
the Qur’an and the Sunna. “O ye who believe! Obey
Allah, and obey the messenger and those of you who are
in authority; and if ye have a dispute concerning any
matter, refer it to Allah and the messenger if ye are
(in truth) believers in Allah and the Last Day. That is
better and more seemly in the end.” Qur’an 4:59
Mohammad Marmaduke Pickthall translation.
“The expression, those of you who are in authority
refers to the ruling authorities. There is also a Hadith
that says, obey your ruler even if he whipped you on
your back or took your money. Now don’t such texts
give the green light for tyranny and oppression?
“In my first article, I thought that the meaning of
“tolerance” was clear. However, the responses I
received indicated it was otherwise. I never meant by
“tolerance,” that we should pardon criminals, or be
lenient with the enemy, or anyone who breaks the law.
What I meant was that tolerance implied the right to
differ, and to co-exist with the one who holds a
different opinion, or religion, or political beliefs.
In brief, by using that word I meant a willingness to
practice pluralism and peaceful coexistence. The
basic problem with Muslims is their refusal to accept
the “Other.”
They claim sole ownership of the truth; and that their
religion should rule the entire world. And in order to
accomplish that goal, they should carry on their global
jihad.
“Some may object, claiming that I am blaming Islam and
Muslims for the actions of a minority, like al-Qaeda and
the Irhab perpetrated by some Islamist militias.
Frankly, such organizations like al-Qaeda are engage in
their activities under the impulse of those sacred texts
known as the “Ayat al-Sayf”** (the Sword Texts)
that I mentioned in Part One of my article.
“It is important to realize that Islamic fascism is far
more dangerous than the national fascism that both Syria
and Iraq had suffered from, under the rule of the
Ba’athists. Islamic fascists consider their policies and
activities as sacred and above reproach, since they rule
in the name of Allah. Thus, to criticise them is
considered to be a criticism of Allah Himself!
“The reputation of Muslims and of Islam has been
tarnished throughout the world, and especially the West.
The former Prime Minister of Italy said, ‘Islam is
unable to become a part of the modern age.’ A French
journalist wrote, ‘Islamic fundamentalism has
become the main threat to world peace and security. It
is similar to the threat that was posed by the Nazis and
the Fascists in the 1930s and by the Communists in the
1950s. There is no room for freedom in the social and
moral realms that are based on Islamic Shari’a law. This
can be seen in the fact there is not one democratic
regime throughout the entire Muslim world.’ Also, the
former Archbishop of Canterbury leveled sharp criticism
of Islam and Muslims for the politicization of Islam,
and for the terrorist acts perpetrated by the radicals.
He referred to the lack of democracy in the Muslim world
blaming moderate Muslims for their reluctance to condemn
the Irhabis and suicide bombers. He went on to comment
on the absence of Islamic participation in enriching
world culture during the last several centuries.
“The absence of freedom in the Islamic world is related
to their religion. For example,
Sheikh Tabtaba’i, the imam of the Kadhimain
mosque in Baghdad said recently, ‘The West calls for
freedom and liberation. Islam rejects this freedom. True
freedom is obeying Allah.’ The Islamist author of ‘The
Future of Iraq and the Arabian Peninsula’ attacked
secularism and democracy, ‘One of the worst by-products
of secularism is democracy, because it nullifies the
rule of Shari’ah in society, both in form and substance.
As the Exalted One says, ‘Government belongs to Allah;’
while democracy declares that government belongs to the
majority of the people.’ Do we need any more proof that
Islamists are against progress, and do not want to
participate in the world’s civilization?”
Analysis
In Part II of “Is Islam a Tolerant
Religion?” the writer reacts to the comments he
received after the posting of Part I. He uses the
negative responses to re-affirm his thesis that that
lack of tolerance in Islam is due to a religious
tradition that was formed by a blind adherence to the
authoritative texts of the Qur’an, and the Hadith. He
deplored the absence of freedom of speech and
expression, and pointed to the restrictions placed on
newspaper articles and correspondents, such as in Egypt.
Today, as I glanced at the 8 July edition of Elaph,
I noticed a news report about the decision of several
Egyptian newspaper editors to refrain, for one day, from
publishing their papers in order to protest a new law
that would further restrict freedom of speech! How could
one register a negative attitude vis-à-vis the President
of the country, if there is
a Qur’anic text that enjoins total obedience to the
powers that be?!
The
author sadly remarks that it is only the imams who enjoy
absolute freedom to proclaim from their pulpits their
violent messages denouncing the Infidels, the
secularists, and the liberals! Rather than surrender to
the status quo, he calls on all liberal
intellectuals to shoulder their responsibility by
calling for reformation and liberalization of Islam.
Comments
I
cannot but applaud the great zeal and courage shown by
this Arab intellectual in stating bluntly that
unfortunately, and in fact, Islam is not a tolerant
faith. Even though he faces insurmountable obstacles in
his way, he keeps on witnessing against such
intolerance. His commitment to the cause is
unquestionable. However, the question remains: What kind
of Islam would it be, if all those “martial” ayats of
the Medinan Surahs are declared no longer
normative? And what school of Islamic jurisprudence
would initiate a new hermeneutic that would advocate
that only the Meccan Surahs are now to be
followed?
In
this connection, I would like to quote a pertinent
section from my article,
“Reformation in Islam: ‘Islam of Mecca’ versus ‘Islam of
Medina,’” that was posted on this website in
July/August , 2006:
“Unfortunately for Muslim reformers, they do not have
the same tradition vis-à-vis the Qur’an as Christians
have regarding the Bible. What I mean is that in the
Christian tradition, the teachings of the Old
Testaments must be interpreted in the light of the New
Testament. Thus, since the New Testament clearly
teaches two distinct and separate realms: the realm of
God, and the realm of “Caesar,” it leaves no room for
the establishment of a theocracy in areas of the world
where Christians dominate.
“Furthermore, such parts of the Old
Testament that deal with the conquest of the Promised
Land, and the various aspects of the Mosaic law,
excepting the Ten Commandments, are regarded as
pertaining to a specific
temporary era, and thus, are not normative for the
present.
“What
I mean is that the Christian Scriptures themselves
describe two phases of revelation, the first being
temporary and preparatory for the second phase, which is
final.
As
mentioned above, it is the New Testament itself that
authoritatively endorses this view, and is not a later
addition to the Christian tradition. It is true that
after the conversion of Emperor Constantine, the lines
of demarcation separating Church and State became
blurred. And after the fall of Rome, the Western Church
began to interfere in the affairs of the State. However,
such changes were contrary to the teachings of the
Bible. So the Reformers of the 16th Century
simply called for a return to the Biblical teachings,
not only regarding spiritual matters, but equally in
connection with the affairs of the state.
“Muslim scholars today, interested in some kind of
reform, don’t have the “luxury” that Luther, Calvin, and
Knox had, almost five hundred years ago. Their Holy Book
doesn’t allow for such a radical hermeneutic as
called-for by the author of the article I referred to at
the beginning of my essay. I cannot solve their dilemma.
It is intractable; as they find themselves within a
closed circle. I wonder how many other would-be
reformers will join the call for making the Meccan
Qur’an, the only standard for politics in
Islam!”
Well,
what I wrote a few weeks ago is still valid. Still, I am
very encouraged that some Muslim intellectuals, fully
realizing the grip of their sacred texts on their
worldview, are doing their utmost to liberate Islam from
its traditional intolerance. Let’s encourage them in
their Herculean efforts.
*Khawarej:
Initially, they were followers of Ali, the fourth
caliph. Mu’awiya, the governor of Damascus disputed
Ali’s claim to the caliphate, and rebelled against him.
When Ali opted for a settlement of the dispute, some of
his followers objected to his decision, and left his
camp. Eventually they murdered him. Their name is
derived from the Arabic verb, “kharaja”
which means to leave or secede. The Khawarej
are considered as the prototypes for radical Islamist
terrorists during the last 1400 years.
**The Sword Texts are taken from the Medinan Surahs of the Qur’an,
after Muhammad had established the First Islamic State.
In contrast with the revelations that “descended” in
Mecca, the Medinan revelations are intolerant of any
opposition to the Prophet, whether coming from the
unbelievers in Mecca, or from those known as “Ahl-al-Kitab,”
(Jews and Christians.)
~~~~~
Is
Islam a Tolerant Religion?
Part III
I
continue to share with the readers of this website a
very timely topic that is being discussed on
www.Elaph.com It is quite a courageous
enterprise on the part of an Arab intellectual to write
on such a sensitive subject as “Is Islam a Tolerant
Religion?” The author returned for the third time to
the subject, being encouraged by the positive response
of some of his readers.
The
following are excerpts from my translation of this
timely article, followed by my analysis and comments:
At
the request of several readers, I continue the debate
about “Islam and Tolerance.”
Through these discussions, we hope to
render a service to Islam and save it from the evils of
the Fuqaha* of death, and the theorists of
Irhab (terrorism.) They have damaged Islam’s
reputation, changing it in the sight of non-Muslims,
into the ideology of Irhabis. Islam needs to be saved
from radical fundamentalists, so it becomes a religion
like the other religions. Its function then becomes to
safeguard morals and human values; rightly ordering the
relation between man and his Creator. Man alone must
bear responsibility for his actions, while God remains
the sole judge of man’s sins. It is no one’s business to
enforce the worship of God on others, according to the
principle, “There is no
compulsion in religion.”
A
reader wrote from America, “Your excellent articles are
more Islamic than those of the Islamists. I keep on
reading them to digest their full meaning.” I want to
draw attention to the fact that there are many honest
people who read and understand my articles, and who
don’t charge me with denigrating Islam!
I
am convinced that the worst enemies of Islam are those
who thrust Islam into politics, such as al-Qaradawi,
al-Ghanoushi, Ali Khamanei, and Hassan Nasrallah. Do
we blame President Musharraf of Pakistan who said
recently, “We have brought Islam to such a low level,
that people throughout the world regard it as synonymous
with illiteracy, backwardness, and intolerance.”
As to those who objected to my broaching
this topic, they would have done better had they
directed their criticisms at the preachers of violence
and death. For they are the ones who have forgotten the
Qur’anic verses that advocate mercy and tolerance, which
descended on the Prophet while he was weak in Mecca.
Unfortunately, these radical Fuqaha
consider the Meccan verses as abrogated by the Medinan
verses that proclaim harshness and violence, when Islam
had achieved power. (See the
article: “The Islam of Mecca versus the Islam of
Medina,”
posted on this website on 22 June, 2006. JT)
Some of those who commented on my articles quoted
Qur’anic verses that emphasized tolerance and peaceful
coexistence with the followers of other religions. I
don’t disagree with them at all, having referred to the
same texts in my previous articles. However, the real
problem is not the absence of texts that advocate
tolerance; but the existence of other sacred texts
(in the Qur’an and the Hadith) that advocate
intolerance. It is these texts that now function
within the minds of the Fuqaha of death and the
preachers of Irhab. They stuff the minds of Muslims with
hatred and animosity toward all non-Muslims, calling for
violence against the “Others,” the “Different,” and the
followers of non-Muslim faiths.
“Here is a quotation from Chapter 3:85
(Al-Imran):
And whoso seeketh as religion other than
the Surrender (to Allah) it will not be accepted from
him, and he will be a loser in the Hereafter. Translation of Pickthall
If anyone desires a religion other than
Islam (submission to God), never will it be accepted of
him; and in the Hereafter He will be in the ranks of
those who have lost (All spiritual good).
Translation of Yusuf Ali
At
present, the practice of violence against all other
religions is an exclusively Islamic phenomenon. This is
an inconvertible fact that requires a proper remedy. For
example, when Osama bin Laden addressed the West saying,
“You love life, but we love death,” he was basing
his statement on similar texts that have deep roots in
the Islamic heritage. When Tariq bin Ziyad,
crossed the strait of Gibraltar**, he addressed the
Spanish people saying, “I have come with men who love
death much more than you love life.” Unfortunately,
most of our religious leaders spread a culture that
despises life, and glorifies death.
Nowadays, it is evident that Islamists are in
confrontation with the whole world, and that most
terrorists happen to be Muslims. Even those Islamic
parties that claim to be moderate don’t hesitate to
practice violence against others, when circumstances
happen to be in their favor. They enforce the practice
of Shari’a, as is happening in Iraq. Armed Islamic
militias, both Sunni and Shi’ite, persecute Muslim women
who don’t wear the veil, and religious minorities such
as Christians, Sabeans, and Mandeans. Just as Iraq lost
its entire Jewish population in the past, it won’t be
long before all Sabeans and Mandeans would disappear,
even though they are the original inhabitants of the
land! Not one Muslim leader has raised his voice against
the crimes perpetrated against these innocent people.
And when I raised this subject recently in a TV program,
I was dubbed as a Crusader-Zionist propagandist!
It
is evident that Irhabi murderers have been influenced by
those sacred texts that are frequently quoted by the
imams who send the young to commit criminal acts against
the innocents. There are well-known religious
authorities like
Sheikh Youssef al-Qaradawi , who have issued
fatwas urging Muslims to go to Iraq and help their
Sunni brothers in their fight against the occupying
Kuffar*** and those collaborating with them from
among the Shi’ites. Several young Sunni responded to
their appeals, and rushed to Iraq as suicide-bombers
bringing death and destruction to thousands of Shi’ites
gathered at mosques and markets.
We know as well that Sheikh Kazem al-Hairi,
a Shi’ite Ayatollah and the spiritual father of the
popular leader, Muqtada al-Sadr (the leader of a
militia known as Jaish
Al-Mahdi****) issued a fatwa threatening any Jew with death should he ever
return to Iraq. Are these religious leaders oblivious of
Islamic Fiqh* and tolerance, when they tell their
followers to engage in such barbaric acts?
In
the early years of the Islamic Revolution in Iran,
Ayatollah Sheikh Sadeq Khalkhali sent thousands to
their death after some show trials. A Western journalist
enquired of him whether he had a clear conscience for
his acts, as most of the condemned were innocent!
Khalkhali responded sarcastically: “Those I condemn to
death are either guilty or innocent. Should some have
been guilty, they got what they deserved; and if others
were innocent, I offer my congratulations to them and
their relatives, since I dispatched them to Paradise.”
I mentioned before that Zarqawi and his
followers waged a ruthless war against the Shi’ites, and
based their murderous acts on the sacred texts of Islam.
This is exactly what the Khawarej***** did when they
rebelled against Imam Ali. Many of them were actually
‘memorizers of the Qur’an;’ and justified their
rebellion by referring to certain sacred texts. This led
Ali to remind his cousin Abdallah ben Abbas, not to
argue with the Khawarej about the meaning of Qur’anic
texts, as they could be
interpreted in several different ways!
Is Islam a tolerant religion?
Yes, we must not hesitate to pose this question, having
witnessed the destruction, the killings, and the
multitude of displaced persons that are found in Muslim
lands. Notwithstanding all that, the Islamists insist on
saying, “Islam is a Tolerant Religion.” They
point to the testimony of history as a proof for that
‘tolerance’ by claiming that non-Muslim minorities have
continued to live within Islam for fourteen centuries.
However, is it true that the followers of non-Muslim
religions have enjoyed true freedom, and were exempt of
persecution? The answer is, No. In fact,
discrimination was practiced against them; as they were
classified as dhimmis.
They were not allowed to take any part in the government
of their lands as citizens. They had to pay the jizya
(poll tax) while “humbling” themselves to the
tax-gatherers!
How about the injunction of
Surat al-Ma’edah (The Table, 5: 51) that tells
Muslims:
O ye who believe! Take not the Jews and
the Christians for friends. They are friends one to
another. He among you who taketh them for friends is
(one) of them. Lo! Allah guideth not wrongdoing folk. Pickthall
O ye who believe! take not the Jews and
the Christians for your friends and protectors: They are
but friends and protectors to each other. And he amongst
you that turns to them (for friendship) is of them.
Verily God guideth not a people unjust.
Yusuf
Ali
Does this verse teach tolerance vis-à-vis other
religions?
And what about a woman’s status in Islam? She is
considered deficient in her mental capacities, her
testimony is worth only half a man’s testimony; the same
pertains to her share in inheritance since she receives
only one half of the portion allocated to her brothers.
These rules are supported by Qur’anic texts that are
totally authoritative.
To
sum-up our discussion: When we support our claim about
intolerance in Islam by referring to Qur’anic texts, we
are charged with ignorance. They claim that those texts
should be interpreted within their historical context;
since every text ‘descended’ on the Prophet due
to a specific problem that had surfaced about 1400 years
ago. We agree with them and ask them to adhere to this
principle. But when we go on to tell them that Islam
came with solutions for the problems of a society that
existed 14 centuries ago and that our present-day
problems are different and require new solutions; they
refuse to consider our point of view. They insist that
when the Qur’an ‘descended’ on the Prophet
Muhammad, Allah was aware of the future, and that all
Qur’anic rules are normative for all time and place.
Analysis
The
author’s goal in the third part of this trilogy is to
emphasize the fact that throughout history, Islam has
been an intolerant religion; and that this attitude
finds support in the sacred texts of the faith. While it
is true that the early chapters of the Qur’an, known as
the Meccan Surahs exhibited a spirit of tolerance
towards Jews and Christians, this approach changed
drastically when Muhammad moved to Medina. In fact, it
is the Medinan Surahs (622-632) that proclaim and
support the basic intolerant view of all non-Muslims.
Comments
The
third article in this series does not add much more
information on the subject. Its importance lies in the
fact it summarizes forcefully the
thesis that Islam is not a tolerant religion.
Furthermore, that the author received positive responses
to the first two articles is an indication that the
critique is much needed within the Muslim world.
What
I find very significant is the fact the author keeps on
pointing to the source of the intolerance and militancy
of Islam being non other the Qur’an, specifically the
surahs that “descended” on the Prophet during his stay
in Medina from 622 until his death in 632. There is no
way to evade the significance of those Medinan verses
that specifically forbid Muslims from entertaining any
friendly or peaceful relations with the followers of
Judaism and Christianity. The latter are considered as
“unbelievers” or
“infidels” having refused to believe in the mission
and the message of Muhammad. Thus they have become,
ipso facto, enemies of Muslims.
I have mentioned in my previous comments
on these articles, that it is impossible for a new
hermeneutic to exist in Islam, that would authorize the
rejection of the normative stature of the Medinan surahs.
The belief that the Qur’an is qadeem
(uncreated and therefore eternal) does not allow for
restricting its authoritative parts to the Meccan surahs,
the latter being considered advocating a peaceful
attitude towards Jews and Christians. The
Mu’tazilites’ attempt to approach the Qur’an
as a historical document was popular for a brief period
in Baghdad during the 9th Century.
Eventually, it was rejected completely by the Muslim
authorities so that the
orthodox doctrine of the Qur’an as Allah’s final,
complete, and authoritative revelation to mankind, has
prevailed ever since.
I am
finalizing my work on this article on Friday, 11 August,
2006, the day after the plot to explode materials on
several airplanes, bound from London’s Heathrow Airport
to the United States, was uncovered. The plotters have
been identified as Muslims, or converts to Islam. My
concern is to underline these points:
First, the men who planned their horrific acts were not
mad men, but in full control of their faculties.
Second, the ability to silence totally their consciences
and plan to perpetrate their horrific crimes on innocent
travelers indicates they were infused with strong
beliefs that their actions were serving a higher, yes
even a divinely-sanctioned cause.
Third, the source of their thinking, while mediated
through men, was ultimately a supernatural authority
that was non-other than the commands of Allah, coming
via specific Qur’anic verses.
In my sharing of the trilogy,
“Is Islam a Tolerant Religion?” with the readers of
this website, I did my best to let the author himself
tell about the problems that are afflicting Islam, i.e.,
its inability to co-exist with the rest of the world.
I hope that his efforts have impressed you with the
crucial nature of the challenges we face, due to the
continued intransigence of Islam vis-à-vis the rest of
mankind. And with the news that keeps coming about the
averted tragedy of 8/10/2006 over the Atlantic, can
ordinary Muslims deny that they have a very, very
serious problem with the source of their faith? If they
desire to live at peace with the rest of us on this
globe, they better jettison
the intolerant baggage of their heritage!
*Fuqaha: plural of
Faqih, a Muslim legal scholar who gives
official opinions on the meaning and application of the
Shari’a; Fiqh designates
Islamic jurisprudence. A
Faqih
is entitled to issue a Fatwa,
a legal decision based on the Qur’an, Hadith,
or the Sunna.
**Gibraltar
originates from two Arabic words, Jabal
(mountain) and Tariq (the leader of the
Islamic army that crossed from North Africa and
conquered Spain.
***Kuffar:
plural of
Kafir, an Infidel
****Jaish
al-Mahdi:
The Army of the Mahdi, the Mahdi
is an apocalyptic Shi’ite figure who is to come near the
end of time, to bring the whole world under the rule of
Islam.
*****Khawarej:
Some of the followers of the fourth Caliph Ali
rebelled against him for having accepted arbitration
with his foe, Mu’awiya. They murdered Ali
in 661. Hussein, the younger son of Ali, became the
leader of the Party of Ali, in Arabic, Shi’at Ali.
This term was abbreviated into the word, Shi’ite.
The Khawarej represent the prototype of
Islamic terrorists, and were notorious for their
savagery against fellow-Muslims.
|
