Lesson 5: The Religion of Warfare
In this lesson, I
will repost two articles of mine from 2015.
The first provides quotations from the Quran, and the second quotations
from Islam’s Sahih Bukhari. From these, readers can see
that Islam is only a religion of ‘peace’ if one understands peace as the result
of submission—submission to Allah and to Islam. More honestly, it is a religion of submission
that engages in jihad as a matter of course to make others submit to it. Of course, this applies more to some than to
other Muslims. Yet this fact does
explain much of Islamic history and the present day Islamic terrorist groups in
various parts of the world. The purpose
of this lesson is to identify some of the important and authoritative texts
that undergird the understanding of Islam as a religion of warfare.
What Does the Quran
Say about Treatment of Jews and Christians? (3 February, 2015)
The Quran seems to offer different advice on what to do with persons of other faiths. Those of us accustomed to reading ancient texts know that there are legitimate issues of interpretation that need to be considered. At times, such issues lead us to a different understanding of texts that, on first reading, appear to be saying something else. There are, for example, issues of translation (and Muslims insist that the Quran cannot accurately be translated from Arabic), the importance of the original context, a possible trajectory of meaning of some sort (such as when the holy war narratives in the Old Testament give way to the pacifism of the early Church due to the teaching and example of Jesus Christ in the New Testament), matters of rhetoric (is extreme language actually hyperbole and not to be taken literally?), and so forth. Thus, the following identification of texts is mainly offered to identify which texts need some sort of explanation as one attempts to understand what the Quran says about the treatment of Jews and Christians.
How might someone explain the apparent contrast of views in the Quran? On the one hand, Surat 2.257 says: 'There shall be no compulsion in [acceptance of] the religion.' On the other hand, Surat 9.5 says: 'And when the sacred months have passed, then kill the polytheists wherever you find them and capture them and besiege them and sit in wait for them at every place of ambush. But if they should repent, establish prayer, and give zakah [a payment showing appreciation for Allah’s blessing], let them [go] on their way. Indeed, Allah is Forgiving and Merciful.' Surat 9.12 goes on to say to 'fight them (polytheists) that they may cease.’
The Quran distinguishes between Jews, Christians, and polytheists, but it also sees them as three groups over against Islam: 'Abraham was neither a Jew nor a Christian, but he was one inclining toward truth, a Muslim [submitting to Allah]. And he was not of the polytheists’ (Surat 3.67). So, what does the Quran say about Jews and Christians? Surat 5.51 sees them as allies of one another and opposed to Islam: 'O you who have believed, do not take the Jews and the Christians as allies. They are [in fact] allies of one another. And whoever is an ally to them among you - then indeed, he is [one] of them. Indeed, Allah guides not the wrongdoing people.'
Similarly, and apparently in reference to the Jews (see Surat 4.46), Surat 4.89 says: 'They wish you would disbelieve as they disbelieved so you would be alike. So do not take from among them allies until they emigrate for the cause of Allah . But if they turn away, then seize them and kill them wherever you find them and take not from among them any ally or helper.' Surat 9.123 says: 'O you who have believed, fight those adjacent to you of the disbelievers and let them find in you harshness. And know that Allah is with the righteous.' Surat 4.47 contains a direct threat of death to Jews and Christians rejecting the Quran: ‘O you who were given the Scripture, believe in what We have sent down [to Muhammad], confirming that which is with you, before We obliterate faces and turn them toward their backs or curse them as We cursed the sabbath-breakers. And ever is the decree of Allah accomplished.’
Conversion from Islam carries an ominous threat of punishment: ‘Or lest you say, "If only the Scripture had been revealed to us, we would have been better guided than they." So there has [now] come to you a clear evidence from your Lord and a guidance and mercy. Then who is more unjust than one who denies the verses of Allah and turns away from them? We will recompense those who turn away from Our verses with the worst of punishment for their having turned away’ (Surat 6.157).
Fighting in the cause of Allah means a great reward: 'So let those fight in the cause of Allah who sell the life of this world for the Hereafter. And he who fights in the cause of Allah and is killed or achieves victory - We will bestow upon him a great reward’ (Surat 4.74). Much is made about fighting for Allah (especially in Surat 2)--and a higher reward goes to the one engaged in warfare--see Surat 4.95: 'But Allah has preferred the mujahideen [those who strive and fight] over those who remain [behind] with a great reward.'
Jews and Christians are unequivocally said to be headed to hell: ‘Indeed, they who disbelieved among the People of the Scripture and the polytheists will be in the fire of Hell, abiding eternally therein. Those are the worst of creatures’ (Surat 98.6). Yet the matter does not end there, even though the Quran gives evidence of people of different religions living in the same region. Instead, fighting against Jews and Christians is advocated. Surat 9.29 says: ‘Fight those who do not believe in Allah or in the Last Day … who do not adopt the religion of truth [Islam] from those who were given the Scripture [Jews and Christians] - [fight] until they give the jizyah [tax on non-Muslims] willingly while they are humbled.’ Those causing Muslims to turn from their religion are promised a painful punishment: ‘Indeed, those who have disbelieved and avert [people] from the way of Allah and [from] al-Masjid al-Haram [the sacred mosque in Mecca], which We made for the people - equal are the resident therein and one from outside; and [also] whoever intends [a deed] therein of deviation [in religion] or wrongdoing - We will make him taste of a painful punishment’ (Surat 22.25).
Texts such as these from the Quran raise questions about how they are to be understood and applied in the present age. For those of us who are not Muslims, the matter is primarily about how such texts are interpreted, not how we think they ought to be interpreted. Yet the beginning of the problem for those outside Islam is that most people are ignorant of such texts in the first place, and they stand confused about how a religion purporting to be peaceful can lead so many to acts of such extreme violence. To be sure, Christians have at different times behaved horribly too, although many would contend—as would I—that in such cases the practice of the Christian faith was completely at odds with Holy Scripture. Such an argument is not difficult to make once one has read the New Testament—after all, did Jesus not say,
Matthew 5:44-46 But I say to you, Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, 45 so that you may be children of your Father in heaven; for he makes his sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the righteous and on the unrighteous. 46 For if you love those who love you, what reward do you have? Do not even the tax collectors do the same?
In closing, the question with which we are left is, ‘Is there any room at all for interpreting these texts in the Quran differently from what one might understand as the simple meaning of the text?’ If so, then perhaps certain advocates are correct when they insist that the extreme acts of Islamic terrorists we see today are not characteristic of ‘true’ Islam. If not, then perhaps ‘radical Islam’ is actually not radical at all but the real thing, not some aberration. In fact, one hermeneutical principle applied to reading the Quran is that the later texts take precedence over the early ones. If so, then the more extreme and bellicose texts take precedence over the less extreme texts.
Is it ‘Islam’ or
‘Radical Islam’? (18 November,
2015)
Western liberals wish to avoid the politically incorrect issue of whether terrorists from Middle Eastern and North African countries do what they do because of their Islamic faith or not. Is this a religious matter, or is it terrorism without any religious motivation? Even when the terrorists claim that they murder because of their faith, liberal Westerners embarrassingly try to insist that this is not the case. They try to criticize the terrorists for misunderstanding their own faith, as though they are somehow more able to explain Islam than Muslims. Some will say that the agents of death are not true Muslims but ‘radicalised Muslims,’ but others will avoid the term ‘Muslim’ altogether.
Why would someone attempt this rather peculiar ‘doublespeak’ (a term coined by George Orwell in his work on politically correct totalitarianism—Nineteen Eighty-Four)? One reason, apparently, is that liberals in the West have for decades tried to sweep religion under the cultural rug. They have exiled religious faith to private places—behind church walls or in houses—anywhere but in the public square. They have legislated against holding Christian convictions if they translate in any way to public life. So, if any Muslims do commit violence because of their faith, they must, the denial mill purports, have been provoked—as in the now infamous story knowingly invented and shamefully told about an offensive video in Bengazi, Libya as the cause of an attack on the American embassy in 2012.
A second reason appears to be that President Barack Obama began his presidency by attempting to mend relationships with Islamic countries. He has, however, repeatedly found himself in the embarrassing position of trying to address unrest in the Middle East when denial of the issues becomes impossible. He would prefer to think of this unrest in terms of attempts to establish democracy or in terms of the previous administration's bungling into foreign wars or in terms of oppression and ethnicity (especially when Israel is part of the equation). In other words, President Obama lacks the will or ability—or both—to analyze a deeply religious part of the world in terms of religion. He is not alone. Believing that reality is constructed, not a matter of facts, Western liberals seem to believe that their version of others’ beliefs is just as viable, if not moreso, than what people say.
As a result, public discussion in the West cannot rise to the real issue of whether terrorism is normative Islam or radical Islam. Is the heart of Islam being exposed in the horrific attacks over recent years, or is this some cancerous aberration of some ‘true’ and peaceful Islam? Divisions in Islam appeared right after the death of Mohammed, of course, and one cannot really speak of a ‘true’ form of Islam—only major traditions. Also complicating any answer to the question are the facts that sacred texts ought to be read in Arabic rather than translation and that what is written needs to be read in some context with explanations. This is the missing dialogue as the Western media attempts to present events without religious analysis.
The following quotations might be a start for those who are capable of reading documents before passing judgements and able to listen to uncomfortable views without feeling that their predetermined views are being threatened. Sadly, this rules out many in the government, on university campuses, and in news agencies in the West.
These quotations are from the Sahih Bukhari, which is one of the books of the Kutub al-Sittah. The Kutub al-Sittah contains six collections by Muhammed al-Bukhari of sayings of Islam’s founder and form part of the Haddith. The Kutub al-Sittah, compiled in the 9th c., is given particular authority by Sunni Muslims (of which ISIS would be a representative).[1]
Quotations from the Sahih Bukhari
From Volume 4, Book 52: Jihaad
Allah's Apostle said, "You (i.e. Muslims) will fight with the Jews till some of them will hide behind stones. The stones will (betray them) saying, 'O 'Abdullah (i.e. slave of Allah)! There is a Jew hiding behind me; so kill him' " (4.52.176).
Allah's Apostle said, "The Hour will not be established until you fight with the Jews, and the stone behind which a Jew will be hiding will say. "O Muslim! There is a Jew hiding behind me, so kill him" (4.52.177).
Allah 's Apostle said, " I have been ordered to fight with the people till they say, 'None has the right to be worshipped but Allah,' and whoever says, 'None has the right to be worshipped but Allah,' his life and property will be saved by me except for Islamic law, and his accounts will be with Allah, (either to punish him or to forgive him.)" (4.52.196).
I asked Allah's Apostle, "O Allah's Apostle! What is the best deed?" He replied, "To offer the prayers at their early stated fixed times." I asked, "What is next in goodness?" He replied, "To be good and dutiful to your parents." I further asked, what is next in goodness?" He replied, "To participate in Jihad in Allah's Cause." I did not ask Allah's Apostle anymore and if I had asked him more, he would have told me more. (4.52.41).
The Prophet passed by me at a place called Al-Abwa or Waddan, and was asked whether it was permissible to attack the pagan warriors at night with the probability of exposing their women and children to danger. The Prophet replied, "They (i.e. women and children) are from them (i.e. pagans)." I also heard the Prophet saying, "The institution of Hima is invalid except for Allah and His Apostle." (4.52.256).
Allah's Apostle sent us in a mission (i.e. an army-unit) and said, "If you find so-and-so and so-and-so, burn both of them with fire." When we intended to depart, Allah's Apostle said, "I have ordered you to burn so-and-so and so-and-so, and it is none but Allah Who punishes with fire, so, if you find them, kill them." (4.52.259).
Ali burnt some people and this news reached Ibn 'Abbas, who said, "Had I been in his place I would not have burnt them, as the Prophet said, 'Don't punish (anybody) with Allah's Punishment.' No doubt, I would have killed them, for the Prophet said, 'If somebody (a Muslim) discards his religion, kill him.' " (4.52.260).
I asked Ali, "Do you have the knowledge of any Divine Inspiration besides what is in Allah's Book?" 'Ali replied, "No, by Him Who splits the grain of corn and creates the soul. I don't think we have such knowledge, but we have the ability of understanding which Allah may endow a person with, so that he may understand the Qur'an, and we have what is written in this paper as well." I asked, "What is written in this paper?" He replied, "(The regulations of) blood-money, the freeing of captives, and the judgment that no Muslim should be killed for killing an infidel." (4.52.283).
From Volume 8, Book 82: Disbelievers
Some people from the tribe of 'Ukl came to the Prophet and embraced Islam. The climate of Medina did not suit them, so the Prophet ordered them to go to the (herd of milch) camels of charity and to drink, their milk and urine (as a medicine). They did so, and after they had recovered from their ailment (became healthy) they turned renegades (reverted from Islam) and killed the shepherd of the camels and took the camels away. The Prophet sent (some people) in their pursuit and so they were (caught and) brought, and the Prophets ordered that their hands and legs should be cut off and that their eyes should be branded with heated pieces of iron, and that their cut hands and legs should not be cauterized, till they die. (8.82.794).
From Volume 9, Book 84: Dealing with Apostates
Behold: There was a fettered man beside Abu Muisa. Mu'adh asked, "Who is this (man)?" Abu Muisa said, "He was a Jew and became a Muslim and then reverted back to Judaism." Then Abu Muisa requested Mu'adh to sit down but Mu'adh said, "I will not sit down till he has been killed. (9.84.58; also in 9.89.271).
Conclusion
Those who do not read primary sources from antiquity need to be
aware that texts must be read in their contexts, and moral judgements on them
should also take earlier contexts into account.
When reading sacred texts—texts understood to carry authority in
themselves—one needs to look for internal criteria that provide a means by
which to interpret the texts intertextually.
That is, interpreters should beware of reading a text (and doing so in
translation) without care for the historical-cultural, literary context or
canonical context. It is in so reading
the Bible that we move from a religious understanding developed around an ethnic
group and nation living in a land with borders that need defending to a
religious understanding developed around the crucified Saviour, Jesus Christ, who
died for the sins of the whole world.
Islam, however, lacks any such theological or heremeneutical key to move
from a religion of warfare to bring about the submission of all.
[1] For
a searchable English translation of the Sahih Bukhari, see: http://www.sahih-bukhari.com/.
Previous Lesson Links:
Lesson 1: Land, Religious State, Coexistence of Religions, and Non-Muslim Taxation
Lesson 2: Whose land? Whose rights? Theology and Politics of the Land, and the Power of the Cross
Lesson 3: Israel’s Theology of the Land in Deuteronomy 26
Lesson
4: Ethical Considerations on Israel’s Clearing of Canaan from its Inhabitants
No comments:
Post a Comment