1) Jihad And The Quran

For online quranic translations, please visit the following link.

http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/

NO COMPULSION IN RELIGION 2/256, 60/8, 109/6 etc.

My understanding is that the quran commands its follower to make nonmuslims embrace islam by all means including force and violence.

Here is why I reached this conclusion.

A) The quran divides the world into two groups, believers and unbelievers. The believers are called the party of Allah and the unbelievers are called party of satan 4/76, 5/59, 58/19-22 etc. The world is also divided by muslims into two parts or zones. The land under muslim control or rule is called darussalaam=house of peace  and the land that is not under muslim rule is called darul harb= house of war. It is sinful for muslims to live in nonmuslims lands unless they have legal excuse in accordance with islamic shariah eg to preach islam to nonmuslims etc. All muslims must always migrate to the land that is ruled by muslims. This is why Muhammad ordered everyone to gather in madina after he came there. The idea is that muslims stick together and fight the nonmuslims and conquer their lands if they refuse to accept islam when invited before the attack begins.

B) The quran clearly states that Allah has sent islam to overcome all other religions 9/33, 14/27, 37/173, 40/51, 48/28, 61/9, 66/6. Moreover it is promised that believers will overcome the unbelievers, perhaps, to give them the sense or encouragement that they should. Not only that but muslim are told to be harsh on nonmuslims, overcome them and humiliate them as much as possible.

C) The ways and means of propagating islam are also stated in the quran eg exchanging ideas nicely to convince the other side 16/125, 25/63, 29/46, 31/18-19 etc etc. Also by insulting, provoking and threatening the other side 2/6-20, 170-171, 6/25, 39, 7/176, 179, 8/55, 59-67, 9/28, 34, 10/43, 21/51-69, 22/46, 73, 25/44, 27/20-44, 80, 31/9, 35/22, 43/40, 46/26, 47/4, 12, 62/5, 63/4, 66/6 etc etc.

The idea seems to be that when weak talk to people nicely to convince them. When no longer weak, just invite people to islam even by provoking them by insults. Should this result in an armed attack, be ready to defend. However, when strong, just order infidels to turn muslims or all hell is going to break loose upon them.

In case of war, go for mass murder do not take captives till you have killed a good number of them and they are well humiliated. The captives are further humiliated by way of being looted and enslaved for good. Their women and children are humiliated by way of slavery. Their women have to sleep with anyone whoever can force himself upon them. I rather abstain from putting too much detail here, for people should read the holy quran and the hadith for themselves in this regard and see what kind of battles were fought by muslims at the time and how they treated their enemies when they had overcome them.

The quran not only condones tribal warfare but takes it a step further in the wrong direction in a more organised and forceful way. The other way to look at the quran is to see its revelational sequence ie which sura or verses were revealed before or after which. This helps to see how muslims behaviour changed as they gained more and more power and older laws were redundant by rule of abrogation. For example, no compulsion in religion verses were revealed earlier than those that cancel them by way of abrogation as is clearly stated in eminent sunni and shia tafaseer or commentaries on the quran.

I am not looking for justifications of these action on the basis of history and historical context but from the perspective of divinity and divine messenger-ship. We can assume for argument sake that the other people were barbarian but purpose of islam was allegedly not to respond in kind but to turn them into sensible human beings. At least that is what is preached nowadays about islam. The quran and the hadith as well as Islamic history tell us a very confusing but a telling story.

Some stories in ahadith are not worth posting because they are so graphic about blood shed and mass rape of captured women, they are so low in morality, even tribals used to deal with each other better than that.

My view is that muslim writers have been hyping up stories to create a better contrast for muslims as a better people in sense of their power rather their morals or ethics. However, in reporting things, they made serious errors by not leaving any room for justifying things under the label of ethics ie universally accepted rules of decency.

For example, most Islamic books would have us believe that people in Arabia in time of Muhammad were ignorant, worthless, barbarian and had no respect for life or liberty etc etc. Muhammad came and brought them out of this depth of immorality and darkness of ignorance etc etc.

We are also told that some of these people were literate and very sensible who were businessmen and produced very good pieces of literature etc etc. For example, when muslims talk about the challenges of the quran as to none could produce like it, they very proudly state that the eminent scholars of Arabia at the time could not produce a single sura like that of the quran. So where do these scholars of Arabia suddenly pop out from amongst people in depths of darkness? We are also told that makkah was a centre of trade and commerce. This also means these people were very peaceful and progressive, for it is impossible for such things to happen unless right conditions exist for them. You cannot have a thriving trade centre in middle of war torn city or country. If arabs were busy in tribal warfare then how did Muhammad get married into a different religion family? This indicates the fact that relationship between various tribes belonging to different religious background were really good or why would jews and Christians etc do business with arab pagans and give them jobs or even go for intermarriages etc etc?

To me it would seem that it were muslims who are to be blamed for whatever went wrong after the declaration of Muhammad’s prophet-hood. Somebody is scheming here and fingers would point to a person or a group that has caused this disharmony in a people who are all living generally peacefully and going about their daily business successfully.

It seems that muslims have been having designs right from the word go to dominate the world once they became dominant and fearless. The reason why islam spread so fast and wide is not that Muhammad managed to convince so many people about the truth of islam over night, which jews failed to do then and muslims fail to do today -even though people are more civilised and better educated- but that Arab world was caught by surprise. People who are living peacefully do not expect to be suddenly attacked by organised armed gang hungry for booty from all sides. Once a few people joined together in scheming and brought along some members of their tribes, it was not possible for individual tribes to combat them. And as the number grew it gave muslims even greater advantage against the rest of the people at the time. Most of all it was an easy way to earn one’s livelihood ie by conquering, looting and enslaving people and being praised for it. This is why human life means nothing in the muslim eyes unless it is life of a muslim ie the memeber of the gang.

The idea is very similar in some suicide bombing campaigns. Even useless people become heroes over night. This fact took ages for America to realise that because people praise these people for carrying out such acts, some really get the buzz out of dying for such causes. Imagine a young lad who is broke and so has no future prospect and no girl would even look at him never mind marry him, suddenly beautiful girls crying for him and shouting his name. I do not mean by this that all causes are useless and so are all those who take part in them but that this is a factor in this story.

Anyway lets go back, I am talking about problems with my understanding of islam ie in this case my problem with concept of jihad.

I am quite aware of the fact that some muslims take it to mean struggle within other struggle in general or a defensive war not an offensive war in the name of islam. However, the sense I get after reading the quran and hadith is that in islam jihad is an offensive war as well. This is why no muslim speaks against those who claim to be mujahideen=the muslim wariors who claim to fight for supremacy of islam. For example, notice the emphasis in the quran on war, verses after verses in sura after sura are devoted to it. You do not emphasise things that are not important that way, do you? Also read in the quran the story of King Solomon in sura 27/20-44. He suddenly finds by hoopoe that a people worship the sun etc and invites them to give their this belief up for islam or they will have to face the wrath of his army.

Since there is a lesson in the quran for those who follow it, the lesson here seems to be quite clear that if you can then stop people by force if you have to from having beliefs against islam regardless where-ever they are on the earth or whether they bother you or not. Moreover notice the loss of temper of Solomon when he says, how he is going to deal with hoopoe. Solomon is not only a king to muslims but a divine prophet as well, whose example must be followed.

Take the story of Abraham 21/51– 71 etc. He is hell bent on teaching idol worshipper a lesson. To make his point he breaks their idols in their temple into pieces thus defiles their holy shrine or religious holy place. Is this not a provocative act? Was it at all necessary to make the point Abraham made? Nonetheless muslim must follow Abraham, says the quran 60/4-6.

The point I am making here is that the quran teaches muslims to deliberately provoke people and start a fight where there is none just because others do not believe what muslims believe. So muslims must convert people to islam by all means necessary.

The question therefore arises whether islam is really religion of peace or of war? The answers from the quran seems to be that islam is religion of war. Abraham is enemy of those who do not believe like him, he hates them because of their wrong beliefs and he is the example the muslims are told to follow. All this proves that muslims are incapable of living in peace with anyone who holds different religious beliefs. If they are trying now, it is only because they are unable to get their way as things stand at the moment.

Not long ago hindus demolished the babri masjid in india, was that a good thing? I am sure it was not because something that has been done long ago should not have been disturbed ie let the by-gones be by-gone. But example is again that, Muhammad took over makkah and cleared all the idols from it ie about 360 from ka’ba alone. The question is, was he right in doing that? Were makkan idols in ka’ba (the holy cube) worshipped only by makkans who treated Muhammad allegedly badly or did people come to makkah for pilgrimage from other places as well who did no wrong to muhammad and his gang whatsoever and so it was their shrine also? The quran tells that it was 9/1–, 22/25, 105/1-, 106/1- etc etc. Makkah was religious centre for many people. So there was no excuse for muhammad for any such action in reaction to makkan actions even if they were harsh to him and his muslim followers. He was suppose to set good examples of tolerance for other faiths that led to peace and cooperation, not the bad ones that led to wars through setting example of destroying paganism. It only tells nonmuslims what is going to happen if they dropped their guard against muslims.

The problem is similar in Israeli and Palestinian conflict over Jerusalem. Muslims claim that ka’ba in Makkah was build by Abraham and belonged to them. There is no proof that that was the case. Moreover even if that was the case, the ka’ba was now taken over by pagans so it should have been left the way it was but it was not. Muhammad took it by show of force and destroyed all symbols of pagan faith. Hindus also want to build Ram mandir in place of babri masjid, claiming it to be lord rama’s birth place. So if muslims were right in taking over kaba then hindus cannot be wrong in reclaiming what they claim is theirs. In fact muslims are proud that they took over nonmuslim places of worship and converted them into their own places of worship=masjids. This is what I mean by religions rather than helping us solve our daily problems they add to them. I do not know how many more innocent lives will have to be lost in order to satisfy this religion based madness.

The hatred that islam creates between people in my views becomes very obvious if one reads the quran, the hadith and fiqh books oneself. In verses I have quoted above, muslims are told in later verses to have nothing to do even with their very own relatives if they choose different beliefs or religion to what muslims believe in 9/24, 58/22, 60/1- etc etc. The quran even insults nonmuslims calling them dirty as well as compares them to donkeys, dogs or worse than the worse animals 7/176, 8/55, 9/28, 62/5 etc etc. If we ourselves develop negative attitude towards other people then we cannot blame them for their reaction either, can we?

2) Islam allows slavery

Although muslims tell me that islam is all about brotherhood, equality, fair treatment of each other, and mutual love and respect etc, the quran and the hadith also paint another picture of islam ie it allowed slavery to continue as I understand it. In fact contradictory dogmas and statements are part of islam as I have already explained.

The quran states that all people originate from the very same parents 4/1, 49/13 etc etc. Also that none is better than the other except the ones who do god's will better. The hadith also tells the same eg the elderly has no superiority over the youngster, white has no superiority over black etc etc. 

Does this mean all people are equal before the law as far as islam is concerned? The answer seems to be, no. There is first of all discrimination between muslims and nonmuslims. Then between muslim men and muslim women. Then there is discrimination between muslim masters and muslim slaves.

I have already quoted the verses that divide people into two camps ie party of allah and party of satan. The party of allah is told to be tough on infidels 9/28, 67, 48/29 etc etc.

The ruler of muslims can only and only be a muslim 2/178, 221, 246, 4/34, 58-65, 16/75, 24/51, 39/29 etc etc. The ruler cannot be a muslim slave nor a muslim woman.

A muslim man is allowed to wed four women at the same time and is allowed to change them at will 4/3,20. There is no limit on him having slave girls 4/24, 23/5-6, 43, 70/30 etc. The wife obviously has no right to limit the number of her husband's sexual partners ie wives and slave girls. So long as one can afford it one is free to do as one pleases. There is no restriction in the quran as regard buying and selling of slaves, male or female. Since a man can have as many partners as he wants by changing wives or slave girls for example, the sexual morality in islam seems to be as good as nonexistent. Moreover a wife is property of her husband and so are her children the property of their father, thus the mother has no right to her children. So good for the paradise being underneath the mother’s feet and that the one who finds either of his parents’ still alive in their old age must take good care of them. Who knows where one’s mother would end up if she is property of her husband who can change her at will? Moreover where are the resources going to come from to take care of their needs if son is going to sit at home for looking after his parents? The quran is silent as usual, you would have to think for that yourselves. The quran is only political when it comes to controlling people and  it has no answers when it comes to solving their economics based problems of invention, production or distribution etc etc.  

All this gives rise to yet another question, how good the original muslims were? The quran clearly states the answer in 2/221, 4/25, 23/6, 24/3, 43/18 and elsewhere. These muslims were happy to keep their muslim sisters as slave girls, so one can see how charitable and loving were muslims as a people towards each other. What an excellent Islamic community! I would not say anything more than that. Now people who could keep muslims as slaves (ie their own very brothers and sisters in faith) could not be expected to let go their nonmuslim slaves, could they? What an excellent utopia Islamic welfare state, of which present muslims are dreaming all the time! Was it their fault? No, they were programmed or allowed to be so by the quran, so it was not their fault, was it? Moreover a man is allowed by the quran to beat up his wife and so it is yet more easier for a man to beat up his slave girls, for they do not have any family or tribal ties that their folk will come to their aid eg fathers or brothers etc.  

Here is al-bukhaari link for hadees and see what it says about slave girls as regard their faith ie were they believers or not? Note also the advice given to these slaves ie work hard for your masters, for Allah will be very pleased. Does this not encourage exploitation? People who turn muslim after being defeated by muslims, there is hesitation on part of muslims in returning even their own looted stuff back. By the way these are just a few reports for sample. For more one will have to consult many other hadith and tafaseer books or even to sira=biographies of the prophet and islamic history accounts.

[url=http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/bukhari/046.sbt.html]AL-BUHKAARI[/url]

Volume 3, Book 46, Number 716:

Narrated Marwan and Al-Miswar bin Makhrama:
When the delegates of the tribe of Hawazin came to the Prophet and they requested him to return their properties and captives. The Prophet stood up and said to them, "I have other people with me in this matter (as you see) and the most beloved statement to me is the true one; you may choose either the properties or the prisoners as I have delayed their distribution." The Prophet had waited for them for more than ten days since his arrival from Ta'if. So, when it became evident to them that the Prophet was not going to return them except one of the two, they said, "We choose our prisoners." The Prophet got up amongst the people and glorified and praised Allah as He deserved and said, "Then after, these brethren of yours have come to us with repentance, and I see it logical to return them the captives. So, whoever amongst you likes to do that as a favor, then he can do it, and whoever of you likes to stick to his share till we recompense him from the very first war booty which Allah will give us, then he can do so (i.e. give up the present captives)." The people unanimously said, "We do that (return the captives) willingly." The Prophet said, "We do not know which of you has agreed to it and which have not, so go back and let your leaders forward us your decision." So, all the people then went back and discussed the matter with their leaders who returned and informed the Prophet that all the people had willingly given their consent to return the captives. This is what has reached us about the captives of Hawazin. Narrated Anas that 'Abbas said to the Prophet, "I paid for my ransom and Aqil's ransom."

Volume 3, Book 46, Number 717:

Narrated Ibn Aun:
I wrote a letter to Nafi and Nafi wrote in reply to my letter that the Prophet had suddenly attacked Bani Mustaliq without warning while they were heedless and their cattle were being watered at the places of water. Their fighting men were killed and their women and children were taken as captives; the Prophet got Juwairiya on that day. Nafi said that Ibn 'Umar had told him the above narration and that Ibn 'Umar was in that army.

Volume 3, Book 46, Number 718:

Narrated Ibn Muhairiz:
I saw Abu Said and asked him about coitus interruptus. Abu Said said, "We went with Allah's Apostle, in the Ghazwa of Barli Al-Mustaliq and we captured some of the 'Arabs as captives, and the long separation from our wives was pressing us hard and we wanted to practice coitus interruptus. We asked Allah's Apostle (whether it was permissible). He said, "It is better for you not to do so. No soul, (that which Allah has) destined to exist, up to the Day of Resurrection, but will definitely come, into existence."

Volume 3, Book 46, Number 721:

Narrated Al-Ma'rur bin Suwaid:
I saw Abu Dhar Al-Ghifari wearing a cloak, and his slave, too, was wearing a cloak. We asked him about that (i.e. how both were wearing similar cloaks). He replied, "Once I abused a man and he complained of me to the Prophet . The Prophet asked me, 'Did you abuse him by slighting his mother?' He added, 'Your slaves are your brethren upon whom Allah has given you authority. So, if one has one's brethren under one's control, one should feed them with the like of what one eats and clothe them with the like of what one wears. You should not overburden them with what they cannot bear, and if you do so, help them (in their hard job)."

Volume 3, Book 46, Number 722:

Narrated Ibn 'Umar:
Allah's Apostle said, "If a slave is honest and faithful to his master and worships his Lord (Allah) in a perfect manner, he will get a double reward."

Volume 3, Book 46, Number 723:

Narrated Abu Musa Al-Ashari:
The Prophet said, "He who has a slave-girl and teaches her good manners and improves her education and then manumits and marries her, will get a double reward; and any slave who observes Allah's right and his master's right will get a double reward."

Volume 3, Book 46, Number 724:

Narrated Abu Huraira:
Allah's Apostle said, "A pious slave gets a double reward." Abu Huraira added: By Him in Whose Hands my soul is but for Jihad (i.e. holy battles), Hajj, and my duty to serve my mother, I would have loved to die as a slave.

Volume 3, Book 46, Number 725:

Narrated Abu Huraira:
The Prophet said, "Goodness and comfort are for him who worships his Lord in a perfect manner and serves his master sincerely."

Volume 3, Book 46, Number 726:

Narrated 'Abdullah:
The Prophet said, "If a slave serves his Saiyid (i.e. master) sincerely and worships his Lord (Allah) perfectly, he will get a double reward."

Volume 3, Book 46, Number 727:

Narrated Abu Musa:
The Prophet said, "The Mamluk (slave) who worships his Lord in a perfect manner, and is dutiful, sincere and obedient to his Saiyid (master), will get a double reward."

Volume 3, Book 46, Number 728:

Narrated Abu Huraira:
The Prophet said, "You should not say, 'Feed your lord (Rabbaka), help your lord in performing ablution, or give water to your lord, but should say, 'my master (e.g. Feed your master instead of lord etc.) (Saiyidi), or my guardian (Maulai), and one should not say, my slave (Abdi), or my girl-slave (Amati), but should say, my lad (Fatai), my lass (Fatati), and 'my boy (Ghulami)."

Volume 3, Book 46, Number 729:

Narrated Ibn 'Umar:
The Prophet said, "If one manumits his share of a common slave (Abd), and he has money sufficient to free the remaining portion of the price of the slave (justly estimated), then he should free the slave completely by paying the rest of his price; otherwise the slave is freed partly. "

Volume 3, Book 46, Number 730:

Narrated 'Abdullah:
Allah's Apostle said, "Everyone of you is a guardian and is responsible for his charges. The ruler who has authority over people, is a guardian and is responsible for them, a man is a guardian of his family and is responsible for them; a woman is a guardian of her husband's house and children and is responsible for them; a slave ('Abu) is a guardian of his master's property and is responsible for it; so all of you are guardians and are responsible for your charges."

Volume 3, Book 46, Number 731:

Narrated Abu Huraira and Zaid bin Khalid:
The Prophet said, "If a slave-girl (Ama) commits illegal se-xual intercourse, scourge her; if she does it again, scourge her again; if she repeats it, scourge her again." The narrator added that on the third or the fourth offence, the Prophet said, "Sell her even for a hair rope."

Volume 3, Book 46, Number 734:
Narrated Abu Huraira: The Prophet said, "If somebody fights (or beats somebody) then he should avoid the face."
Many a time one will hear that islam brought slavery to an end and removed racism etc etc but one can clearly see that that is not true. Even if today islam had the upper hand, the human rights will be thrown out of the window and people will be forced to live by islam as dictated in the quran and the hadees or the fiqh, for that is what islam really is.

Please remember that my point is that these books are not good enough to be attributed to all merciful god or his messenger, because according to my understanding they teach things which go against what humanity is all about. This is why I am in a dilemma ie in a catch 22 situation. Will I be doing the right thing by attributing such terrible teachings to my creator, who is supposed to be all knowing and very kind?

Again we are not judging islam in historic context as part of natural evolution but in context of its claim for divine origin. One may ask, how would I go about things? I do not know, for I myself am no god at all but I would expect that god would not go along with what unfair people think and do. He would set out his own vision and standard for them to follow and that would be the best if not perfect. I expect it would be based upon the principle of fairness and equality. Giving people choice to cooperate freely for their own good or go to hell. In case of the quran and the hadith, it seems the quran is playing in the hands of the prophet and the prophet is playing in the hands of the people who allegedly are his followers. For example, quran is taking into consideration even prophet’s and peoples’ unfair and wrong desires rather than telling them straight to their face what is right or fair and what is wrong or unfair as far as god was concerned. We see verse after verse coming down as Muhammad and his followers desire and what they desired is clearly written in the quran and the hadith, what a terrible joke!

For example, if slavery was wrong then god ought to tell the people so and forbid it right from the beginning. Let people then accept or reject his message at their own peril. The way the quran is dealing with this situation is creating a two tear system or double standard that those people were allowed to get their way but we are not. So one can see why I have problems with religions and scriptures because they raise serious questions in my mind rather than trying to help me solve the problem I am facing in living my daily life as a good human being.

The quran allows slavery by clear verses but contains no clear-cut verse as regard abolishing it, hence I am of the view that as far as the quran is concerned, slavery is fine even today. The reason is simple that according to Islamic rules of shariah law formation, if there is no proof that something is forbidden in islam then it is allowed or is lawful. Now slavery is not mere lawful but is actually allowed by the quran and the implication is that whatever the quran dictates to be lawful cannot be made unlawful unless by the quran itself, for nothing is as authentic as the quran in Islamic sources according to muslims themselves other than the quran itself. In other words proof is necessary to show that islam forbids something. So one can see how dangerous islam is if people fell prey to it and also why the quran is not the word of god.