Sri Lanka: Hate verses in Islam’s religious text is the main cause of global Islamic issues
Muslims the world over must introspect. There were no Americans, US State Department or CIA when the spread of Islam took place violently with the core mission to ‘kill infidels” or non-believers. Islam via sword cut across entire continents and destroyed entire civilizations. These natives did not even have time to defend against the attacks. Undeniably, the acts were not in self-defense and the use of sword were inspired by the Quran. It is these factors that raise the existential fears of non-Muslims once more. The fear of history repeating itself prevails when 95% of violent conflicts around the world involve Muslims even if these conflicts are mischievously ignited by Western Christian countries. These conflicts are drawn using Koranic verses by numerous Islamic groups. That Islamic groups/Islamic leaders uses verses from the Koran to instill mayhem and draw Muslims into their fold raises the question of how far Islam is being manipulated by Islamic leaders as well as how far the West is manipulating this weakness. That these groups have no shortage of followers and these groups are heavily funded and are able to easily manipulate moderate Muslims makes any to wonder how many Muslims are able to go against the tide without submitting themselves to their religion and those who are leading them. What needs to be said is that Muslims leaders and the West are manipulating Islam’s Koranic verses because there are verses that can be manipulated. Herein lies the core issue and root cause for the violence. With no central authority to control doctrine in Islam, a proliferation of bizarre religious edicts has resulted in chaos the world over.
Whatever context the verses are being argued on the claim that Islam is ‘misunderstood’ the fact is that there are verses that call for action against non-Muslims while ideological differences have enabled external factors to pit Muslims against Muslims.
There are over 100 verses that call Muslims to war with non-believers for the sake of Islamic rule. Some of these commands are graphic calling to chop off heads and fingers and kill non-believers wherever they are hiding. Quran (8:12) – “I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them” There is nothing defensive about these calls – Muslims were not attacked by the Buddhist priests of Nalanda when they burnt to cinders the world’s first Buddhist learning center and library. Muslims were not attacked when they travelled to Maldives and beheaded all Buddhist monks and destroyed all Buddhist artifacts in their belief of iconoclasm and declared Maldives as Islamic. Muslims were not attacked when they raised all Hindu architecture built by Hindu emperors in India.
Over a period of 800 years, millions of Hindus were slaughtered by Muslims as infidels or converted by the sword.There are scores of other examples as well to depict that there was no excuse for the manner Muslims drawing Islam killed unarmed civilians and completely destroyed ancient civilizations. Islam destroyed inventions of others but have shown little of creativity themselves.
What has to be said is that Muslims are drawn to violence not because they are bad people but the bad ideology that engulfs them and it is on the basis of these that non-Muslims are appealing for the scrutiny of madrassas where Islamic leaders are able to play mischief with the minds of Muslim children indoctrinating them by using verses of hatred. This is where non-Muslim governments have failed to realize and take action upon.
Let us take Quran (2:191-193) – “And kill them wherever you find them, and turn them out from where they have turned you out. And Al-Fitnah [disbelief] is worse than killing…but if they desist, then lo! Allah is forgiving and merciful. And fight them until there is no more Fitnah [disbelief and worshipping of others along with Allah] and worship is for Allah alone. But if they cease, let there be no transgression except against Az-Zalimun (the polytheists, and wrong-doers, etc.)” . There is nothing defensive in this passage too even in the historical context as Muslims had relocated to Medina. The verse is actually drawing Muslims to drive Meccans out of their own city – which they eventually did.
Madrassas and Muslim leaders can easily manipulate Muslims through Quran (2:216) – “Fighting is prescribed for you, and ye dislike it. But it is possible that ye dislike a thing which is good for you, and that ye love a thing which is bad for you. But Allah knoweth, and ye know not.” The verse establishes that violence can be virtuous (again negating the oft quoted excuse of self-defense).
Muslims who do not wish to be part of violence are also ridiculed. Quran (4:95) – “Not equal are those believers who sit (at home) and receive no hurt, and those who strive and fight in the cause of Allah with their goods and their persons. Allah hath granted a grade higher to those who strive and fight with their goods and persons than to those who sit (at home). Unto all (in Faith) Hath Allah promised good: But those who strive and fight Hath He distinguished above those who sit (at home) by a special reward,-” They are told that they are less worthy in Allah’s eyes.
That non-believers had little choice but to convert to Islam and pay tax is revealed in Quran (9:5) – “So when the sacred months have passed away, then slay the idolaters wherever you find them, and take them captive and besiege them and lie in wait for them in every ambush, then if they repent and keep up prayer and pay the poor-rate, leave their way free to them.”
This clearly reveals the context of present day fears of non-Muslims knowing that when Muslims have power, if Muslim leaders use the violent verses of Koran they would not hesitate to convert or kill those who do not convert to Islam – peaceful Muslims have no say and no power to overrule this reality. With the number of Islamic factions rising, the number of Islamic groups calling for various jihads the looming dangers are great made worse by the West manipulating these leaders for their own agendas.
Quran (9:73) – “O Prophet! strive hard against the unbelievers and the hypocrites and be unyielding to them; and their abode is hell, and evil is the destination.” dehumanizes those who reject Islam and shows how Muslims can be easily led to show disregard for non-Muslims.
Armed Muslims groups are all described as Islamists because they are using Islamic verses. Every killing of non-Muslims follows instructions taken from the Koran (whatever context it is read in). Since 9/11 there are said to have been over 20,000 acts of deadly Islamic terrorism.
Elements that define hate speech include drawing a moral distinction between one’s own identity group and those outside it. Devaluating and dehumanizing other groups drawing superiority of one’s own. Advocating different standards of treatment clearly established in categorizing believers and non-believers and thus calling to violence against them. 61% of the Quran s about non-Muslims 98:6. Non-believers are even compared to vile animals. Verse 7:176 compares unbelievers to “panting dogs” with regard to their idiocy and worthlessness. Verse 7:179 says they are like “cattle” only worse. It is these verses that enable Islamic groups to call for jihads against non-believers. We can’t be faulted for claiming that Quran is about brotherhood of believers (49:10). We wonder what Minister Vasudeva Nanayakkara has to say about the verses that incite hate?
Nowhere in the Quran does it say that Allah loves non-believers of Muhammad. However there are over 400 verses giving the torment for people of other religions. Moreover, in today’s context of affairs the 9 places in the Quran where believers are warned not to befriend non-Muslims can be easily seen in the manner Muslim children are not encouraged to even play with non-Muslims. O ye who believe! Take not for friends unbelievers rather than believers: Do ye wish to offer Allah an open proof against yourselves? (4:144).
In the present context of conflicts is it not time to question why Islam is at war with every major religion in the world when none of these religions are at war with each other? Is the reason not found in the Quran itself that shows non-Muslims to be inferior to Islam’s adherents and do Islamic groups and their leaders not draw upon Allah’s hatred for non-Muslims to wage these wars? The moderate Muslims have been totally powerless to control this aspect and have themselves become part and parcel not desiring to be outcasts of their religion.
Entering the present, we see how far Islam has become easy to manipulate by the West with Osama bin laden himself part of the West’s agenda and continuing through various factions/associated entities of the Al Qaeda. The Muslim world itself is faced with the ISIS who are demolishing mosques and shrines and wonder who are responsible for making Muslims victims of their own faith.
Islam today suffers from within as well as because of external factors. On the one hand there are bizarre fatwas issues upon Muslims. Rashan Hassan Khalil, former dean of Islamic law at al-Azhar University in Cairo, Egypt forbid married couples to be naked in 2006. Saudi Arabia’s highest committee for Scientific research and Islamic law banned Pokmon video games and cards in 2001. Pakistan’s largest Islamist umbrella group, Muttahida Majlis-e-Amal banned immunizing children from polio in 2007 claiming it sterilized Muslims. Parents of 24,000 children refused to give polio vaccine to their children as a result. In the year 2005, an Islamic Organization Jamiat-e-Ulama-e-Hind based in Kolkata issued a fatwa warning ominously that Indian tennis star Sania Mirza would be ‘stopped from playing’ if she did not start wearing ‘proper clothes’. Sheikh Muhammad Munajid, a former Saudi diplomat pronounced that Mickey Mouse was Satan’s soldier. The head of the “Moroccan Association for Jurisprudence Research” issued a fatwa allowing Muslim men to have sex with their just-deceased wives. The pretext of the ruling is based on nothing in Islam prohibits sex with corpses. Egypt, Sheikh Amr Sotouhi, head of the Islamic Preaching Committee at al-Azhar, issued a fatwa prohibiting fathers from marrying their daughters to members of the formerly ruling National Democratic Party owing to their “corruption.”
It is not hard to imagine how non-prevalent issues have suddenly emerged giving Muslims a sense of grievance against non-Muslims for not accepting these new culture changes into non-Muslim majority societies. These factors have also become a means to create disharmony by encouraging non-Muslims to react against incursions.
We can also imagine the mischief Western envoys are upto. On the one hand they would be encouraging the very elements that they know raises reactions by non-Muslims because these elements are perfect for the Western superiority to prevail.
As examples we can take how hijab/nikab have been encouraged on the one hand while also shown as non-integrators and non-co-existence elements. We have seen how halal has become a mere commercial element for Muslims who have a choice to even eat haram items given the condition they are in. We also see how far incursions are encouraged through Western-partnered Islamic leaders/groups and even politicians for they become perfect ingredients to push other agendas even inside countries of the West too.
Thus, even Britain is home to Islamic scare stories. The French had been wiser. Before announcing the ban on the face veil its survey estimated that not even 0.1% of Muslims wore the face veil. The French also showed how more Muslims were without the nikab than those wearing it. The French also highlighted the security concerns over ID and testifying in court, drivers license, as well as driving.
Essentially, anyone reading the Koran deserves to be told why these verses exist. It is because they exist and are uncontrolled Muslim groups are using these verses to create mayhem and the mayhem is funded by the West for their own corporate geopolitical agendas:
“And slay them wherever ye catch them..” (2:191)
“..But if they turn away, seize them and slay them wherever ye find them; and (in any case) take no friends or helpers from their ranks.” (4:89).
- Slay the unbelievers wherever you find them(2:191)
- Make war on the infidels living in your neighboorhood (9:123)
- When opportunity arises, kill the infidels wherever you catch them (9:5)
- Kill the Jews and the Christians if they do not convert to Islam or refuse to pay Jizya tax (9:29)
- Any religion other than Islam is not acceptable (3:85)
- The Jews and the Christians are perverts; fight them (9:30)
- Maim and crucify the infidels if they criticise Islam. (5:33)
- The infidels are unclean; do not let them into a mosque (9:28)
- Punish the unbelievers with garments of fire, hooked iron rods, boiling water; melt their skin and bellies
(22:19) - Do not hanker for peace with the infidels; behead them when you catch them (47:4)
- The unbelievers are stupid; urge the Muslims to fight them (8:65)
- Muslims must not take the infidels as friends (3:28)
- Terrorise and behead those who believe in scriptures other than the Qur’an (8:12)
- Muslims must muster all weapons to terrorise the infidels (8:60)
Sri Lanka’s President recently declared those who condemn other religions bring disgrace to their own. The examples of the Quran are not to condemn Islam but to showcase that because these verses exist, they are open to interpretations by Islamic groups that are not controlled and end up destroying their own as well as destroying the harmony around the world.
It is no better a time than now to relook at these verses and for Muslim scholars to make a statement on the verses directly attributed against non-Muslims (non-believers) and the calls to destroy or convert them.
– by Shenali D Waduge
Latest Headlines in Sri Lanka
- Sri Lanka President orders swift, grassroots-driven disaster relief amid adverse weather November 27, 2024
- Sri Lanka Parliament to convene from December 3 to 6, 2024 November 27, 2024
- Severe weather displaces over 200,000 in Sri Lanka November 27, 2024
- NPP General Secretary Nihal Abeysinghe’s vehicle falls into Parliament Pond November 27, 2024
- CBSL reduces monetary policy rate, sets 8% overnight rate November 27, 2024
the article written by admin, have been discriminating Islam from the beginning, but no bleddy could stop the fastest growing religion. Clever people would understand.even if you people burn the holy Quran in Sri Lanka it does not matter, as it is already sealed in millions of Islamic people around the world.Ok then if you people destroy the business establishments of muslims , then again there will be a great way to establish wel than before. Do it ! Again if you people want to massacre the muslim community do it , when there is a will then there is a way.
Alhamdhu Illa.
9:5 Kill the disbelievers wherever you find them.
This verse, often called “the verse of the sword”, has been misquoted in a manner similar to the previous verses. First, we shall provide the verse in its context:
9:5-6 But when the forbidden months are past, then fight and slay the Pagans wherever ye find them, an seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem (of war); but if they repent, and establish regular prayers and practise regular charity, then open the way for them: for Allah is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful. If one amongst the Pagans ask thee for asylum, grant it to him, so that he may hear the word of Allah. and then escort him to where he can be secure. That is because they are men without knowledge.
Having presented the verse in context, we can analyze it properly. Dr. Maher Hathout gives an explanation on the historical context of the verse:
This verse was revealed towards the end of the revelation period and relates to a limited context. Hostilities were frozen for a three-month period during which the Arabs pledged not to wage war. Prophet Muhammad was inspired to use this period to encourage the combatants to join the Muslim ranks or, if they chose, to leave the area that was under Muslims rule; however, if they were to resume hostilities, then the Muslims would fight back until victorious. One is inspired to note that even in this context of war, the verse concludes by emphasizing the divine attributes of mercy and forgiveness. To minimize hostilities, the Qur’an ordered Muslims to grant asylum to anyone, even an enemy, who sought refuge. Asylum would be granted according to the customs of chivalry; the person would be told the message of the Qur’an but not coerced into accepting that message. Thereafter, he or she would be escorted to safety regardless of his or her religion. (9:6). (Hathout, Jihad vs. Terrorism; US Multimedia Vera International, 2002, pp.52-53, emphasis added)
Therefore, this verse once again refers to those pagans who would continue to fight after the period of peace. It clearly commands the Muslims to protect those who seek peace and are non-combatants. It is a specific verse with a specific ruling and can in no way be applied to general situations. The command of the verse was only to be applied in the event of a battle. As Abdullah Yusuf Ali writes:
The emphasis is on the first clause: it is only when the four months of grace are past, and the other party show no sign of desisting from their treacherous design by right conduct, that the state of war supervenes – between Faith and Unfaith. (Yusuf Ali, The Holy Qur’an, Text, Translation and Commentary, emphasis added)
If the pagans would not cease their hostilities towards the Muslims, then they were to be fought, especially since they were living in the land of an Islamic state. Dr. Zakir Naik writes concerning this verse:
This verse is quoted during a battle. …We know that America was once at war with Vietnam. Suppose the President of America or the General of the American Army told the American soldiers during the war: “Wherever you find the Vietnamese, kill them”. Today if I say that the American President said, “Wherever you find Vietnamese, kill them” without giving the context, I will make him sound like a butcher. But if I quote him in context, that he said it during a war, it will sound very logical, as he was trying to boost the morale of the American soldiers during the war. …Similarly in Surah Taubah chapter 9 verse 5 the Qur’an says, “Kill the Mushriqs (pagans) where ever you find them”, during a battle to boost the morale of the Muslim soldiers. What the Qur’an is telling Muslim soldiers is, don’t be afraid during battle; wherever you find the enemies kill them. Surah Taubah chapter 9 verse 6 gives the answer to the allegation that Islam promotes violence, brutality and bloodshed. It says:
“If one amongst the Pagans ask thee for asylum, grant it to him, so that he may hear the word of Allah; and then escort him to where he can be secure that is because they are men without knowledge.” [Al-Qur’an 9:6]
The Qur’an not only says that a Mushriq seeking asylum during the battle should be granted refuge, but also that he should be escorted to a secure place. In the present international scenario, even a kind, peace-loving army General, during a battle, may let the enemy soldiers go free, if they want peace. But which army General will ever tell his soldiers, that if the enemy soldiers want peace during a battle, don’t just let them go free, but also escort them to a place of security? This is exactly what Allah (swt) says in the Glorious Qur’an to promote peace in the world. (SOURCE, emphasis added)
Dr. Naik makes some very interesting observations about the verse. Indeed, it is truly amazing how Islam-haters will ignore God’s infinite mercy in their attempt to malign Islam. God has always given human beings a way out of any suffering, and has only ordained fighting as a last resort. Muslim scholars have written much commentary on these Qur’anic verses explaining the historical context in such great detail so that there may be no misconceptions. We have quoted extensively from various commentators on these verses and there is no need to repeat the same material again. We will provide one more commentary before moving on. Professor Shahul Hameed writes on verse 9:5:
This is a verse taken from Surah At-Tawba. This chapter of the Qur’an was revealed in the context when the newly organized Muslim society in Madinah was engaged in defending themselves against the pagan aggressors. The major question dealt with here is, as to how the Muslims should treat those who break an existing treaty at will. The first clause in the verse refers to the time-honored Arab custom of a period of warning and waiting given to the offenders, after a clear violation. That is, they will be given four months’ time to repair the damage done or make peace. But if nothing happens after the expiry of these forbidden months, what should be done? This is what the present verse says. According to this verse, fighting must be resumed until one of the two things happens: Either the enemy should be vanquished by relentless fighting. That is what is meant by {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]}; or they should repent, establish prayers and pay zakah, etc. This is one of those verses of the Qur’an which are likely to be misunderstood, if quoted out of context. We must understand that this fighting was against a people who forced the Prophet and his companions to leave not only their own homes but all their property and even their hometown of Makkah to Madinah. Once the Muslims were organized into a community in those lawless times, the rules to be followed by the Muslims were clearly laid down, even in the matter of war. Since Islam is a comprehensive system, no human activity could be ignored. And given the nature of mankind, we cannot imagine a situation where fighting is completely ruled out either. As can be seen, the above injunctions on fighting is not on an individual level, but only in the case of a society that strives to flourish and thrive as a nation. But even here the norms are clear: fighting is only in self defence or for the establishment of justice; and always fighting is the last option. And no one is allowed to transgress the limits set by God. (SOURCE, emphasis added)
Ibn al-`Arabi, in his commentary on the Qur’an, writes:
“It is clear from this that the meaning of this verse is to kill the pagans who are waging war against you.” (Ahkam al-Qur’an: 2/456, emphasis added)
Shaykh Sami al-Majid also makes some very interesting points in his discussion on this verse:
If we look at the verses in Sûrah al-Tawbah immediately before and after the one under discussion, the context of the verse becomes clear. A few verses before the one we are discussing, Allah says:
“There is a declaration of immunity from Allah and His Messenger to those of the pagans with whom you have contracted mutual alliances. Go then, for four months, to and fro throughout the land. But know that you cannot frustrate Allah that Allah will cover with shame those who reject Him.” [Sûrah al-Tawbah: 1-2]
In these verses we see that the pagans were granted a four month amnesty with an indication that when the four months were over, fighting would resume. However, a following verse exempts some of them from the resumption of hostilities. It reads:
“Except for those pagans with whom you have entered into a covenant and who then do not break their covenant at all nor aided anyone against you. So fulfill your engagements with them until the end of their term, for Allah loves the righteous.” [Sûrah al-Tawbah: 4]
So when Allah says: “But when the forbidden months are past, then fight the pagans wherever you find them, and seize them and beleaguer them and lie in wait for them in every stratagem (of war)” we must know that it is not general, since the verse above has qualified it to refer to the pagan Arabs who were actually at war with the Prophet (peace be upon him) and those who broke their covenants of peace. This is further emphasized a few verses later where Allah says:
“Will you not fight people who broke their covenants and plotted to expel the Messenger and attacked you first?” [Sûrah al-Tawbah: 13] (SOURCE)
Therefore, the context of the verse within the Surah makes it clear that this refers to those who are persistent in their hostilities and attacks against Muslims, and it is applied in battle only. We recommend that one reads Shaykh Sami Al-Majid’s full article entitled There is no Compulsion in Religion.
————————————————————————————————————————
Abrogated?
The next issue with this verse concerns abrogation. It has been claimed by some that this verse 9:5 has abrogated all the peaceful verses in the Qur’an. However, this claim results from a misunderstanding of some Qur’anic concepts. In the Qur’an there is naskh and there is also takhsees. Naskh is the abrogation of a ruling by a ruling that was revealed after it. Naskh occurs in matters of Islamic law. Takhsees on the other hand refers to specification, where one verse restricts the application of another verse, or specifies the limits not mentioned in the other verse. As Shaykh Abu Ammaar Yasir Qadhi writes:
Specification involves one verse limiting or restricting a general ruling found in another verse, whereas naskh involves abrogating the first verse in toto (i.e., it is not applied in any circumstances or conditions). (Qadhi, An Introduction to the Sciences of the Qur’aan;UK Al-Hidaayah Publishing and Distribution, 1999, p. 233)
Shaykh Qadhi also explains that one of the conditions for naskh is that the two conflicting rulings apply to the same situation under the same circumstances, and hence there is no alternative understanding of the application of the verses. As he states:
Therefore, if one of the rulings can apply to a specific case, and the other ruling to a different case, this cannot be considered an example of naskh. (Qadhi, An Introduction to the Sciences of the Qur’aan;UK Al-Hidaayah Publishing and Distribution, 1999, p. 237)
Therefore, verse 9:5 can in no way be considered an example of naskh since it is only a ruling applied to a very specific situation and circumstances. There is a lot of confusion surrounding some verses labeled as cases of naskh because the early Muslims used to use the word naskh to refer to takhsees as well. Therefore, some Muslims failed to realize that some of these cases labeled by early Muslims as ‘naskh’ were cases of takhsees. This is why some early Muslim scholars are quoted who have classified this verse as a case of ‘naskh’. One should realize that they used the term naskh to refer to a broader range of meanings, including takhsees. As Dr. Jamal Badawi writes:
Any claim of naskh must be definitive, not based on mere opinion or speculation. It should be noted that earlier Muslims used the term naskh to refer also to takhsees or specifying and limiting the ruling than abrogating it. (SOURCE, emphasis added)
Shaykh Abu Ammaar Yasir Qadhi specifically addresses the confusion about verse 9:5, and after citing the different claims he concludes:
It can be seen from the examples and categories quoted that, in reality, most of these verses cannot be considered to have been abrogated in the least. Some of them merely apply to situations other than those that they were revealed for. Almost all of these ‘mansookh’ (abrogated) verses can still be said to apply when the Muslims are in a situation similar to the situation in which the verses were revealed. Thus, the ‘Verse of the Sword’ in reality does not abrogate a large number of verses; in fact, az-Zarqaanee concludes that it does not abrogate any! (fn. Az-Zarqaanee, v.2, pps.275-282) (Qadhi, An Introduction to the Sciences of the Qur’aan;UK Al-Hidaayah Publishing and Distribution, 1999, p. 254)
Shaykh Sami Al-Majid also states the same thing in his article:
Some people – especially some contemporary non-Muslim critics of Islam – have tried to claim that this verse abrogates the verse “Let there be no compulsion in religion.” They argue that the generality of this statement implies that every unbeliever who refuses to accept Islam must be fought. They support their allegation by pointing out that this verse is one of the last verses to be revealed about fighting. However, this verse in no way abrogates the principle in Islamic Law that there is no compulsion in religion. It may be general in wording, but its meaning is quite specific on account of other verses of the Qur’ân that are connected with it as well as on account of a number of pertinent hadîth. (SOURCE)
Shaykh Jamal Al-Din Zarabozo also deals with this issue in his writings on the verse “There is no compulsion in religion”. He mentions the view that this verse has been abrogated as then states:
Al-Dausiri rejects this statement because of the following: A verse cannot abrogate another verse unless it completely removes the ruling of the earlier verse and there is no way to reconcile the contradictory meanings of the verses. (Zarabozo, There is No Compulsion in Religion, Al-Basheer)
This was the view of the great scholars and mufasireen (Qur’anic commentators) both classical and recent, like Ash-Shanqeeti or Ibn Jarir At-Tabari. Shaykh Muhammad S. Al-Awa also comments on this issue in his discussion on the puunishment for apostasy:
At the same time, one can say that the death penalty for apostasy – especially when it is considered as a hadd (prescribed) punishment – contradicts the Qur’anic principle [law] in Surah II, verse 256, which proclaims “No compulsion in religion.” Ibn Hazm, to avoid this criticism, claimed that this verse had been abrogated and that compulsion is allowed in religion; consequently, according to him, the punishment for apostasy does not contradict the Qur’an (fn. Muhalla, vol. XI, p. 195). However, this claim is invalid, since Qur’anic scholars have established the abrogated verses and this verse is not among them (fn. Suyuti, Itqan, vol. II, p. 22-24). Accordingly, one can say with the Encyclopaedia of Islam that “In the Qur’an the apostate is threatened with punishment in the next world only.” (fn. Heffening, Encyclopaedia of Islam, vol. III, p. 736 under “Murtadd”). (El-Awa, Punishment in Islamic Law; US American Trust Publications, 1993, p. 51, emphasis added)
Therefore, when we discuss the merciful and loving verses of the Qur’an and we receive a claim that they have been abrogated by the specific verses concerning battle, we can dismiss such a claim as mere speculation and invalid. Peace and justice are fundamentals of the religion of Islam and can never be removed from it.
All your verses are out of context. Islam is the religion of peace, that’s what the word Islam means itself. Some verses are revealed in the battle field (do not misunderstand Muslims did not go to battle, when enemies attacked Muslims reacted and some verses revealed in those moment). If you read after the verse 9:5 it says if they seek asylum, grant it, and then escort him to where he can be secure. Can you please tell any Army chief will instruct to his solders like that in a battle field.
Some other verses for example 22:19 relate to the punishments in the hell-fire, not in this world.
Okay you quoted verses out of context, I will quote an entire chapter how to deal with non believers. It is chapter 109. (http://quran.com/109)
Say, “O disbelievers, [1] I do not worship that which you worship, [2] nor do you worship the One whom I worship. [3] And neither I am going to worship that which you have worshipped, [4] nor will you worship the One whom I worship. [5] For you is your faith, and for me, my faith.” [6]
When you read the last verse you will realize that ISLAM promotes – LIVE AND LET LIVE policy. Can you show me any one religion in the face of the earth talks like this.
ANSWER TO NON-MUSLIMS’ COMMON QUESTIONS ABOUT ISLAM
Please go to below link to find answers to most your common misconceptions about ISLAM,
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:nXE0ApDJI2YJ:www.thecommentator.com/ckeditor_assets/attachments/333/en_common_questions.pdf+&cd=3&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=sa
Please do not create any more mess within the community, let’s everyone live with the freedom.
I fully support Shenali’s views on Wahabism which is a threat to the existence of civilisation.
What we can see here are the excuse after excuse by those who never ever accept any reality.
One can say that the number of fools and ideots is also increasing in the world. Therefore fastest growing this or that may not be the best argument anyway. Also, you can get people to be in a certain cult by force too as seen in the history and therefore fastest growing argument is not valid anyway.
Shenali has opened up a very valid and timely debate and only one person (Rifan) has so far tried to explain the situation a little but again was not balanced, and only giving excuses to justify the vague verses that is open to misinterpretation by some.
The problem what Shenali is exposing is the room given by the Quran to misinterpret it’s versus to act against non-Muslims. That is real and most of the people are not going to read the Quran as deep as Rifan thinks.
If one verse in Quran says “kill the non-believers”, what do you pundits think a person who read that verse is going to do? According to Rifan, that person will now stop everything and will try his best to find another verse somewhere in the Quran that says something against the previous verse. Isn’t that a joke? Why would someone spend his time and effort to find verses contrary to each other inside Quran? He/she will read the easiest and the one more exciting and will go ahead with that. The reality what is happening in the Muslim world with enormous amount of violence by Muslims bear proof to what I am saying here. There is no point of bringing more excuses when the reality is shown clearly everywhere.
They simply read the basic verses and interpret them in their own way. You cannot stop it if you leave those vague verses as they are.
Rather than coming up with more silly excuses I think it is better if those “educated” (or supposed to be) Muslims to debate what is really going on and find why the whole world is rallying against Islam as never before.
Rifan said “do not misunderstand Muslims did not go to battle, when enemies attacked Muslims reacted and some verses revealed in those moment”. However he is not correct when Muslims attacked and killed 20,000 monks at Nalanda (in India) and when they killed non-Muslims in Maldives. Any explanations or excuses?
The biggest problem is that in Quran it goes on to talk about non-Muslims. Non-believers or Non-Muslims is not the business of Muslims. Muslims can and must only deal with and talk about Muslims and they have absolutely no right to talk about or think about non-Muslims regardless whether in this world or another fake world(like Hell). If they think they have a right to talk about Non-Muslims then they must accept the fact that Non-Muslims also will then have a similar right to talk about and deal with Non-Muslims in the way best suited to those non-Muslims too. They also can come-up with vague verses in their own religious books or “new revised editions” of them and create new verses also and hit back at non-believers (who will be Muslims then) from their own point of view. Is that what we need? I don’t think so.
Once the Quran is cleared of discussing about non-Muslims, I think the problem will be solved to a great extent.
Any more excuses?
Dear Manjula, I am a 39 years old Muslim. But up to my age of 25 I was a Muslim because of my parents are Muslim. But since then to date I am in the same faith because of my choice. I studied almost 5 major religions in the world including Islam, Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism and Buddhism.
Of course I learned Buddhism through out my school carrier as there is no Islam tutor in my school I happened to spend the periods of Religion studying Buddhism. I could able to memorize sutras’ than some of my Sinhalese friends, make shocking some monks.
In Buddhism you believe that “Mithri Buddun” will come. and also almost all major religions talk about that there is a final messenger to come. There are some characteristic mention in those religions including Buddhism how he will be, his family background, the place he will born, what will he do, etc. And Islam is the only religion declares’ that Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) is the final messenger and all those characteristics in the previous religions match with him.
Yes, I said that “do not misunderstand Muslims did not go to battle, when enemies attacked Muslims reacted and some verses revealed in those moments”. I was talking about the period of GOD revealing the Glorious Qura’an to Prophet Muhammad (Peace be upon him), that is now almost 1,400 years ago. But you are giving an example of current time to put me down. See this is the problem, Shenal also did the same thing. Quoting out of context.
Qura’an is not a book of Science it is book of signs. But it talks about Science in more than 1,000 verses. Any single one of them does not false by the modern science rather proving day by day the verses which talks about science are agree with Science.
Manjula at last you talk about “new revised editions” of the religious books, who you and me are or any other learned pandiths to change the words of religions of god. Just for your information Qura’an is the only religious book on the face of the earth with our any single change. This is confirmed by the noble verse: ‘’We have, without doubt, sent down the Message; and We will assuredly guard it (from corruption). (Qura’an – Chapter 15 verse 9)
Most of people who talked against Islam finally became Muslims because of Allah’s mercy. May almighty mercy on the people and guide them to the straight path. Ameen
Watch & Learn ! Three Stages of Jihad (David Wood)
https://youtu.be/ERou_Q5l9Gw