Sometimes I feel that I am trying to ride two horses in maintaining connection both as Christian and Muslim. I know that if I were not in America, this might well cost me my life. I see us all as followers of Allah SWT, God, G_d or whatever anyone wishes to call him. I have less in common with those who see multiple Gods, yet I know that many Muslims see Christians as doing that because of the "Sonship" of Jesus.
Being a non-Trinitarian, I am less worried about that. I am determined to wait for God to prosecute all that. I am not Allah SWT, so can not.
Tonight I was at a cooking dinner/class and somehow some guy started authoritatively talking about the origin of some food, and then he got on how dangerous Muslims were because of Isis, or the Taliban. I'm no stranger to these situations, being in America, so I told him that no Muslim I know would say that Isis is Muslim. I have been instructed that these daish have neither Qurans, nor Pray.
It was soon obvious that I would either have to hit this man or to turn and walk away. I would likely defend Christians the same way.
As-Salāmu ‘alaykum, sister.
The Former Grand Mufti of Saudi Arabia, Sheikh Bin Baz (an ardent Wahhabi) declared that suicide attacks are ‘evil, sinful, immoral, corrupt, oppressive and hostile’; and that those responsible for such crimes do not believe in Allāh (subḥānahu ūta'āla) and the Last Day ‘with correct conviction.’ In his opinion, such people are: ‘Indulged in the lewdness of the spirit, corruption of the self and envy.’ (referenced in ‘ISIS - DAESH a Catastrophe and a Tribulation’; by Syed Hussain bin Osman Madani, and reviewed by Shaykh Abdullah Taha Madani).
Syed Madani writes:
‘Sheikh Muhammad Ibn Ramzan Al-Hajari (may Allah preserve him), Lecturer by Royal Commission Al-Jubail, Eastern Province Saudi Arabia said that Daesh and Nusrah Front are not upon truth.
‘He further said that there are no ‘Ulama (scholars) with this organisation, rather all of them are imprudent and foolish…………a bloodthirsty and savage organisation, which is not only a danger for Muslims, but rather the whole humanity. Furthermore, he said that to warn against the perpetuators of mischief and tribulations and to disgrace them is an extremely high level of Jihad.’ (Op. cit.).
According to Al-Hajari, approximately one thousand and fifty Indian scholars have issued a Fatwa stating that ISIS is un-Islamic; and that therefore: ‘The scholars from all around the world should disseminate awareness against this terrorist organisation by any possible means.’ This Fatwa was signed by one thousand and seventy religious organisations, and copies sent to fifty countries.
Madani goes on:
‘After having known the opinion of the Indian scholars towards Daesh, it is appropriate to get ourselves acquainted with what the Muslim leadership has to say about it too. The senior Barrister, Janab Asad-ud-Deen Owaisi, President of AIMIM, and Member of Parliament in India, gave this message to 180 million Muslims that Daesh are Khawaarij, who are dogs of Hellfire, adulterers, murderers and worthy of condemnation. He also advised the youth to remain close with the ‘Ulama, and prevent themselves from visiting the terrorist websites, and consider seeking knowledge, eradication of poverty and serving one’s parents to be Jihad in the current times.
‘Grand Mufti of Saudi Arabia, Sheikh ‘Abdul ‘Azeez Aal Ash-Sheikh (may Allah preserve him) said that organisations like Al-Qaeda and Daesh are Khawaarij, amongst whom extremism, severity, rigidness, mischief and terrorism are found. Moreover, they are the first enemies of Islam, who slaughter the Muslims to begin with. Thus, these organisations have nothing to do with Islam. In fact they are outside the Deen.’ (Op. cit.).
Shaykh Muhammad Al-Yaqoubi (a Sufi) has also issued a lengthy Fatwa against ISIS, declaring them to be Khawarij and, as such, outside the fold of Islam. According to the Shaykh, Muslims have a duty to fight ISIS, and to destroy them. (see his book: ‘Refuting ISIS’).
Muslims are attempting to do just that.
Why is it that certain people (regardless of their ethnic origins, or religious affiliations) can kill so readily (and eagerly)? Noam Chomsky and Andre Vltchek suggest an answer:
‘George Orwell had a term for it: “unpeople.” The world is divided into people like us, and unpeople – everyone else who do not matter. Orwell was talking about a future totalitarian society, but it applies quite well to us. There is a fine young British diplomatic historian, Mark Curtis, who uses the term unpeople in his study of the post-World War II depredations of the British Empire. We are not concerned with what happens to them.’ (‘On Western Terrorism - New Edition: From Hiroshima to Drone Warfare’).
Islam rejects utterly the notion that certain individuals, or nations, are ‘unpeople’. Allāh (subḥānahu ūta'āla) created human beings as equals, who are to be distinguished from each other only on the basis of their faith and piety. He tells us:
‘People, We created you all from a single man and a single woman, and made you into races and tribes so that you should know one another. In Allāh’s eyes, the most honoured of you are the ones most mindful of Him: Allāh is all knowing, all aware.’ (Al-Hujurat: 13).
Why do Islamist extremists defy the Qur’an?
The principal reason is evidenced in a Channel 4 documentary on the Qur’an; a documentary I recorded several years ago. At one point, the presenter introduces Sheikh Khalid Tafesh, at that time the elected representative of Hamas in Bethlehem; with (according to the presenter) a third of his votes coming from Christian Palestinians.
When reminded that that suicide is expressly forbidden in the Qur’an the Sheikh answers: ‘That’s true. God says “do not kill yourself, and do not bring misery on yourself”, so we are forbidden from attempting suicide.’
He then says: ‘If we had the same weapons as the enemy we would not resort to this method, but we don’t, so it’s our only option.’
His argument is straightforward: When faced with overwhelming power and weaponry Muslims are entitled to set the Exalted’s prohibitions on aggressive and unrestrained warfare aside; and to act in any way they see fit.
El Fadl writes: ‘Since they (the terrorists) are not strong enough to take on the Western armed military, they must achieve victory by any means necessary. And, according to puritans, waging attacks against the civilian nationals of countries that occupy Muslim lands will eventually bring these countries to their knees and teach them not to violate the sanctity of or attempt to dominate Muslim nations.’ (‘The Great Theft: Wrestling Islam from the Extremists’).
In short, Islamist extremists believe they are justified in violating the prohibitions against starting – or participating in – a war of aggression; against harming, in any way, non-combatants, women, children, the old, the sick and those enemy combatants who no longer wish to fight, or who are prisoners of war; as well as the prohibitions against destroying property; homes; churches; synagogues; mosques; crops or livestock; and the prohibition against suicide; because (as far as they are concerned) there is no other way to win peace…their version of peace.
El Fadl writes:
‘What type of arrogance permits a people to name themselves God’s soldiers and then usurp His authority? What type of arrogance empowers a people to inject their insecurities and hatred into the Book of God, and then fancy themselves the divine protectors? Of all the sins of this world, what can be more revolting than usurping God’s Word, and then misrepresenting God’s meticulous Speech?’ (‘The Search for Beauty in Islam: A Conference of the Books’).
In a foreword to the monograph ‘Islamic Rulings on Warfare’; produced in 2004 by Lieutenant Commander Youssef Aboul-Enein (US Navy Medical Service Corps) and Dr. Sherifa Zuhur (Visiting Research Professor of National Security Affairs at the Strategic Studies Institute, U.S. Army War College) Douglas Lovecraft - Director of the Strategic Studies Institute - writes:
‘To win that ideological war (against Islamic radicalism and anti-American sentiment) we must understand the sources of both Islamic radicalism and liberalism. We need to comprehend more thoroughly the ways in which militants misinterpret and pervert Islamic scripture. (‘Islamic’ terror groups have) produced (their) own spokespersons who attempt to provide religious legitimacy to the nihilism they preach. Many frequently quote from the Quran and ahadith (the Prophet Muhammad’s sayings and deeds) in a biased manner to draw justification for their cause.
‘The authors have found that proper use of Islamic scripture actually discredits the tactics of al-Qaeda and other jihadist organisations.’
Everything that Lovecraft says about ‘Islamic’ terror groups can be applied equally well to those who rage against Islam in general, and its Prophet in particular. These people also quote from the Quran and ʼaḥādīth in a biased manner to draw justification for their cause.
Julia Ebner, an Austrian journalist, and researcher at the London-based Institute for Strategic Dialogue, writes:
‘Although it may seem self-evident, it is important to emphasise that most Muslims are not Islamists and most Islamists are not jihadists. This crucial distinction is often ignored by far-right sympathisers, who use the terms Islam, Islamism and jihadism interchangeably to propagate the view that Islam is inherently violent.
‘Far-right and Islamist extremist incidents correlate in terms of their timing, and areas with a strong far-right presence are more likely to breed Islamist extremists and vice versa. One side tends to provoke a retaliatory reaction from the other. The extremes thus escalate, resulting in a spiralling violence effect. With those on each side feeling the need to defend themselves from the offences of the other side, their predictions become a self-fulfilling prophecy: an increasing number of Muslims are lured into embracing Islamist views and a rising number of non-Muslims turn to far-right parties.
‘Looking at the statistics, the Global Database on Terrorism (GDT) records domestic, transnational and international acts of terrorism that occur anywhere across the world. It contains data on over 150,000 terrorist attacks, making it the world’s most comprehensive unclassified database on terrorism incidents. An analysis of this data suggests that far-right extremist violence correlates with Islamist extremist attacks. Indeed, a closer look at the incidents that occurred in the period between January 2012 and September 2016 across the US, Australia, the UK, France and Germany, reveals that far-right and Islamist terrorist attacks tend to spike at the same time.
‘To conclude, a symbiotic relationship between far-right and Islamist extremists occurs on at least two levels: (1) as their stories are two sides of the same coin, they reinforce each other; and (2) as their actions provoke each other into more radical retaliation, they turn each other’s predictions into self-fulfilling prophecies.’ (‘The Rage: The Vicious Circle of Islamist and Far-Right Extremism’).
It appears that far-right and Islamist extremists are incapable of making a fair and reasonable assessment of what the Qur’an has to say – based on a thorough examination of the text itself; and of the words of Islamic scholars – because such an assessment cannot exist in their particular world. They begin with the assumption that whatever they believe simply has to be true; and that any argument to the contrary must be a lie, or else the product of some delusion. No evidence, no logic, no appeal to reason can persuade them otherwise. They dwell in their own echo chambers; two sides of the same worthless currency.
