The American Muslim community needs to have a frank and honest discussion about extremists within our ranks. Within the past few years, we have witnessed a rise in homegrown terrorists. Like the problem of domestic violence, we pretend that homegrown terrorism doesn’t exist and are quick to point figures at law enforcement agencies and accusing them of entrapment. However, we all know that these sorts of people exist within our community and they espouse radical views without any law enforcement agencies manipulating them. The truth of the matter is that choosing to ignore these types of problems won’t make them go away. Imam Zaid Shakir has stepped up to the plate to challenge the moral foundations of those within our ranks who turn to violence and terror to achieve political ends and he should be applauded and supported.
While this open letter is a great first step, the community also needs to begin to set up programs to deal with the radicalization of the youth within our community. The ideology of violent extremism is not one that comports with the mainstream understanding of Islam. It is not, was never part of, nor will it ever be, part of orthodox Islam. The deviancy of violent extremism needs to be thoroughly rebutted by our Imams and ‘Ulema and it must be done through Islamic educational institutes and centers of worship. This does not require curtailing of the freedom of speech and right to critique to the powers that be – by all means, that discourse should happen. However, political grievances cannot be used as a means to justify violating both sacred and secular law. We need to have a town hall meeting within the community to discuss this problem and propose solutions. Its not enough to condemn terrorist attacks every time they happen, we need to be proactive not reactive and stop the spread of an ideology which is infecting people within our community.
Regardless, Imam Zaid’s article is a great first step. This article should be distributed through every major media outlet. Consider reposting the original article on your blog if you are a blogger or sharing it via facebook, twitter, or e-mail.
May Allah (subhana wa ta’ala) preserve our ‘Ulema and enable us to benefit from them. Ameen.
Letter to a Would-be Mujahid
By Imam Zaid Shakir
Recent developments have forced me to put some things on hold to write you this letter. You might ask how I know you. I have met you at student events, in mosques, and at conferences. I have listened to your arguments and I have made my counter arguments. Oftentimes, my arguments have been somewhat formal. I figured I would write you a letter, since that is a lot more personal and less formal. Perhaps this way you will be more inclined to listen.
To begin with, whenever you are criticized for your bloody, anarchistic ideology, you point to the bloody abuses of the American war machine or their Zionist accomplices. This diversionary tactic on your part does not impress serious and thoughtful people. It is simply an abdication of your moral responsibility. It is as if you are saying you reserve the right to violate established Islamic principles, such as those guaranteeing the protection of innocent life, because the American military or the IDF do no respect innocent Muslim life. That would be a credible argument if the American military or the IDF claimed to be operating on the basis of Islamic principles. They don’t, but you do. I hope, without further elaboration, you can immediately sense the moral dilemma you are creating for yourself.
Along those lines, please allow me to remind you of something else. Your misguided attempts to kill and maim innocent Americans only make it easier for the American military to kill more Muslims with greater impunity. Your actions help to create a political climate that removes any moral restraint from the actions of the American military, the IDF and soon the forces of India’s increasingly Hindu nationalist armed forces. You see, fear is a very potent emotion and when it is carefully manipulated it can lead to very irrational politics. That most extreme form of those politics is called genocide.
Fear can be especially dangerous when it is combined with another emotion, insecurity. You are so divorced from reality that you probably haven’t noticed that a lot of Americans are extremely insecure right now. Especially, the white middle class or what is left of it. They don’t know if they will soon lose their homes, if they will have a job tomorrow, if their money will be in the bank next week, if they will be able to send their children to college or if their retirement funds will be stolen or totally devalued. Those insecurities combined with the spectre of the “Muslim terrorist next door” are a lethal combination that a group of people called demagogues is exploiting to justify an all out war on Muslims.
Those demagogues use the fear of you to prevent people from building the kind of grassroots, popular, movements that are necessary to challenge the corporate rape of our society and from challenging the destructive logic of permanent war. For example, remember the growing movement to challenge the new invasive TSA screening procedures at airports? Did you notice how it disappeared after the would-be mujahid in Portland allowed himself to be trapped into the scheme to blow up the Christmas tree ceremony? Do you think the timing was accidental? It is a shame that you and your ilk are so mindlessly complicit in such schemes.
Now you think the mujahideen can win an all out war against the Americans. Look at what the mujahideen are doing to them in Afghanistan. Sorry, but Afghanistan is not what all out war looks like. I’ll give you a clue what all out war looks like. Remember a couple years ago when the Israelis were bombarding the Gaza Strip and the Palestinian Muslims, for all of their courage, couldn’t do anything except appeal to outside powers to stop the carnage? Or a few years before that when Jenin was flattened? Think of the scale of that devastation expanded to encompass all of the major cities of the Muslim world. Imagine America unleashing a new generation of “tactical” nuclear weapons being designed to be used specifically against Muslims targets raining down on Muslim capitals and there is no Muslim strategic deterrent available to stop it. AK-47s and RPGs will be of no avail. Imagine the calls to human rights organizations to stop the slaughter finding no ears to hear them because the neo-fascist forces your stupidity has helped to unleash have swept those organizations away in its maddening torrent.
I have heard you counter that such an argument is a manifestation of a lack of faith. God has promised the believers victory. Indeed, He has. However, it is very pretentious of you to assume that someone who murders women, children and innocents with blazon impunity in the Name of God are the believers that victory has been promised to. He has promised the believers victory, but that promise is not unconditional. God is not going to give victory to people who murder in His Holy Name.
I applaud your courage, but how it manifests itself puzzles me. You have the courage to fly halfway around to world to engage in an armed struggle, but you do not have the courage to knock on your neighbor’s door to explain Islam to him or to give him your take on world affairs. I am also baffled at how you can smile in his face, but are ready to blow him up if he happens to be at the wrong place at the wrong time. What calculus do you use to assume he would not be amenable to your message? What has he done to you to be the target of your bloodlust?
You claim a refined understanding of Islam, so refined that you can make grave decisions concerning life and death, decisions with huge strategic implications –yet you seem to perceive nothing of the divine wisdom of your being in this country. You have an opportunity to be an educator at a time people are looking for a new way. You have an opportunity to be a guide at a time people are looking for a new direction. You have an opportunity to provide a source of spiritual solace at a time people are confused, angry and afraid. You have an opportunity to be a fierce advocate for truth at a time when lies are transforming the image of your religion and the direction of your country. You have the skills, the command of the language, the knowledge of the people to do all of that and more, but you choose to run away from this battle to join one you do not even know who the commander is.
Did I say that? “To join a battle you do not even know who the commander is.” No! I didn’t say that. Do you think that if the FBI can send fake mujahids into mosques all around America to find confused, vulnerable Muslims, develop fake bomb plots, with fake bombs, for very real political objectives, the CIA couldn’t do the same thing abroad? No, wait a minute. Didn’t the CIA build the Afghan mujahideen network? Didn’t what’s his name, Zbigniew Brzezinski, describe the Afghan operation as the CIA’s finest hour?
They would never use fake mujahids, operating through fake websites, to recruit confused and desperate Muslim youth to engage in operations that keep the climate of fear alive, would they? They wouldn’t do that to keep support for bloodsucking, treasury-draining wars alive at a time when there is no money for the poor, the elderly, health-care, education, infrastructure or investment in the green economy. No! It’s preposterous. Those would be psychological operations (psych ops) and that would be cheating. America never cheats, we’re the good guys!
I apologize, I’m tripping. On a serious note, I hope you don’t one day end up feeling as stupid and abused as young Antonio Martinez or Mahomed Osman Mohamud, the Somali kid in Oregon, are probably feeling right now. They have been tricked, deceived, used, and abused by fake mujahids and then thrown in a dungeon to rot for the rest of their lives. Do you think your fate will be any different? Don’t be a fool.
Sincerely,
Imam Zaid Shakir
Isma'il ibn Bilal
December 15, 2010
Inshallah, Ya Rab!, let’s share each other’s posts and information…I would be so honored to see some of my work on your blog, and there is plenty of yours on my own…
The Global Jihad of Ideas is the arena we must truly conquer for Allah’s Victory.
Naeem Muhammad Khan
December 16, 2010
Assalam U Alikum wr wb
brother i applaud your effort on talking to a wanna be Mujahid. But certainly telling us that there is no Jihad going on in the world and that us fighing any where in the world for legitimate reasons, authorized by Sharia is just our delusion is simply unreal and unIslamic.
I think Shaikh with all due respect, you should talk to people who wanna blow up themselves or use bombs to blow up innocent people. Please let the real Mujahideen have their way. There is absolutely NO Islamic text you can show me which denies the right of Afghans, Iraqis and Chechans to fight these foreign invaders.
Wa Salam
Nagi
December 18, 2010
Very interesting perspective. I agree with Imam Shakir’s point of view when addressing those that choose to attack innocents as a form of political statement. But for those that resist against armies that occupy their land, his argument does not hold water.
Most importantly, I appreciate Imam Shakir writing about this matter. This helps to bring about an open discussion about this subject in our community which is very much needed.
Mohammad Jawad
December 27, 2010
A Would-be-Mujahid’s answer to Imam Zaid’s Letter
Dear Imam Zaid Shakir
I read your letter addressed to me very carefully. You have tried to incite my emotions with reason and intellectual arguments so that I may not pick up some ammunition and go on a killing spree. I am surprised that you did not touch the real reasons behind my actions and attacked a few men of straw here and there.
You may make arguments that you think are convincing but to me, “reason”, “intellect” and “arguments” are of secondary importance behind my rationale of going after the non-believers. When you and I accepted Quran as the final, uncorrupted and literal word of God, we made a huge leap of faith. Our trust in Quran was not proportional to the evidence available and the quality of it. We both trusted the word of Muhammad (SAW) when he said that it was God talking to him through an angel. Reason, intellect, evidence and other corruptions were left far behind in the labyrinth of this world. Imam Ali (RA) puts it beautifully when he says that if there was a place for “reason” in religion, we would have done masah on the bottom of our feet while making wudu. I think you would make more sense if you stick to the sacred texts. After all, how much of your daily routine, from prayer (both dua and salah) to innumerable rituals, is based on reason and intellect? I am sure that you base most of your life on sacred texts instead of reason and intellect but you expect me to do otherwise. The real difference between you and me is that you believe that eating frozen yogurt makes a man invisible while I believe that eating frozen yogurt OR frozen milk makes a man invisible.
I have also met your kind at seminars, mosques and Youtube. Please allow me to call you a “moderate” as I am sure you will find “apologist” too distasteful a term. After all, you called my ideology “bloody” and “anarchistic” so perhaps you should be happy in accepting this label.
I would like to comment on your “moderation” here before moving on. Moderation in Islam (and in any other faith) is nothing but an attempt to loosely interpret or simply ignoring much of the holy texts in the interest of living in the modern world. The first thing to note is that your retreat from scriptural literalism is not due to a new light that you have suddenly discovered from the Islamic texts one fine morning but it is the result of blows coming from the demonic achievements of modernity that have put certain tenants of your faith to doubt. Scientific advancements, concern for human rights, fruits of liberal-democratic politics, an end to cultural/geographic isolation and the emergence of a general tendency to value a proposition in proportion to the evidence for it, led you to your religious moderation. The door did not open from inside, it was rather a result of these ideas steam-rolling in with a force. You are just unhappy at the personal and social cost a full embrace of Quran imposes on you. I call verse 65:4 as my evidence and your test to my statements here. This verse is universally interpreted by ALL theologians (minus some “moderates” in the last 50 or so years) down the centuries as sanctifying marriage (and subsequent consummation of it) to a pre-pubescent girl but you will disagree due to one of the above reasons although I have no doubt that your disagreement will be carefully layered in between sacred sayings.
It seems to me that you see actions of my mujahid brethren as a result of some strategic misjudgement. I assure your that strategy also plays a second fiddle in the equation and the real inspiration comes from what Islam ordains ALL Muslims to do. Your voice of moderation can never make any sense to me when I hear Muhammad (SAW) himself saying that “a day and a night fighting on the frontier is better than a month of fasting and prayer” and that “he who dies without having taken part in a campaign dies in a kind of unbelief.” My resolve to lay down my life and take as many others as possible further strengthens when I hear the Hadith that A single endeavour (of fighting) in Allah’s Cause in the forenoon or in the afternoon is better than the world and whatever is in it. Tell me why I should not stick to what the Prophet of Islam (SAW) tells me and listen to you instead?
You mention an established Islamic principle of guaranteeing the protection of innocent life including the infidels. This principle does not look so established to me when I see Muhammad’s (SAW) God is himself in the process of “mocking,” “cursing,” “shaming,” “punishing,” “scourging,” “judging,” “burning,” “annihilating,” “not forgiving,” and “not reprieving” throughout the Quran. The Verse of the Sword also gives further sanctity to my tolerance of collateral plus intentional damage of innocent infidels. “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 (9:5)”. I call Ibn-Kathir (I can name many other authentic names here), THE most quoted, esteemed, authoritative and authentic name in Quranic tafsir who weaves together Hadith, Seerah and other reports to conclude that The Verse of the Sword abrogates other more tolerant and peaceful verses of Quran. My trust in this established principle of yours further weakens when I hear Syyed Qutb, the most influential modern thinker in Islamic world, say “The Koran points to another contemptible characteristic of the Jews: their craven desire to live, no matter at what price and regardless of quality, honour, and dignity.” Please note that I am quoting some of the most trustworthy names in Quranic sciences here not some obscure, one-man-bands. I hope you have found the names of the commanders here in reply to your question when you amaze at my eagerness to “join a battle I do not even know who the commander is”.
I know that you will reply to all these verses and saying of the Prophet (SAW) by invoking the standard excuse of “reading Quran in context”. No doubt you will also repeat some peaceful verses you are so fond of. You will quote me the verse “whoever kills a soul …. it is as if he had slain mankind entirely. And whoever saves one – it is as if he had saved mankind entirely (5:32)” but you will conveniently miss the next couple of lines. As a reminder, let me quote 5:33 here. “Indeed, the penalty for those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger and strive upon earth [to cause] corruption is none but that they be killed or crucified or that their hands and feet be cut off from opposite sides or that they be exiled from the land. That is for them a disgrace in this world; and for them in the Hereafter is a great punishment”.
Please remember “corruption or fisaad” is a qualification that is ambiguous at best and I have yet to hear of a sane person, let alone a Muslim, who does not think that USA and its other cronies are not spreading corruption on the earth.
Also, why should I not interpret all the peaceful teachings of the scriptures in the light of the ones I mentioned earlier? Why not take “my” verses as standard-bearers and use these as a lens to understand the other more laid back ones? Your “context” could be my fiction because it is the result of a faulty human intellect altering the apparent meanings of Allah’s eternal and infallible words. Once again, I see it nothing but an attempt to forego the social and personal cost of a literal reading of Quran. I hope you keep in mind what Quran claims for itself when you try to alter, nudge or dilute the apparent message it contains specially when this message has been understood by all throughout the Islamic history in a specific way. Quran claims that it “makes things clear and manifest”, is” easy to understand”, it is in a language that is “pure and clear”, the “God thus clarifies the revelations” and that it is a book that “provide(s) explanations for everything” and “there is no doubt in it” Now you tell me that suddenly, Quran is not so clear and pure and context should be added before its application in my various projects.
You invoke the smile of my friendly neighbour John Smith to beg for mercy on his soul (I take a sigh of relief that at least you did not mention Jenny Smith here). I am afraid Our Lord sees him in a different light. Allah orders me that “Let the believers not make friends with infidels in preference to the faithful—he that does this has nothing to hope for from God—except in self-defense” (3:28). Also, “Believers, do not make friends with any but your own people. They will spare no pains to corrupt you. They desire nothing but your ruin. Their hatred is evident from what they utter with their mouths, but greater is the hatred which their breasts conceal” (3:118). Further, “Believers, do not seek the friendship of the infidels and those who were given the Book before you, who have made of your religion a jest and a pastime” (5:57). No doubt Allah’s final instructions to mankind for all times are pure and clear just like He promised in the Quran.
At the end, you have tried to install fear in me of the dungeons of Abu Ghuraib and Guantanamo Bay. My Lord has already promised me that “Those that suffered persecution for My sake and fought and were slain: I shall forgive them their sins and admit them to gardens watered by running streams, as a reward from God; God holds the richest recompense. Do not be deceived by the fortunes of the unbelievers in the land. Their prosperity is brief. Hell shall be their home, a dismal resting place” (3:195-96).
I end here with a note that I seriously and sincerely hope that you can see the desperation and ineffectiveness of your moderation compared to my “bloody” and “anarchistic” ideology. You may have the best of intentions but moderation, reason, intellect have an eternal, damned dilemma to contemplate with. Once you cross a certain bridge without using these very tools, you can not invoke them later on to save yourself. You just cannot base most of your life on vague beliefs and expect more fervent adherents to dispose off what you do not like by reasoning.
To see what I mean, here is a link for a Letter from a Mujahid to his wife.
Wassalam
A Would-Be-Mujahid
Imam Zaid's Response to Mohammad Jawad
January 26, 2011
http://www.newislamicdirections.com/nid/articles/answers_to_would-be_mujahids/
Answers to “Would-be Mujahids”
By Imam Zaid on 20 January 2011
Category: Teachings
The following questions have been sent to me from numerous individuals in response to my rant entitled, “Letter to a Would-be Mujahid.” Hopefully, these responses, some of which are quite lengthy will help clarify issues that are causing a lot of confusion for many of our young brothers and sisters.
Question: Your nonviolence will deny Muslims the right to defend their homelands and repulse invaders.
Answer: I definitely advocate nonviolence for Muslims living in the pluralistic societies of the West. This is a fundamental Islamic responsibility. However, Muslims in Muslim majority countries have every right to defend their lands, resources, homes and families, if their political and religious leaders deem such a defense to be in their best interest. The issue I have been discussing is not the universally-recognized right of self-defense, which is applicable for Muslims and all other people. I am arguing against the mass murder of civilians being part of Islam. It is morally wrong and strategically counterproductive. Any credible strategic gains made by Muslims in recent history have been accomplished by popular resistance, not by vigilante murderers or mercenary killers.
Question: Why are you trying to convince me to abandon jihad by your intellectual arguments when the literal meaning of the Qur’an is clear in terms of the incumbency of slaying the kuffar wherever they are found?
Answer: I think the most important issue to clarify in this question is the use of intellect. The issue of “slaying the kuffar wherever you find them” will be dealt with in the context of answering a subsequent question. The Qur’an itself calls to the use one’s intellect. This is true at the very beginning when one enters into Islam. Allah states, “There is no compulsion in religion, truth clearly distinguishes itself from error…” (2:256). Ibn Kathir says concerning this verse:
The Most High says, “There is no compulsion in religion…” That means you cannot force anyone to enter the religion of Islam, for it is evident and clear. Its evidences and proofs are discernable such that it does not require that anyone be forced to enter into it. Rather, whosoever Allah guides with Islam, opens his breast, and illuminates his inner vision; he enters the religion on the basis of clarity. [Conversely,] whosoever finds his heart rendered blind by Allah, his hearing and vision sealed; there is no benefit to him entering Islam by force and compulsion. They mention that the occasion of revelation for this verse concerns a group of the Ansar, even though its ruling is general.
The evidences and proofs that Ibn Kathir refers to cannot be grasped without sound intellect, which is why all Muslim scholars consider a person who lacks control of his or her mental faculties to not be religiously responsible (ghayr mukallaf). The position the scholars take on this issue is based on the Hadith of the Prophet, blessings and peace upon him, “The pen is lifted from three: the insane until he regains his sanity; the child until he attains to puberty; and the sleeper until he wakes up” (Abu Dawud, 4403, Ibn Majah, 2041).
The Qur’an further states, concerning reason, intellect, reflection, contemplation and related concepts, “Do they not reflect on the Qur’an? If it had it been from other than Allah they would have found therein many divergent views” (4:82). Ibn Kathir comments on this verse with the following words:
The Most High orders them to reflect on the Qur’an, forbids them from turning away from it and from its unambiguous meanings and clear expressions, and informs them that there are no divergent views, inconsistencies or contradictions in it. [This is] because it is a revelation from the Mighty and Praiseworthy. Thus it is a truth from The Truth. For this reason He says, “Do they not reflect on the Qur’an? Rather, their hearts are sealed up” (47:24).
He then says:
Had it been from other than Allah they would have found therein many divergent views.” Meaning, were it manmade or fabricated, as the ignoramuses among the idolaters and the hypocrites claim during their secret councils, they would have found much divergence in it –namely many inconsistencies and contradictions. However, this [scripture] is safe from divergent views, because it is from Allah.
How are divergent views, inconsistencies and contradictions known if not through contemplation and reflection which are rooted in reason? The following verse should make the role of intellect in understanding Islam clearer. Allah mentions in the Qur’an:
It is He who has revealed unto you the Scripture. In it are unambiguous verses, they are the foundation of the Scripture. Others are ambiguous. As for those harboring deviance in their hearts, they pursue what is ambiguous, seeking discord and desiring its interpretation. No one knows it interpretation except Allah. Those firmly established on knowledge say, “We believe in it, it is all from our Lord.” None will be admonished except those possessing sound intellects (3:7).
Unlike verses that call for reflection on the wonders of Allah’s creation, this verse deals with a specific theological issue. Fully grasping that issue requires a sound intellect. Ibn Kathir comments on the phrase, “None will be admonished except those possessing sound intellects…,” by saying, “Only those possessing sound intellects and upstanding powers of discernment understand, intelligently grasp and comprehend meanings accurately.” I have noted what Ibn Kathir mentions in this regard because he is considered a conservative exegete not known for relying on reason and intellect in explaining the Qur’anic text.
Fakhruddin al-Razi is even more explicit in supporting the role of intellect in understanding the message of the Qur’an. He says concerning the phrase, “None will be admonished except those possessing sound intellects” (3:7):
This is praise from Allah Most High for those who said, “We believe in it.” It means: None will be admonished by what the Qur’an conveys except those with mature intellects. This expression has become an indication that they use their intellects to understand the Qur’an.
Our Prophet, blessing and peace of Allah upon him, mentioned, “Whoever Allah desires good for, He gives him a sound understanding of the religion…” (Bukhari, 71; Muslim, 1037). Understanding is critical to attaining to the truth of this religion. One lacking understanding will be doomed to misguide both others and himself, which the Prophet, peace upon him, mentioned as the condition that will result when the scholars are taken away:
Allah does not suddenly remove knowledge by snatching it away from the servants. Rather, He removes it by taking away the scholars until not a single scholar remains. The people then take ignoramuses as their leaders. They are asked [questions] and respond without knowledge. They are astray and they lead others astray (Bukhari, 100).
Uncritical literalism has contributed to transforming jihad from a means to obtain interests that are countenanced by the Divine Law into an end in and of itself. In the words of one of the leading theoreticians of the jihad movement, Abdul Salaam Faraj, it is the Missing Obligation (al-Farida al-Gha’iba). This transformation has led many to believe that they have to fight regardless of the consequences, whether the interests of the Ummah are advanced or set back by their fighting.
The Prophet, peace and blessings upon him, has indicated that jihad is not an end in and of itself. In fact, it can be undertaken for the wrong reasons. An example of this is found in the hadith of Abu Ayyub al-Ansari: He mentions the following incident:
The Messenger of Allah was asked about a man who fought to display his courage; one who fought motivated by tribal fervor; another to show off, which of those was in the Way of Allah? The Messenger of Allah, blessings and peace upon him, responded, “The one who fought in order that the Word of Allah be uppermost, that is in the Way of Allah” (Bukhari, 7458; Muslim, 1904). As the Prophet, blessings and peace upon him, reminds us, there are worldly and otherworldly consequences for fighting, especially for the wrong reasons. For example, the Prophet, blessings and peace upon him, mentioned a man who claimed he both fought and was killed in the way of Allah, yet he was thrown into Hell.
The Prophet, peace and blessings upon him, says:
The first person to be judged on the Day of Resurrection will be a man who was martyred. He will be brought forward and reminded [by Allah] of the blessings he has received and he will acknowledge them. He will ask, “What have you done for these blessings?” He will say, “I fought for your sake until I was martyred.” Allah will reply, “You have lied. Rather, you fought in order that it would be said that you are brave, and it was said.” He will then be ordered to be dragged on his face until he is flung into Hell (Muslim, 1905).
Many times, the implications of literalism are not fully thought through. For example, if we consider the hadith, “Do not long to meet the enemy. Ask Allah for well-being. If you do meet them be patient and know that Paradise lies in the shadow of the swords” (Bukhari, 2965; Muslim, 1742). In this hadith, the Prophet, blessing and peace upon him, is warning against longing for the tribulation of conflict and ordering his community to pray for peace and well-being. This prayer is consistent with the origin (asl) in human affairs which is peace and wellbeing, war and disease are deviations from that origin. He then mentions that if you do meet the enemy to be patient. One of the manifestations of patience in conflict is to strictly observe the rules of engagement delineated by Allah and His Messenger, such as those guaranteeing the protection of innocents and noncombatants. He then says, and this is the point I want to emphasize in the context of discussing literalism, “…and know that Paradise lies in the shadow of the swords.” Our Prophet, blessings and peace upon him, mentioned that Paradise lies in the shadow of the swords. According to this hadith, literally interpreted, it does not lie in the shadow of the AK-47 or the RPG-7 or any other modern weapons. The only way to apply this hadith to modern fighting conditions is to interpret it figuratively or in the light of other texts.
This is a small example of the limited efficacy of literalism in understanding the divine texts. Ultimately, literalism in this area will only serve to reinforce foregone conclusions, such as mass murder being an inherent part of Islam. When it confronts its advocates with dilemmas of understanding that can only be resolved by its abandonment the usual course of action is to ignore those dilemmas.
Question: How can you advocate peaceful and friendly relations with non-Muslims when the “Verse of the Sword” (9:5) abrogates all of the lenient verses you cite to substantiate your position?
Answer: The contention that the “The Verse of the Sword” abrogates other more peaceful and tolerant verses in the Qur’an is flawed for a number of reasons. First of all, the most authoritative commentators on the Qur’an hold that the “Verse of the Sword” is itself abrogated by the verse, “Then, when you encounter the disbelievers in battle, smite their necks; after you have routed them, bind (the prisoners) tightly. Then set them free or ransom them…” (Qur’an 47:4). The point to be made here is that if an indiscriminate, unconditional order has been given to kill the non-Muslims, how can one have a choice to free or ransom them? It should also be pointed out that the order to “smite their necks” is in the context of the actual battle. Many anti-Islamic polemicists use this verse to argue that Muslims are ordered to behead innocent people.
Imam al-Qurtubi mentions that al-Dahhak, ‘Ata’, and others are of the opinion that the above-mentioned verse (Qur’an 47:4) abrogates the “Verse of the Sword.” Al-Thawri relates from Juwaybir, that al-Dahhak said, “Slay the polytheists wherever you find them… (9:5)” is abrogated by the verse, “Then set them free or ransom them….(47:4).” Imam at-Tabari reaches the following conclusion concerning this latter verse. After mentioning the proofs of those who opine that it abrogates or is abrogated by the “Verse of the Sword”:
The correct opinion in this discussion, as far as we are concerned, is that this verse (47:4) is operative; it has not been abrogated. This is because the description of what constitutes an abrogating or an abrogated [verse], which has been mentioned in more than one place in this book of ours, occurs when it is not possible to join the two conflicting rulings advanced by the verses or when there is convincing proof that one of the rulings abrogates the other. [In this case] it isn’t farfetched to say that a choice has been given to the Messenger of Allah and those charged with the affairs of the community after Him between liberating, ransoming, or executing [the combatant] non-Muslims.
Secondly, the claim that the “Verse of the Sword” abrogates other verses that encourage peace and tolerance is challenged by many exegetes. For example, among the verses it is claimed are abrogated by the Verse of the Sword, is the following, “If they [your enemies] incline towards peace then you should likewise incline and place your trust in Allah. Surely, He hears and knows all” (Qur’an 8:61). Imam Qurtubi engages in a lengthy discussion of why this verse is not abrogated. In the context of his discussion, he mentions that this verse is the basis for Muslims entering into a treaty of peace with non-Muslims that can extend indefinitely.
Imam Tabari similarly rejects the idea that this verse is abrogated. He mentions, “As for those who repeat what Qatada and others mention concerning the abrogation of this verse [by the Verse of the Sword]it is a baseless statement unsubstantiated by the Qur’an, the Sunna (prophetic tradition), or sound intellect.” Ibn Kathir, after mentioning the opinion that this verse is abrogated specifically rejects that idea. He states, “There is no contradiction (tanafi), abrogation (naskh) or specification(takhsis) [in this verse].”
In addition to the opinions that the “Verse of the Sword” is itself abrogated, and that it does not abrogate those verses urging restraint, peace and tolerance in relations between Muslims and the members of other communities, many scholars are of the opinion that it does not even apply to Jews and Christians. Hence, it cannot be used as a proof that the Qur’an condones the indiscriminant murder of Jews and Christians. For example, Imam al-Qurtubi, renowned for his exposition on the legal implications of the Qur’anic text, states, concerning the verse in question (9:5), “… it is permissible to [understand] that the expression ‘polytheists’ does not deal with Jews and Christians (Ahl al-Kitab).” This opinion is reinforced by the interpretation of a related prophetic tradition, “I’ve been ordered to fight the people until they testify that there is no deity but Allah. …” Imam Nawawi mentions in his commentary on this tradition, “Al-Khattabi says, ‘It is well-known that what is intended here are the people of idolatry, not the people of the Book (Jews and Christians).’” Imam Abu Hanifa, Imam Ahmad, and many other scholars, are of the opinion that the polytheists living in the Arabian Peninsula at the advent of Islam are the group being referred to in the “Verse of the Sword.” As for polytheists outside of the Arabian Peninsula, in this opinion, the verse does not apply to them.
Question: You frequently quote the verse, “Whoever kills a soul for other than retribution in the case of murder or spreading murderous corruption on earth, it is as if he has killed all of humanity. Whoever saves an innocent soul, it is as if he has saved all of humanity, … (5:32)” but you never cite the next verse, “Rather, the sole recompense for those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger and strive to work corruption on earth is that they be killed, crucified, that their hands and feet be cut off from opposite sides or that they be exiled from the land. Disgrace is theirs in this world; and in the Hereafter they will have a great punishment (5:33).”
Answer: The magnitude of the verse, “Whoever kills a soul for other than retribution in the case of murder or spreading murderous corruption on earth, it is as if he has killed all of humanity. Whoever saves an innocent soul, it is as if he has saved all of humanity,… (5:32)” is too great to glibly dismiss. However, I will not dwell long on it other than pointing out what two of the greatest Qur’anic commentators have said about it. Imam Fakhruddin al-Razi says, commenting on this verse:
When he [a murderer] resolves to intentionally kill an innocent person he has given preference to the dictates of his bloodlust and anger over the dictates of obeying Allah. When this prioritization occurs, in his heart he has resolved to kill anyone who opposes his demands, were he capable of doing so.
Imam al-Qurtubi mentions:
The meaning is that whoever makes it lawful to take the life of a single innocent person has made everyone’s life lawful, because he has rejected the divine law [establishing the prohibition of killing innocents].
It should be sufficient warning to anyone that intentionally killing innocent people has been declared by one of the greatest scholars in Islamic history as a rejection of the divine law.
To move to the subsequent verse (5:33):
Rather, the sole recompense for those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger and strive to work corruption on earth is that they be killed, crucified, that their hands and feet be cut off from opposite sides or that they be exiled from the land. Disgrace is theirs in this world; and in the Hereafter they will have a great punishment (5:33).
It is interesting that attention is being called to this verse by a “jihadi” for it specifically indicts those guilty of the atrocities that increasingly are passed off in the name of “jihad,” as exegetes and jurists agree that this verse is an exposition on the punishment for those who are guilty of crimes against public order. The only difference of opinion in this regard is are such crimes against public order Muharabah/Hirabah strictly confined to rural areas or include both rural and urban areas. Imams Malik, al-Awza’i, Layth b. Sa’d, al-Shafi’i, and Ahmad b. Hanbal are of the opinion that such crimes against public order can occur in the rural and urban areas. However, Abu Hanifa and his school are of the opinion that they can only occur in rural areas because in urban areas people can more easily and readily appeal for help and there are police agencies to prevent such crimes under normal circumstances.
After an exhaustive study of the occasion for the revelation of this verse (5:33) Ibn Kathir explains the punishment associated with the crime it describes. He says:
The majority of scholars say: This verse is revealed for varying situations, as has been mentioned by Abu ‘Abdullah al-Shafi’i. [He says] we were informed by Ibrahim b. Abi Yahya, on the authority of Salih al-Taw’ama, on the authority of Ibn ‘Abbas concerning the crime of brigandage: if the criminals kill and take wealth they are killed and crucified; if they kill and do not take wealth they are killed and not crucified; if they take wealth and do not kill their hands and feet are cut off from opposite sides; if they terrorize people, but do not take wealth they are exiled from the land.
No one mentions that this punishment can be applied to someone who has not been directly convicted of the crimes Ibn ‘Abbas mentions above. Hence, to claim or imply that this verse can be used to justify the murder of innocent civilians is a baseless misinterpretation.
Question: America, Israel and their dupes have no mercy on innocent Muslim civilians, why should we have mercy on their civilians?
Answer: Allah, Most High, says, “Do not kill the soul Allah has sanctified except with just cause…” What cause can be evoked to justify the murder of innocent, noncombatant people who might even be Muslims? The fact that America or Israel or anyone else does it is not a suitable justification. None of the Qur’anic verses mentioning retribution apply to this situation in light of the hadith, “There is no harm or reciprocating harm,” and the associated legal principle, “Harm is to be removed.” Killing innocent non-Muslims only creates the conditions making it easier for far greater numbers of Muslim civilians to be indiscriminately killed. Hence, it is inviting and reciprocating harm, which is to be removed.
Our Messenger, blessings and peace upon him, has stated that he is a gift of mercy. He declared, “O People! Verily, I am a gifted mercy” (Hakim, al-Mustadrak, 100). He further stated, “One who shows no mercy will be shown no mercy” (Bukhari, 5997; Muslim, 2318). Similarly, “Whoever shows no mercy to humanity, Allah will show him no mercy” (Bukhari, 6013; Muslim, 2319). Likewise, “The merciful people will be shown mercy by the All Merciful; be merciful to those on earth and the One in heaven will be merciful to you” (Abu Dawud, 4941; Tirmidhi, 1924). Also, “You will not believe until you are merciful to each other.” Those hearing this replied, “O Messenger of Allah! All of us are merciful [to each other].” He responded, “Not the mercy one of you displays to his companion, rather mercy to all people.” “Mercy is only removed from the heart of a Hell-bound wretch” (Abu Dawud, 4942). During the Battle of Uhud when his enemies were on the verge of killing him, the Prophet, blessings and peace upon him, was asked to pray for their destruction. He refused, declaring, “I was sent as a mercy. I was not sent to damn people.”
Question: You advocate friendly relations with the non-Muslims, when Allah has forbidden us from taking them as friends.
Answer: Allah mentions in the Qur’an, “Allah does not forbid you, concerning those who have not fought you because of your religion or driven you from your homes that you treat them kindly and justly. Allah loves those who are just” (Qur’an: 60:8). There are those who claim that this verse has been abrogated by the “Verse of the Sword (9:5).” However, Imam Qurtubi mentions, while explaining this verse, that most of the exegetes consider it to be operative and reject the idea that it is abrogated. The many scholars who consider the verse to be operative cite as the basis for their position the story of Asma, the daughter of Abu Bakr, when she was visited in Madina by her mother, who remained committed to idolatry. She hesitated accepting the gift her mother brought her and refused to allow her to enter her house. Upon learning of the situation, the Prophet, peace upon him, encouraged her to accept her mother’s gift, to host her and to treat her with the upmost kindness, even though she was an idolater.
Imam Tabari states, after mentioning the various interpretations of the verse in question (60:8):
The most accurate opinion concerning this [issue] is that of one who says, “What is intended by this verse (60:8) are members of all ways of life and all religions; that you are kind to them, join relations with them and treat them justly.” This is because Allah, Mighty and Majestic is He, makes a general statement [in the verse] that includes anyone who fits the description. He does not designate some people to the exclusion of others. The claim that the verse is abrogated is meaningless.
Ibn Kathir also rejects the idea that this verse (60:8) is abrogated. Alluding to the following verse (60:9), he states:
Rather, He forbids you from taking as friends those who have displayed open enmity towards you, fought you, expelled you, or cooperated in your expulsion. Allah, Mighty and Majestic, has forbidden you from their friendship.
If one examines other verses in the Qur’an that discourage the befriending of members of other faith communities, one will find, consistent with what Ibn Kathir mentions above, that condemnation is conditional. For example, in (3:28) it is conditional on prejudicing the believers; in (3:118) it is conditional on befriending those whose have openly declared their hatred for the religion and are working for its ruin; in (5:57) it is conditional on befriending those who ridicule Islam. When the conditions mentioned in these verses are absent then the prohibition against the just, equitable and friendly treatment of members of other faith communities is of no effect.
It is fitting to mention in conclusion here that a Muslim man can marry a non-Muslim woman. This is undeniable. Allah mentions in the Qur’an, “Among His signs is that he has made for you from yourselves spouses, in order that you live with them in tranquility, and he has made between you love and mercy. Indeed, in this are signs for people who do reflect” (30:21). Allah mentions that he has placed love and mercy between the man and his wife, who may be a Jew or a Christian. Is he to reject this love and mercy or the friendship of his spouse and blindly adhere to a supposed absolute prohibition against befriending members of other faith communities?
Question: What is a person who is fed up with America’s murder of innocent Muslims all over the world supposed to do?
Answer: This is a valid and important question. I will make a few recommendations here.
1. Realize that you did not create the confusion, weakness and political incompetence that prevails in the Muslim world and that you are not responsible for or capable of fixing it. Oftentimes, we become stressed out over things beyond our control. Our Prophet, peace and blessings upon him, informed us, “From a person’s Islam being good is his leaving what does not concern him.” What we cannot control is not our concern. On the other hand there is much we are capable of doing here yet we oftentimes neglect those things. We will even run from what we can effectively influence to become caught up in events that we have no ability to influence at all. This is a formula for frustration and ineffective action.
2. Take advantage of the educational opportunities you have and train yourself to do something meaningful for the Muslims and humanity at large. Most people in the average Muslim society have no opportunity for higher education. Here in western societies we do have such opportunities. Instead of brooding about the situation of Muslims in various parts of the world, we should be educating ourselves to able to do something meaningful with our lives that can make a difference in theirs. It has been proven that knowledge indeed translates into power. We should be about the business of empowering ourselves.
3. Contribute in a meaningful way to the discourse that is shaping how Americans will view Islam. We should not assume that everyone in this country is inherently anti-Muslim. However, if we do not begin educating our fellow citizens about our religion, our community and the struggles of our people, an ever greater percentage of Americans will be prejudiced against Islam and we will have an extremely difficult time changing their attitudes. You can research to help provide refutations of the slanderous and defamatory ideas that are being passed off as Muslim principles and beliefs. You can write or blog. You can teach people about Islam in both formal and informal settings. You can arrange for classes and seminars in public places such as libraries, community centers and similarly places. You can give private presentations in the homes of friends, neighbors and relatives. You can organize book clubs to read and discuss books that portray Islam accurately.
4. Learn a skill that is needed in the Muslim world and spend part of your time serving people in other countries. Such skills may include medicine, nursing, computer science, sanitation engineering, environmental science, psychology (as the basis for therapeutic counseling), auto mechanics, etc. By serving in these areas you can contribute to the stability of Muslim societies that are being rendered damaged and dysfunctional by decades of unrelenting violence.
5. Help to serve the incarcerated, recent immigrants, poor, elderly and other populations whose lives are being ravaged by the corporate state. Building bridges with these populations will be a key to creating the kinds of coalitions that can push back in an effective way against the hegemonic sociopolitical machine that is attempting to actualize its control over all aspects of our lives. As the fiscal crisis of the capitalist state deepens there will be more and more people in need of various services. Muslims must step up to do our part in meeting those needs. This is one of the greatest things we can do to counter the vociferous anti-Muslim propaganda.
6. Join the work of those organizations whose political vision aims to bring people together and to overcome the divisions and rifts that have separated them. Such work can take place within the context of the electoral political system and in the context of grassroots political education and organization. There are also many Muslim advocacy groups that are springing up. Get involved with those groups and help to strengthen them both financially and in terms of their human resources.
7. Join the movement to humanize Muslims to the mainstream society with Muslim art and culture. This movement is powerful and is gaining momentum. The realms of effective communications in this regard include film, art, acceptable genres of music, poetry and many other vistas.
8. Get involved in the antiwar movement. Grassroots antiwar activism was instrumental in ending the Viet Nam war and it is the only thing that will end the so-called war on terror. There are many organizations and online initiatives that need help to enhance their efficacy. Muslims should be involved with such groups in great numbers if we are sincere in our desire to end a so-called war, which is leading to the deaths of thousands of innocent Muslims and the destruction of many Muslim societies.
These are just a few suggestions. There are many others. No young Muslim has an excuse to sitting around suffering from boredom waiting to be lured into a reactionary scheme that will only be used to set back Muslims both in this country and abroad.
I hope these answers have helped to provide some clarity and direction for those asking these questions and the demographic that they represent. At the end of the day, no success is possible without the Divine Providence of Allah. We ask that He assists us and that He fills our sails with the winds of His providence and His Love during these challenging times. May Allah bless you all, friend and foe alike.
Your Brother in Islam,
Imam Zaid Shakir
1/20/11
Aswaz Truv
December 28, 2010
Sorry-dear reader.
Since nearly 200 years- if one sincearely wishes to understand what it is all about- one HAS to look at the intentions and works of the “most-of-all-criminal-organisations” ,socalled -Secret Services- unfortunately now spread all over the world.
This I am writing as an expert in this field.
All what is written above and elswhere about ,no matter where in the world and in whatever disguise used to manifest theire humanity-poisoning activities,if one wishes to stop that most-criminal-actions one must first of all stop all the socalled “wolfs in sheeps clothes”-the Secret Services-In the first row CIA,Mossad, ISI(=CIA)ect,ect.Taliban IS CIA! Al-Qaida IS CIA! Jihadis ARE CIA! Hamas IS Mossad! etc.etc.
These agencies have to be shot down forever,their agents and all of those who are involved ,no matter from which walk of life,or those intending to get involved in such an activity- quickely be put in prison for a very long time.then,and only then there will be an end to such nonsence -activities.
But I am sorry to say that this will first of all not be enough believed and also those organisations are so powerfull today and act above law that the only way to stop them from doing there evil backround-work will be some happening like an asteroid hitting the earth and ending all that most-criminal activities on the spot,because people now are in their deapest sleep since the beginning of HUMAN mankind.
With most good wishes for the change of mankinds condition we are in now. Dr. Aswaz Truv
Ps.: These plastic-muslims doing the dirty work for their hidden or not hidden criminal agencies,are the most foolish ones.Why? First and most important of all:
!!!!!!! THERE IS NO PERMISSION for their socalled JIHAD!!!!!!!!
How This can be?
Go! and find out-but ask not the fanatics and extremists
-they know NOTHING!
That is Why they are involved.
And the fact that they are involved alltough there is no permission ,is the most clear sign that Secret Services are financing,supplying with weapons,and doing the propaganda work for it -and for the public-against it.And none of those individuals,no matter what the may be told or believe about,will ever enter paradise or become a matyr by doing such criminal idiot-works for the only benefit to lay much more heavy burdens on themselves,their families,their communities,and even whole mankind,poisoning -for the benefit of their hidden or not hidden suppliers -their hearts and the hearts of all those around them. They are the biggest idiots in that whole game-and the biggest losers. AND SECRET SERVICES KNOW THIS FACT VERY WELL-THAT IS WHY THEY ARE DOING THIS DIRTY WORK NOT BY THEMSELVES-THERE ARE MANY FOOLISH PEOPLE OUT THERE TO MANIFEST A MANY MOST-SLEEPING-ELITES CRIMINAL INTENTIONS.