Blog

The Time for a Muslim Reformation is Now

Background

Unlike what Americans are used to in the codified separation of civil law and individual religious beliefs, in Islam, there is no distinction between religious and secular—every aspect of life is subject to Sharia Law. Sharia is based on the Quran, Sira, and Hadith. The latter two are writings regarding the perfect example of Mohammed[1], that is, the details of Mohammed’s life and thoughts, and are collectively referred to as the Sunna.

Those who portray Islam as a tolerant and peaceful religion might be earnest in their beliefs. Nonetheless, as will be briefly shown herein, the literal writings of the Quran and Sunna depict Islam as a religion of both intolerance and subjugation of non-Muslims and violence toward them. There is no alternative conclusion that admits to the literal content of the Quran and Sunna, and it follows that Muslims wishing to live true to these texts are called to violence against, and oppression of, non-Muslims.

Many violent groups operating in the Middle East, such as ISIS, are not composed of radical Muslims. Quite the contrary, members of these groups practice Sharia Law to the letter as true Muslims are called to do. It is no coincidence that Jews, Christians, and other non-Muslims have been the continual brunt of discrimination under Dhimmi laws[2] and the victims of repeated and sustained violence against person and property[3] in Muslim-dominated countries.

One seeming solution would be for those Muslims who reject the wealth of prejudice and violence toward Kafirs (i.e., infidels) that can be found in the Quran and Sunna—the true radical Muslims—to revise those religious texts to reflect what they believe Allah’s true intent and disposition toward non-Muslims to be. Not an easy task and sure to be opposed, violently, by those who cling to jihad and subjugation of non-Muslims. There is, however, no other way if Islam is to be accepted by non-Muslims as a religion of peace.

What the Quran and Sunna Say

Among the most respected works regarding Sharia Law is the book Reliance of the Traveller, written by Nuh Ha Mim Keller in the fourteenth century. This book is the most definitive, single source reference regarding Sharia Law[4]. In this paper, the Reliance of the Traveller will serve as an authentic interpretation of these Islamic documents.

Among the difficulties of discerning the intent of many Muslims are the widely varying admonitions and instructions of the Quran and Sunna. Both defendants of Islam and Sharia Law as well as those who raise alarm provide copious quotations to substantiate their respective arguments. Certainly the volume of writings allows for picking and choosing as is demonstrated in the paragraphs below.

The Quran and Sunna ostensibly provide evidence of the magnanimity and love of Allah for all mankind. Here is one often-cited example:

“Whoever takes a life other than to retaliate for a killing or for corruption in the land is as if he had slain all mankind.” (Quran 5:32)

This particular quotation seems sensible enough and protective of all life, but the context needs to be understood. “Retaliation is obligatory against anyone who kills a human being purely intentionally and with right.” (o1.1)[5] Retaliation, however, is not permitted, inter alia, for “[A] Muslim for killing a non-Muslim” (o1.1.2), so punishing a Muslim for killing a non-Muslim for any reason whatsoever is, in Allah’s view, “ . . . as if [the punisher] had slain all mankind.” Non-Muslims are afforded little protection from even the most arbitrary actions of Muslims.

Retaliation also is not permitted for “[A] father or mother (or their fathers or mothers) for killing their offspring, or offspring’s offspring” (o1.1.4). This latter exemption from retaliation would seem to allow “honor” killings.

As to what constitutes “corruption in the land”, one form is apostasy—the act of abandoning or rejecting Islam. “When a person who has reached puberty and is sane voluntarily apostatizes from Islam, he deserves to be killed.” (o8.1) If a Muslim were to convert to Buddhism, another Muslim would have the right to kill the apostate.

A second corruption is fornication (i.e., adultery) or sodomy. “If the offender is someone with the capacity to remain chaste, then he or she is stoned to death, someone with the capacity to be chaste meaning anyone who has had sexual intercourse with their spouse in a valid marriage, and is free, of age, and sane.” (o12.2) Pregnant women, however, have a mandated, if limited, stay of execution: “A pregnant woman is not stoned until she gives birth and the child can suffice with the milk of another.” (o12.6)

There are other passages in Enormities (Book p of Reliance of the Traveller) that apply, too. In p17.3m we find: “The Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) said:

1. Kill the one who sodomizes and the one who lets it be done to him;
2. May Allah curse him who does what Lot’s people did
3. Lesbianism by women is adultery between them.”

Another quotation that is intended to give non-Muslims comfort is found in o11.1 in Reliance of the Traveller, as follows: “A formal agreement of protection is made with citizens who are:

1. Jews;
2. Christians;
3. Zoroastrians;
4. Samarians and Sabians, if their religions do not respectively contradict the Fundamental bases of Judaism and Christianity;
5. And those who adhere to the religion of Abraham or one of the other prophets (upon whom be blessings and peace).”

As it stands, the quotation is very consoling. The catch, however, is found in paragraph o11.3, which contains a set of rules that must be followed for the agreement to hold. In summary, the “subject peoples” must:

1. Follow the rules of Islam in public behavior and dress, although they may worship in private and have their own laws and courts;
2. Pay the non-Muslim poll tax (jizya), although women, children and the insane are exempt;
3. Comply with Islamic rules that pertain to the safety and indemnity of life, reputation, and property. They:
   1. Are penalized for committing adultery or theft, but not for drunkenness;
   2. Are distinguished from Muslims in dress
   3. Are not greeted as a Muslim
   4. Must keep to the side of the street
   5. May not build as high or higher as Muslim buildings
   6. Are forbidden to openly display wine or pork, to ring church bells or display crosses, recite the Torah or Bible aloud, or make public display of their funerals and feast days;
   7. And are forbidden to build new churches.

If a subject person violates these rules, then that person is subject to one of four alternatives that are applied to prisoners of war (o11.11). Those alternatives are: death, slavery, release, or ransoming for money or in exchange for a captive Muslim. If the subject person converts to Islam, then he/she may not be killed and one of the other three alternatives applies (o9.14).

Jihad means to war against non-Muslims (o9.0). Further in this section from Book o (Justice), we find scriptural basis for jihad in:

1. “Slay them wherever you find them” (Quran 4:89)
2. “Fight the idolators utterly” (Quran 9:36)

Later in o9.0 is a hadith as follows: “I have been commanded to fight people until they testify that there is no god but Allah and that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah, and perform the prayer, and pay zakat. If they say it, they have saved their blood and possessions from me, except for the right of Islam over them. And their final reckoning is with Allah.” Another hadith follows: “To go forth in the morning or evening to fight in the path of Allah is better than the whole world and everything in it.”

Jihad is not optional, but is a communal obligation (o9.1). Later in o9.1, failure to perform jihad is labeled a sin: “If none of those concerned perform jihad, and it does not happen at all, then everyone who is aware that it is obligatory is guilty of sin, if there was a possibility of having performed it.” Interestingly, a Muslim may leave the battle if the non-Muslim army is more than twice the size of the Muslim force (o9.2).

Lying is a sin and considered an Enormity. But, there are exceptions. “The Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) said, ‘He who settles disagreements between people to bring about good or says something commendable is not a liar.’” See r.8.2. Specifically permitted are untruths “ . . .for three things: war, settling disagreements, and a man talking with his wife or she with him (A: in smoothing over differences).” Because jihad means to war against non-Muslims, it follows that for the purpose of sustaining jihad, Muslims are allowed to lie.

There is much more that could be presented in this paper, but the conclusion is inescapable: Islam, as reflected in the writings of the Quran and Sunna, is a religion that embraces the subjugation of infidels and violence against non-Muslims. The behavior of Muslim dominated nation states and many individual Muslims over the centuries has been fully, and sadly, consistent with this assessment.

Time to Choose

Many Muslims live in America ostensibly for the freedoms and opportunities afforded them. These and other Muslims who would live in a world of peace and acceptance need to step forward now and declare the teachings of Mohammed to be those of peace and an acceptance of the differences among the peoples of the earth. They need also to condemn those who would do harm in Allah’s name and disavow all parts of the Quran and Sunna that exhort Muslims to intolerance of, and violence against, non-Muslims. Will they?

In a paper “Historical Methodology and the Believer” delivered at the June in 2010 Symposium of the New English Review in Nashville, Ibn Warraq, a leading apostate from Islam, said:

“Without criticism of Islam, Islam will remain unassailed in its dogmatic, fanatical, medieval fortress; ossified, totalitarian and intolerant. It will continue to stifle thought, human rights, individuality, originality and truth. Western intellectual Islamologists have totally failed in their duties as intellectuals. They have betrayed their calling by abandoning their critical faculties when it comes to Islam.”

There may be many Muslims who do not follow Sharia Law, but one cannot live as a true believer without following Sharia as defined by the Quran and Sunna. Those Muslims who claim to be tolerant of non-Muslims are either consciously disavowing major elements of Islam, or they are exhibiting the deception of the infidel, or Kafir, as permitted in Sharia. Where do we go from here?

In accepting the 1970 Nobel Prize in Literature, Alexandr Solzhenitsyn said: “The spirit of Munich[6] has by no means retreated into the past; it was not merely a brief episode. I even venture to say that the spirit of Munich prevails in the 20th century. The timid civilized world has found nothing with which to oppose the onslaught of a sudden revival of barefaced barbarity, other than concessions and smiles. The spirit of Munich is a sickness of the will of successful people; it is the daily condition of those who have given themselves up to the thirst after prosperity at any price, to material well being as the chief goal of earthly existence. Such people—and there are many in today’s world—elect passivity and retreat, just so as their accustomed life might drag on a bit longer, just so as not to step over the threshold of hardship today—and tomorrow, you’ll see, it will all be all right. But it will never be all right! The price of cowardice will only be evil; we shall reap courage and victory only when we dare to make sacrifices.”

Many non-Muslims are well past the point of indifferent diffidence as reflected in Solzhenitsyn’s comments. Ultimately, the world will not exempt Islam, Mohammed, and Muslims from the slightest criticism while Christianity and all other religions receive no such protection from public or private offense. Nor will we non-Muslims hold our tongues and cap our pens because Muslims require us to do so if we are to escape their wrath. Non-Muslims are not welcome mats for the followers of Mohammed and we will not accept Dhimmi status. The stage is set for a confrontation between Islam and the rest of the world. Muslims have the power to determine whether the struggle is a peaceful contest for the spiritual hearts and minds of men and women or a catastrophic prelude to the Armageddon. Alea jacta est[7].

[1] Warner, Bill, Sharia Law for Non-Muslims. Center for the Study of Political Islam, 2010.

[2] These laws offer specified protections and limited rights to non-Muslims who pay a special tax and abide by a set of restrictions discussed later in this paper.

[3] See inter alia Peters, Joan, From Time Immemorial. Chicago: JKAP Publications, 2002.

[4] The 1994 revised edition contains statements from four Islamic authorities attesting to the accuracy of the translations.

[5] Refers to Reliance of the Traveller, Book O, Justice, paragraph 1.1. Similar references appear elsewhere in this document.

[6] In using the phrase “spirit of Munich”, Solzhenitsyn refers to the foreign policy of nations (e.g., Great Britain during the years leading up to WWII) to refuse to confront a threat, and, instead seek peace and security through appeasement. The phrase refers to Neville Chamberlain’s claim to have secured “peace for our time” as a result of the 1938 Munich Agreement with Hitler.

[7] The Latin phrase reportedly uttered by Caesar as he crossed the Rubicon with his legions in opposition to the Roman Senate. Translation: “The die is cast.”