Dhimmi and tablighees-
Reader comment on item: Shoeless George Bush[ Discusses Islam]
in response to reader comment: So what did we learn from our dear Chris?

Submitted by Chris G. (United States), Jul 25, 2007 at 19:42

Um... honestly I didn't even know what a tablighees was until I googled it. From there it seemed to indicate that they were some Saudi Wahhabi group that usually spouts the same Wahhabi stuff that you keep insisting on. But if they say the same things that I'm saying and are good people, I probably would like them.
However, I've never traveled to Pakistan. I do like Indian and Pakistani food though. Does that count? By the way are you from India? I was just wondering cuz it sounds like you really hate Pakistanis.

You are right that the Surah 9 was revealed late after the capture of Mecca. What you don't mention however is that it was revealed during the campaign against the city of Tabuk, then held by the Roman Empire and made up of mostly Christians. This particular Surah taken within historical context is about this military campaign and not meant to abrogate previous ayas.

Furthermore, let us explore the Qu'ranic context of this verse that you leave out. Oh...what do you know, the verse before it in Surah 9:4 says:
"Except those of the idolaters with whom you made an agreement, then they have not failed you in anything and have not backed up any one against you, so fulfill their agreement to the end of their term; surely Allah loves those who are careful (of their duty). "

Then the verse afterwards says in Surah 9:6:
"And if one of the idolaters seek protection from you, grant him protection till he hears the word of Allah, then make him attain his place of safety; this is because they are a people who do not know. "

Followed by Surah 9:7:
"How can there be an agreement for the idolaters with Allah and with His Messenger; except those with whom you made an agreement at the Sacred Mosque? So as long as they are true to you, be true to them; surely Allah loves those who are careful (of their duty)."

So what do you know, they don't have to kill them all do they. Keep in mind that all this was during the conquest of Arabia in order to make it the center of Islam. These verses are also referring to battles.

The majority of the rest of Surah 9 has to do with trying to rally Muslims to go fight against Tubuk if you study Islamic commentaries about when this Surah was revealed. Now just for grins, since you speak Arabic, what is the Arabic word used for the word "him" in Surah 9:6??? Can that be translated to mean "her" as well? That sounds like they're talking about a battle to me.

As for abrogation theory, that is something that some scholars came up with based on a two vague ayas in the Qu'ran and it is highly controversial.

In most cases, of abrogation, it was used to clarify small sections about alcohol, family law, and penalties for sexual misconduct. This began under Imam Shafi, founder of the Shafi madhhab of Islam. However during this time, it was not widely accepted by other scholars of his time. Later however however, it began to gain acceptance and eventually led to extremists using ayas taken completely out of historical context in order to abrogate a massive section of the Qu'ran concerning peaceful behavior with non-Muslims.

This includes over 100 verses. This is what is called taking abrogation to the extreme way beyond anything originally envisioned by Imam Shafi. It now has become the favorite tool of Wahhabis that you now are using to help legitimize their extremists views.
A vastly more rationale explanation for the differences in peaceful versus warlike verses is quite simple...read them in their historical context as to when they were revealed rather then as ayas to be followed to the letter for every situation. That verse of the sword was an example of certain circumstances of warfare showing how Mohammed dealt with opposing armies of the Roman Empire who slaughtered his emissaries that he sent to Tobuk. Even so he still leaves room for mercy in the surrounding verses I quoted during these battles.

The usage of this "verse of the sword" is an example of the concept of Sunah taken to extremes. After this battle Mohammed also halted his armies and invaded no further despite anger from his followers. Later however after his death the following Caliphs would launch military campaigns across the Roman/Byzantine Empires and Persian Empires in which the major Islamic expansion occurred. Keep in mind also that these empires were serious threats to their newly formed Islamic nation.... but like most empires...once they start, they just keep on conquering...

We did no different in the founding of our own country. Manifest Destiny Baby.... except we ended up giving Mexico back to the Mexicans and failed to take Canada....but hey at least we got Alaska, Puerto Rico, and Hawaii along with a big freakin' mainland. It was just too much sweet land to leave to the brown savages, plus we had to bring civilization and Jesus Christ to them....ah the good ol' days of missionary schools on the reservations. Now why can't we have those for Muslim immigrants to teach them how to behave like good American Protestant White folk? Not just Muslims but for Mexicans and Indians and the Chinese as well. After all, if it could work here maybe it could work in Iraq?
I'm being sarcastic by the way just in case anyone actually thought that was a good idea.

At any rate, there are a lot of sources about abrogation theory that you are welcome to go research. You will find totally different versions if you read the Salafi examples versus traditional Salafi, Maliki, and Hanafi Islamic historians. One good one that I found is this one as it has all its sources well cited and is well written: http://www.brillonline.nl/public/abrogation

That will give you a small taste about the complexity of abrogation theory and why its not to be taken to extremes to wipe out 100+ verses of the Qu'ran.
:

Chris G.

---

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened for relevance, substance, and tone, and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome, but comments are rejected if scurrilous, off-topic, vulgar, ad hominem, or otherwise viewed as inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the Guidelines for Comments. For informational purposes, we identify countries from which comments are sent.