To Mr. Zedine about Muslim tolerance etc.
Submitted by Plato (United Arab Emirates), Jan 6, 2007 at 06:12
Mr. Zedine you have quoted from a lot of people about your Prophet. I could quote even more lengthy stuff dripping with admiration for the Buddha, Asoka, Jesus, Zoraster, Mahatma Gandhi. Does it prove anything? Mr. Zedine I suggest you read something about the Buddha or even Gandhi to let some light into the mind closed by your Islamic education.
You have some interesting things to say and I have equally interesting comments on them.
"The great success of Mohammad's life had been effected by sheer moral force, without a stroke of sword.
Mr. Zedine either you do not know your Islamic history or it is pure dissimulation on your part. These sort of statements flow smoothly from the tongues of Muslims. Do you know who started raiding the Meccan caravans. The first raid, and almost all other raids were instigated by Mohammed, was conducted on the Prophet's orders at Nahla during a sacred month when all of Arabia refrained from shedding blood. A man was killed and booty taken. The Arabs of the day reacted with abhorrence. Did the Prophet regret this. Conveniently there was an ayat 'revealed' allowing such raids. The raiders had offered the Prophet one fifth of the booty which he accepted after this 'revelation'. This proportion of booty for the Prophet was then legtimised by the Koran. You call that sheer moral force?
And what about the much-trumpted battle of Badr. The Muslims were trying to rob a rich caravan being taken to Mecca by Abu Sufyan. The battle of Badr happened when the Meccans sent out a force to protect that caravan. That is Islamic self-defence for you. Pure self-defence as you say. When the other guy tries to defend himself it is considered aggression and now the Muslim is the one defending himself! Geobbels must be turning in his grave for not having thought of something like that.
You say:"In an aged of barbarism, the Battlefield itself was humanized and strict instructions were issued not to cheat, not to break trust, not to mutilate, not to kill a child or woman or an old man, not to hew down date palm nor burn it, not to cut a fruit tree, not to molest any person engaged in worship. His own treatment with his bitterest enemies is the noblest example for his followers. At the conquest of Mecca, he stood at the zenith of his power. The city which had refused to listen to his mission, which had tortured him and his followers, which had driven him and his people into exile and which had unrelentingly persecuted and boycotted him even when he had taken refuge in a place more than 200 miles away, that city now lay at his feet. By the laws of war he could have justly avenged all the cruelties inflicted on him and his people. But what treatment did he accord to them? Mohammad's heart flowed with affection and he declared, "This day, there is no REPROOF against you and you are all free." "This day" he proclaimed, "I trample under my feet all distinctions between man and man, all hatred between man and man.""
This one is a favourite of Muslims. That Mohammed did not massacre the Meccans when he conquered them. Then why did he massacre the Banu Quraiza (You have the convenient story of the hapless Jews choosing their own judge, a person who had sworn vengeance on them. What a story!). The Banu Quraiza were only suspected to have had intentions to help the Meccans. The Meccans actually attacked the Muslims. Which is worse. Why did he not massacre the Meccans. What the apologists hide is the fact that almost all the Muslims invading Mecca had close relative there, including the Prophet himself. Abu Sufyan was his father-in-law! The Prophet had always had great affection for his own people, to many of whom he was related by blood, even though they rejected his teachings (they converted only under duress on his victory). Please read the story, in Ibn Ishaaq's Sirat, of how disturbed the Prophet was when one of his uncles was captured at Badr and kept in chains. He had the person who had captured him treat him more kindly. A person on his list of people to be executed, a relative of Omar, was let off because Omar hid him and protected him. How does one go about massacring ones own cousins, uncles, father-in-law and that of ones supporters? Mr. Zedine, don't give us that balderdash about Islamic mercy.
You also forget that the Prophet was never mistreated because of his high connections until he started reviling the sacred idols and symbols of the Meccans. He preached without too many hindrances for more than a decade, albiet without much success. Success, if you can call it that, came only when the Meccans came under his sword. What did the Muslim world do Mr Zedine when those silly cartoons were published, or when the Pope made that speech. The Muslim world went on a rampage killing and destroying innocent lives. How much more tolerant were those pagans and idol worshippers when compared to you monotheists. Your god commands you to go and convert the whole world into worshippers. Your god even makes a contract with you, a binding contract mind you, to treat you to the pleasures of heaven if you kill or are killed in his cause. And what is this great cause for which you must kill and be killed. Recognise this one god as the only one. For that you must go and kill and be killed.
Your first sentence ".....strict instructions were issued not to cheat, not to break trust, not to mutilate, not to kill a child or woman or an old man, not to hew down date palm nor burn it, not to cut a fruit tree, not to molest any person engaged in worship" tells me you have not clue about your Prophets life.
Not to mutilate? Have you read of what the Prophet ordered done to Kinana of Banu Nadir. Tortured for treasure. Have you read of what was done to the robbers who killed his shepherd. Their eyes were put out, hands and feet cut off and left to die of thirst They begged for water and were refused. You think I am making this up. Please go and get a copy of Ibn Ishaaq's Sirat and read it from cover to cover. There are many more interesting stories.
Not to kill child or woman or old man? What happened to Asma Bint Marwan. A woman poet. What happened to Kaf Bin Ashraf? How old was he? A hundred plus. Both among others were murdered. They only criticised. What a crime!
Not to hew down date palm nor burn it, not to cut a fruit tree? Mr. Zedine you not only do not know your Islamic history you don't know even your Koran! Read: 59:5" Whether you chop a tree or leave it standing on its trunk is in accordance with GOD's will. He will surely humiliate the wicked. Whatever palm tree you cut down, or left standing on their roots, it was by ALLAH's leave that HE might humiliate the transgressors." What is the message that comes through Mr. Zedine? It is the Koran that is authorising destruction of trees and plants as long as it is the Muslims doing it. Can any Hadith you can quote override this Mr. Zedine?
You say:"The city which had refused to listen to his mission, which had tortured him and his followers, which had driven him and his people into exile and which had unrelentingly persecuted and boycotted him even when he had taken refuge in a place more than 200 miles away"
Was the city obligated to listen to his mission. If I go and preach a religion other than Islam in Mecca how long would you think I would last. Would I be merely driven into exile? How come Mohammed lasted thirteen years among the "intolerant" pagans. And you have some nerve saying that he was persecuted while he was in Medina, when all the time he was the one doing the persecuting by constantly raiding their caravans. This happens all the time with Muslim apologists. The aggressor is portrayed as the defender. The persecutor is painted as the persecuted.
You say:The theory of Islam and Sword for instance is not heard now frequently in any quarter worth the name. The principle of Islam that there is no compulsion in religion is well known. Gibbon, a historian of world repute says, "A pernicious tenet has been imputed to Mohammadans, the duty of extirpating all the religions by sword." This charge based on ignorance and bigotry, says the eminent historian, is refuted by Quran, by history of Musalman conquerors and by their public and legal toleration of Christian worship.
When you say:009.029009.041
Now read this little ayat.
Go ahead and search for the context and tell me that I have torn it out of context. Or tell me that the translator has mangled the original Arabic.
What does 9:111 tell you. Please read it carefully. God has PURCHASED your person and your goods and BINDS Himself to give you paradise.And rejoice for this is wonderful bargain as you gain paradise for the price of your life and property. Allah making a contract with Muslims to kill and be killed to serve his wonderful purpose. Really wonderful. Also read 6:10-12 where again god bargains with your life and property for a heavenly abode.
In fact Mr. Zedine you must read the whole of Chapter Nine. It encapsulates Islam very well. Interestingly the Koran even condemns the Bedouins (97-101) in this chapter. Only the city-slickers of Mecca and Medina seem praiseworthy.
Why do Muslim countries have apostacy laws and what do these laws prescribe for Muslims who leave their religion. Imprisonment if they are lucky. No compulsion in Islam!
Mr. Zedine your comments are welcome.9:111 God hath purchased of the believers their persons and their goods; for theirs (in return) is the garden (of Paradise): they fight in His cause, and slay and are slain: a promise binding on Him in truth, through the Law, the Gospel, and the Qur'an: and who is more faithful to his covenant than God? then rejoice in the bargain which ye have concluded: that is the achievement supreme.
YUSUFALI: Go ye forth, (whether equipped) lightly or heavily, and strive and struggle, with your goods and your persons, in the cause of Allah. That is best for you, if ye (but) knew. (Are Muslims being told to go lightly or heavily armed to build dams and bridges and hospitals?)
YUSUFALI: Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued. (Search for context and tell me the meaning of this ayat is not what it appears to be. Let me help you here. The previous verse is condemning the poor pagans as unclean and banning them from what they had held sacred for generations and the next one curses the Jews. As shining an example of religious tolerance as one can think of!)The principle of Islam that there is no compulsion in religion is well known, surely you must be joking Mr. Zedine. Read a small sampling from the Koran and tell me whether a change in the dictionary meaning of compulsion will be wise.
But in pure self-defense, after repeated efforts of conciliation had utterly failed, circumstances dragged him into the battlefield."
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 and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".
Reader comments (1084) on this item
Comment on this item
Support Daniel Pipes' work with a tax-deductible donation to the Middle East Forum. Daniel J. Pipes