For our dear M&M and his bogus command of Islamic theology
Reader comment on item: How the West Could Lose
Submitted by dhimmi no more (United States), Mar 9, 2007 at 18:00
Let me start by saying that jihad means holy war. No and, ifs or buts. But again you Know no Arabic and you have the audacity to pontificate about a language that you do not know and for this I say: Shame.
Any one who is interested in scholarly work about Jihad I suggest reading:
1. "Jihad The origins of Holy War in Islam" by Reuven Firestone. Oxford University 1999
2. "JIhad in Classical Islam and Modern Islam" by Rudolph Peters. Markus Weiner Publishers. Princeton 1995.
3. And for those that can read Arabic I suggest Malik's "Kitab al-Jihad."
Now for the Nth time the word Jihad means holy war and the word Ijtihad means strive to improve, and these two words have nothing in common except they belong to the same Arabic root JHD, and now feel free to prove me wrong.
Now the fun starts:
>the ayat sent by various posters such as Noah Wilk are all pertaining to attacking the non believers if he transgresses upon you this is no way condone violence
This is as bogus as it can get.
In classical commentaries we have two important verses and they are the foundation of what came to be know as al-Harb al-Muqadassa or holy war or Jihad and thay are
1. Ayat al-sayf or the sword verse which is Qur'an 9:4 and in it Muhammad tells his minions to go out and kill the polytheists for _no reason_ at all
2. Ayat al-harb and in classical commentaries it is Q2:216 where your Allah declares war on the rest of humanity for no reason at all.
And if you wish I can provide you with a linear translation of both ayat.
But the most important is Q:29 where your Allah decalres an unconditional war on Ahl al-Kitab what ever that is for no reason at all and now you can prove me wrong.
Now the Islamic tradition tells us that Surat al-Tauba (oh do not panic as you know no Arabic) or Sura 9 is the last revealed sura and Q2:216 is a very late Madina aya. Right?
Now based on the doctrine of al-nasikh wa al-mansukh these above ayat will abrogate any previous ayat where attacking unbelievers was conditonal.
So your claim is bogus. And how come you did not know that? and is it out of wishful thinking and you were hoping that we do not know that?
The rest of your post is nothing but hot air
And you know what? I find it funny that your likes you are out to defend and spread the religion that brutalized your ancestors and Arabian imperialism and for this I say shame. Is this islamophobia? so be it!
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 (2096) on this item
Comment on this item
You can help support Daniel Pipes' work by making a tax-deductible donation to the Middle East Forum. Daniel J. Pipes