So that they may hear the Word of Allah

Re: Human Rights for War Victims & America’s Muslims

Sura 9, Verse 6

“And if anyone of the polytheists seeks your protection, then grant him protection so that he may hear the words of Allah [i.e. the Qur’an]”

“Then deliver him to a place of safety. That is because they are a people who do not know.”

The meaning is that all non-Muslims (even pagans) were treated with a basic level of human dignity, not forced to beg for mercy when the Muslim army was in the superior position, nor if a true Islamic government were in power today or had power over ordinary non-Muslims (nonviolent civilians and non-combatants) who do not bear arms or threaten the government or the peace and security of the Muslims (or people) within the Islamic state.

It wasn’t permitted to kill people just because they were non-believers or pagans.

Furthermore, it was considered a bigger problem (for the state) than killing a Muslim (due to some conflict with him) to kill a non-believer who was under the protection of the Muslim government, and had (as above) a guarantee of safety of the emir al Moumineen (or Caliph).

It is also taught that any Muslim could give protection to any non-believer and that person’s life and property became sacrosanct (impermissible); there could be no shedding of such a person’s wealth, or any mistreatment (as per the prophet’s statement that any Muslim could give protection and the ummah would be obliged to protect that person, no matter how insignificant that Muslim is in the eyes of the people in his community regardless of his wealth or position, social status or any similar considerations.

To conclude, this means that non-believers are not to be killed merely for non-belief or their preferred religion, if they are not joining in fighting the Muslims, either in the Islamic state, or if they are given protection (in the days of Muhammad, it was in the form of a letter to which a seal was affixed). In those days the Muslims respected such things.

In Peace or War, the rights are guaranteed, they cannot be annulled by the dictates of extremists, nor does the Qur’an permit hypocrisy or two-faces; there is no permission in Islamic literature or teachings to lie to people to hurt them or to cause rifts in society or permission to deceive to curtail civil rights. It is permissible for the military leaders to plan and otherwise do what is necessary (by falsifying reports by people or otherwise to try to hide the Muslims’ true intentions (direction of a campaign, dates for actions, as military strategy), which is nothing to do with the average Muslims character or truthfulness. Some people (enemies of Islam) pretend that Muslims are permitted to lie about their religion, or to mislead people in every big or small discussion and so on, which is a part of the non-Muslims’ strategy of false propaganda against Islam and Muslims.

This protection was extended to anyone who asked, and meant that he agreed that he wouldn’t fight the Muslims inside the Islamic state, or scheme to attack Muslims by helping others from without the Islamic state, and so on. It is not true either that the protection in Sura 9, Verse 6 (above) was only for those people who were willing to listen to the Quran to convert; it means that the Muslims made some attempt to teach Islam to them and then they were allowed to remain free and could do as they pleased (as per their living, beliefs and worship (with some limitations placed on non-Muslims, such as no open worship or displays of religious symbols (e.g. a cross) or preaching of religion (contrary to what Islam teaches) This didn’t limit their free discussions with Muslims or other Christians and/or people who shared a similar faith, however). Non-Muslims could be punished for crimes which were well known to have proscribed punishments in those days, e.g. murder, adultery, fornication, stealing, drunkenness and so on.

It is to be noted that Muslims were not permitted to spy on each other or others, and spying wasn’t a permissible way to ascertain whether a person was breaking any laws or not; whether this would be the same today in light of the dangers faced by societies by terrorists, it is possible that some scholars might have a different opinion about whether or not the government would be permitted in unusual or special cases where there is a need, to spy on the people, vis a vis tapping their phones or monitoring their activities.

The demand by non-Muslims in their own countries that they be permitted to enter mosques and monitor activities isn’t unreasonable, and there is no problem in Islam with allowing non-Muslims to enter the masjid if there is some need; they could remain in the back and do their jobs, e.g. listen to the Khutba (religious talk of the Imam) and ascertain whether Muslims in some mosques are teaching extremism (ideas or encouragement to terrorist actions) which would be illegal; it isn’t a question really of whether Muslims give permission to this or not as we know that they are in fact being monitored, but the fact that this is brought up by some non-Muslims as a thing which would cause Muslims discomfort or pain is suggesting that Muslims in general have a problem with the greater society or telling what they really believe, whereas as Americans in favor of freedom point out, Muslims have been polled as to their beliefs, they have spoken out, they are engaged, and particularly in America where there are good numbers of Muslim Americans who are integrated - they are born Americans, they have degrees, they are more educated than a majority of Americans and almost as educated as Jewish Americans (according to polls, as speakers point out), they believe in the “American dream” more than most Americans.



Emails Asking About Islam -2

Does Islam Discriminate Against Women or Girls?

Re: Reply to your comment on: Douglas Murray - (SML) Are Muslims Too Easily Offended?

Hi again Jane.


Please feel free to use my thought on your blog. I would appreciate it if you would not change them, LOL.

I think you did mention something to the effect that the moral code outlined in the Koran might only apply to people from that day, rather than today. The Koran for instance seems to have no objection to slavery. I will admit that the freeing of slaves was a generous act, but the institution itself was practiced and seems to be condoned by the Koran and the Hadith. There are very few Muslims today who would agree with slavery. Unfortunately there still are some Islamic people and countries who have not outlawed slavery because of the Koran. There are also very few Muslim people who would marry prepubescent children. Unfortunately there are some who do.


I do believe that 4 witnesses for adultery and rape is unreasonable. I do believe that human beings can rationally determine whether adultery or rape has occurred without 4 witnesses.I also believe that a woman's testimony is just as valuable as a man's and a woman can decide what is appropriate for her to wear without asking her husband. I believe that woman can walk around society unaccompanied if she chooses. I believe it is never appropriate for husband to strike his wife.I believe that stoning to death for adultery or apostasy is immoral.

I also believe it is quite fine for Jews and Christians to have political power over Muslims if they are best at the job. There should be no prohibition based upon religion. I don't believe in the modern world, polygamy is unacceptable.

I don't believe that you do know where you stand with respect to a huge number of moral issues facing human beings today. I don't believe that Islam has worked out a universal moral stance to global warming, taxation, women's rights, polygamy, defensive war, Gay rights, Dhimmi rights, Jihad, apostasy. There is a great deal of interpretation that goes on with respect to these things and they are basically the same things we have to work out in the Western world.

Wrt torture-I generally agree that torture is unacceptable, however since I have a very good imagination, I can imagine some instances where it might be acceptable. This is the problem with holy books giving universal moral prohibitions. Morality actually requires an assessment of the particular situation.

it may be that there is some evolutionary value to belief in a God or gods or spirits. I wonder though, if we are evolving away from that. I think that atheism or nonbelief or at least a minimum belief is far and away the fastest growing. If religion is truly a man-made invention, then I would expect there to be a number of different beliefs depending upon culture. I would expect that there would be great confusion about it, even amongst people of the same religion. I think this is exactly what we find.


Does Islam Discriminate Against Women or Girls?

As promised, I haven't changed any of the email or ideas one iota. I have had a lot of enjoyment reading peoples emails, particularly this one, and it's because of freedom that we can exchange views. So here is three cheers for freedom: Hooray for Freedom, Hooray, Hooray.

That was a bit weird, lol.

 

My reply will follow in the next post, It's ready, but to build up suspense, I'll be posting that tomorrow. (see below for more of my thoughts on Allah, Islam, faith and religion)

Allah has revealed to us 99 names and there are other of His names we don't know. We also can learn about His attributes, which helps us to know Him. That's one means to knowing Allah, and then there are His signs in nature, etc.

Many people say they have changed certain habits and so on, but I don't believe most people change as far as who they actually are. I think most people know themselves pretty well, it isn't about changing ourselves but our actions, which is a big part of Islamic conversion and the time that takes could be short or long depending on the person and his/her background and problems, etc. Some people find the conversion almost nothing to complain about, meaning it is rather easy for them. I didn't struggle myself with wearing hijab too much, though it took me 3 months to get up the courage when I was living at the time in a non-Muslim environment, but that is my personal experience and others have a different one.

I believe I am still the same person my parents raised and they recognize that most of the changes about me have been outer ones and others are more private, such as my thoughts or beliefs on things, which I don't always express to my family for reasons I don't go into here. But they know who I am, that I am basically the same daughter they raised and will always have my special personality and quirks.

I am a more God-conscious person however, and that is something which has been ongoing since I converted rather than something which came and went when I was Christian. It has something also to do with the society I choose to live and the company I choose to keep.

I think you have a lot of preset ideas about Islam and Muslims which makes you say the things you do, in a kind of judgmental way.

No problem, it's been interesting as usual to read your reply.

Some Points:
 

 adultery is proven with four witnesses, otherwise it can't be proven, nor can anyone's reputation be spoiled by talk of infidelity without clear evidence and witnesses  this gives opportunity for the sinner to repent of his or her crime and to stop the adulterous behaviour without being dragged through the mud, as is done in western and european nations whenever a hint of "infidelity" occurs.

It is to preserve honor and life that Allah has made it a difficult task to prove adultery by ordering that four witnesses (they must be male, even in this day and age). This requirement means that convictions don't happen a lot, unless the people themselves turn themselves in to receive the punishement (a worldly punishment will ward off the one in the hereafter). Also, if women were to be witnesses, that would maybe make it easier to find four people to testify, than if all four must be men. What adulterer is going to let people find him in a situation like this? It might not happen every one hundred years, but is a good deterrent anyway, when punishment is a possiblilty.

stats on Muslims show that their divorce rate is rising in general. This means that there is more unhappiness or instability inside marriages today,which is due to many modern reasons. We can reflect that women also seek divorce more often in shariah or family courts (in the ME) or in the West and Europe through lawyers or divorce court. But Muslim marriage is still more successful on averrage than other marriage. Infidelity is also not as much of a problem as in non-Muslim societies, in my opinion (probably stats back this up).

Rape, is another issue and viewed with great gravity by the society and earns the displeasure of Allah and is not condoned in any case. It can be easily proven by a physical examination of the victim; it isn't necessary to have even one witness if DNA testing can prove the criminal without any doubt. It is better to have witnesses to corraborate the woman or child's testimony, or in the case of men also, there is the same recourse to medical witness of a doctor or health professional, and first person accounts of witnesses and so on.

(revised June 9th)



Wrong Assumptions Based on Imperfect Knowledge - Part One

Islamic ruling by an incompetent:

When Osama Bin Laden was killed, the Americans buried him at sea: they claimed that it is permissible to bury Muslims at sea, so they did that without the consent of Bin Laden’s family, although they also had his wives in custody.

Frequently we hear about some Fatwa issued, not by Islamic scholars, but by non-Muslims. The fact is, they are not capable of issuing a correct Islamic opinion on any subject, nor are they qualified to do so, because that requires a known Islamic Studies degree, or some proper and accepted form of Islamic education. Also, Muslims necessarily rely on Muslims for reliable Islamic rulings; they cannot rely on non-Muslims for this (Isn’t that so?). It is well known that even regular Muslims are not allowed to make “fatawa”, but are only allowed to repeat the Islamic legal opinion of a scholar, if they are certain it is as he had said. Someone might make an incorrect statement, based on their knowledge, but which they had forgotten, or mixed up. They are not be punishable for making a mistake, but this can lead to some problems for others.

A woman told me that the Prophet, SAWS, had been affected by “the evil eye”, or ‘hassad’ as it is known in Arabic. I thought that maybe she was just trying to prove her point, that a woman who didn’t read qur’an on herself, but her husband reads qur’an on her, could still get ‘hassad’ (even if she had read the verses on herself). I told her, the Prophet, SAWS, used to read the three final chapters of the qur’an and was protected from ‘the evil eye’ by it; he, SAWS, also used to read ‘ayat al Kursi’, in english called, “the verse of the throne”, the Fatihah, or opening chapter (often read seven times when indicated) and other verses of the qur’an at different times.

Not only was this Islamic studies student wrong in her judgment about the protection afforded by reading verses of the qur’an against the evil eye, but she also stated incorrect information about the Prophet, SAWS; that he had been affected by ‘the evil eye’ when in fact, we read in the traditions that once, a Jew performed a magic spell on the Prophet, SAWS, without his knowledge, and a while later the angel Gabriel informed the Prophet, SAWS, about the location of the magic , a charm, which he must undo to break the magic spell. Magic can be very powerful or dangerous, and is something which is completely forbidden in Islam. If one does magic, it takes that person out of Islam. As for the Prophet being afflicted by the ‘evil eye’, it never happened. He also taught others how to protect against it, so it is possible to be safe from the ‘evil eye’s’ effects.

The one who possesses an ‘evil eye’ might be a good Muslim, but should protect others from his ‘evil eye’ when he sees something which he envies, by saying “ma’esha allah tabarak allah” or “what Allah has willed, may it be blessed by Him”. It is known that some people naturally have a more envious disposition than others; therefore they should always repeat the formula when they see something beautiful or which could make them envious. That will also protect their souls from the envy, and make them more God fearing. Also, people would not hate them.

Other examples of ‘fatawas’ by ignorant people involve the important aspects of the prayer. Praying with the face veil is permissible; the prayer will be acceptable. Similar to covering the feet with socks; the feet still touch the ground. There is a hadith which mentions that for the prayer to be acceptable seven bones have to touch the ground. Based on this saying, one woman who claimed that she has an Islamic Studies degree told another that she cannot pray with the niqaab on. We can see that this is not correct because there are times when women must cover their face while praying, such as in a public place, where others (specifically, men) might see them. IN any case, I asked a scholar, and he informed me that it is not an incorrect prayer. Although it is preferable to pray without the face veil, it is acceptable to occasionally pray with it on, whether it accidentally falls over the face, or if the woman prayed with it on intentionally.

Renditions are unIslamic:

In Islam, torture is forbidden; suicide bombing is also forbidden. To fight terrorism, the Saudi Arabian government sentenced some people to prison. Some of these men had already served prison in Guantanamo, or Bahrain, and then were sent to Saudi Arabia. It is a well known ‘secret’ that the Saudis employ other nationals to torture prisoners. Therefore, Egyptians, for example are brought to perform this ‘duty’.

But the Saudis also have found other ways to deal with people involved in terrorist plots; for example, one young Muslim Saudi, who explained that he had been used as a suicide bomber by a group; men who wore masks to hide their identity had strapped a bomb to this young man, who was fortunately able to live because the bomb he was wearing didn’t go off. He ran for his life, was caught and sent to rehabilitation. So, the Saudi government spared this person, mainly because he claimed he didn’t know what his mission was; he had volunteered for Jihad, according to Islamic principles, not to volunteer for a suicide mission, in Iraq.

No one knows who the group or men were who did this to him. It is believed based on his statements, (which I saw in a television broadcast) that they may not have been Arabs, or Iraqis but actually ‘foreigners’, another way of saying that they were probably Westerners/Americans.

If prisoners are sent to Saudi Arabia, or any Muslim government, then one would hope that they would be dealt with according to Islamic principles. While many governments in the west, and elsewhere abhor capital punishment, it is the opinion of Muslim jurists that this is far more humane, and a better way to deal with hard core criminals; highway robbers, murderers, terrorists, rapists, or drug dealers, etc. and dangerous repeat offenders, than life in prison.

It is therefore perturbing that the Saudis have come up with this idea of ‘rendition’ the way that the Americans do. It is similar to what the Stalinist regime used to do to prisoners, in effect, making them disappear. During renditions, prisoners are sent away and not heard from, nor allowed any legal counsel. Then they are tortured, and possibly killed while in detention; sometimes the torture continues for years. This is totally unconscionable and surely is un-Islamic. So, why does the Islamic government allow it? It seems, they do not ask their Islamic scholars what is the proper view of torture, and they assume that if a non-Muslim or other person does the torture, then, it is not their sin. They believe they absolve themselves of responsibility for the crime. Torture is a crime against humanity. Not only is it unIslamic but it is against all international conventions.

It is strange to sometimes hear people defend torture.

IN all cases, when ignorant people, or unqualified people make ‘fatawas’, especially as no one has asked their opinion, it seems arrogance is a motivating factor. Such people are too eager to express their opinions, and likewise their manner of doing so is insincere. When an opinion is sought, the scholars are always friendly, and seem to want to help, not hurt the questioner. They do not speak of their own free will, but say what they have learned according to the strongest opinions available. They are free of willful arrogance or a bullying attitude.

The one common character flaw which many people have who offer their opinion when not asked, is arrogance. It is not a characteristic of a good believer’s, therefore sincere Muslims should try to purge this tendency from their personality and character, or the people will not appreciate them and will in fact suspect their motives, or their sincerity.

Non-Muslims cannot make juristic or other decisions for Muslims or believers.

The Americans were of course wrong to bury Osama Bin Ladin at sea, based on several obvious things, which I can see, and a true scholar would come up with more evidence than I can.

1) Bin Laden died in his home, or thereabouts after the Navy Seals attacked him and the family or people with him at the time.

2) He was nowhere near the sea, so why should he be buried at sea?

3) A Muslim must clean the body, ghusl, and perform wudhu for the body (both are essentially forms of ritual purification of the body) before the dead person is to be buried. The family or close relatives have the right to perform the ghusl.

4) There is no reason to assume that bin Laden did not die a Muslim, despite his ‘fatawa’ about fighting the Americans and his belief that Americans should be killed in suicide bombing attacks.

5) A Muslim should be prayed on by his fellows, meaning his relatives and male Muslims in the community.

6) As far as we know, none of these things did take place, because Osama was buried at sea by the Americans. (A muslim clergy for the Americans did the required ghusl, prayer, and burial, according to the American authorities).

7) Is an American Muslim, who works for the non-Muslims army, while they are hostile to Muslims and kill innocent Muslims worldwide, permitted to do this sacred duty?

 Therefore, it seems on several counts the Americans did wrong by burying him at sea.

Part Two

Ritual Purification vs. Mental Illness Cure:

One non-Muslim told me that Islam will cure the mental disorder Obsessive Compulsive Disorder because the rituals in Islam, such as purification before the prayer, are such that the person suffering from OCD will be somehow satisfied with purifying himself and stop the obsessive washing, or other forms of compulsion which he does. This was baseless, of course, with no scientific research behind it.

The fact is that there are Muslims today who have this disorder; they continue to wash their body parts even after they have already done so. The purification for prayer known as ‘wudhu’ is done once by washing parts of the body or wiping with water in a specific order a specific number of times (yet it is flexible). Then s/he can pray.

Some Muslims, like the general population, suffer from ‘waswisah’, or ‘whisperings’, such as thoughts that they did not do something, such as perform the wudhu properly. They sometimes continue repeating wudhu, which is not correct. The point is, the ritual washing is not meant as a cure for OCD, but to purify one’s body. One should say ‘Bismillah’ or a short formula which is said before or during purification (inaudibly) or also before entering the toilet. Then one can perform wudhu and pray with it.

Only passing of gas, natural discharge, or using the toilet renders the wudhu invalid. In case of sexual discharge or sexual relations and penetration, a complete bath (ghusl) is in order before one can pray. Release of prostatic fluid also requires wudhu, as above. Menstruation and post partum bleeding (nafees) require a full bath (ghusl). One could therefore, remain in a purified state all day long, as long as none of the above things occurred, which would render the ‘wudhu’ invalid. Of course, sleep in another nullifier of the ‘wudhu’, which requires a new wudhu, if one wants to pray, or also according to some scholars, before one can hold or read the Qur’an (definitely after sexual relations, as there is a specific hadith about this).

Some Muslims, repeat the prayer many times. Again, this is due to their urge to repeat the prayer, and doubts about their prayer’s validity. Some people repeat the units of the prayer, thinking they have forgotten one or more. Again, if this happens often, the correct opinion, which was given by a scholar on the subject, is that s/he should not continue to add an/other unit/s to the prayer, but end her/his prayer, without making the prostrations for forgetfulness (sujud sahw) either, and leave it at that, because it is a recurring habit; another cannot be sure if s/he is just very forgetful, or perhaps s/he is suffering from ‘whisperings’. If the person is just forgetful, maybe the solution is for her to try to concentrate better during the prayer, or have ‘khushu’, which is intentional, and can be improved by performing the prayer in an environment where there are minimal distractions, and getting in the habit of prolonging the prostrations, and other movements, concentrating on what one is reading during the prayer or saying in the up and down movements, and the bowing, and so on. Also, looking at the place in front of you during the bowings and at your nose during the prostrations, or at your folded hands during the standing and at the finger during pointing while sitting, making the ‘tashahud’.

Scholars tell the Muslims who suffer from doubts or ‘whisperings’, that they should expel these by reading the Qur’an and seeking cure and Allah’s guidance. It is possible to be freed from the burden of such doubts and often self-destructive behavior. If the problem is not waswisah, but an actual mental disorder; the person should first be diagnosed by seeking a professional opinion, and then perhaps a cure or improvement of the symptoms would be achieved with medication, or some other form(s) of treatment.