Al-Huda
Foundation, NJ U. S. A
the Message Continues ... 4/133
Newsletter for September 2012
Article 1 - Article 2 - Article 3 - Article 4 - Article 5 - Article 6 - Article 7 - Article 8 - Article 9 - Article 10 - Article 11 - Article 12
Does the Quran Really Sanction Violence Against ‘Unbelievers’?
Recently some prominent talk-show hosts, Sean Hannity among
them, have been referring to certain verses in the Quran that
appear to call for Muslims to kill non-Muslims. These verses
have too often been quoted with what appears to be a willful
disregard for the context in which they occur, thus inflaming
the emotions of listeners, perpetuating grave misunderstandings,
and contributing to the potential for violence on all sides.
Though we may not be able to influence those who are hell-bent
on hatred, an explanation is owed to all reasonable people who
are interested in the truth of the matter and are not looking to
create enemies. The vast majority of Muslims deserve to be seen
as allies in a common quest for social justice and human dignity
— assuming, of course, that we as Americans have the same goals
in mind.
A careful and unbiased study of these and other verses, in their
proper context, will reveal that the exhortations to fight
“idolaters” and “unbelievers” are specific in nature and are not
general injunctions for the murder of all those who refuse to
accept Islam as their way of life.
Among the most often cited verses is this one: “Kill the
idolaters wherever you find them, and capture them, and blockade
them, and watch for them at every lookout…” (Quran 9:5).
According to Islamic belief, the Quran was “revealed” to
Muhammad in a process of dialog with the Divine, and some parts
of the Quran refer to specific situations, while other parts
offer universal spiritual principles. To understand this
passage, we must take into account the historical circumstances
at the time of its revelation.
The “idolaters” (Arabic: mushrikeen) were those Meccan “pagans”
who had declared war against Muhammad and his community. The
Meccan oligarchs fought against the Prophet’s message from the
very beginning. When they realized that the flow of converts to
Islam was increasing, they resorted to violent oppression and
torture of the Prophet and his followers. The Prophet himself
survived several assassination attempts, and it became so
dangerous for the Muslims in Mecca that Muhammad sent some of
his companions who lacked tribal protection to take asylum in
the Christian kingdom of Abyssinia. After 13 years of violence,
he himself was compelled to take refuge in the city of Medina,
and even then the Meccans did not relent in their hostilities.
Eventually, various hostile Arab tribes joined in the fight
against the Muslims, culminating in the Battle of the Trench,
when 10,000 soldiers from many Arab tribes gathered to wipe out
the Muslim community once and for all. As we know, the Muslims
survived these challenges and eventually went on to establish a
vast civilization.
At the time Verse 9:5 was revealed, Muhammad and his followers
had begun to establish themselves securely. They had returned
triumphantly to Mecca without violence, most Meccans themselves
had become Muslims, and many of the surrounding pagan Arab
tribes had also accepted Islam and sent delegations to the
Prophet pledging their allegiance to him. Those that did not
establish peace with the Muslims were the bitterest of enemies,
and it was against these remaining hostile forces that the verse
commands the Prophet to fight.
The verses that come immediately before 9:5 state, “Those with
whom you have treaties are immune from attack.” It further
states, “Fulfill your treaties with them to the end of their
term, for God loves the conscientious.” Now, in its proper
context, verse 9:5 can be properly understood.
This was a guidance to the Prophet at that specific time to
fight those idolaters who, as 9:4 mentions, violated their
treaty obligations and helped others fight against the Muslims.
It is not a general command to attack all non-Muslims, and it
has never signified this to the overwhelming majority of Muslims
throughout history. Had it been so, then every year, after the
“sacred months are past,” (The “sacred months” are four months
out of the year during which fighting is not allowed) history
would have witnessed Muslims attacking every non-Muslim in
sight. This yearly slaughter never occurred. Though the present
verse is only one example, none of the Quranic verses that
mention fighting justify aggression nor propose attacking anyone
because of their religious beliefs. Nor were forced conversions
recognized as valid under Islamic law.
The fundamental Quranic principle is that fighting is allowed
only in self-defense, and it is only against those who actively
fight against you. Indeed, Islam is a religion that seeks to
maximize peace and reconciliation. Yet, Islam is not a pacifist
religion; it does accept the premise that, from time to time and
as a last resort, arms must be taken up in a just war.
If the enemy inclines toward peace, however, Muslims must follow
suit: “But if they stop, God is most forgiving, most merciful”
(2:192). Also read: “Now if they incline toward peace, then
incline to it, and place your trust in God, for God is the
all-hearing, the all-knowing” (8:61).
How then do we explain the early spread of Islam through
military conquest? In the two decades following the death of
Muhammad, Muslim armies challenged and largely overcame the
world’s two greatest powers, the Persian and Byzantine empires.
Were these conquests truly justifiable according to the Quranic
principles outlined above? It is a complex question and not one
to be readily answered within the limits of a blog post such as
this.
It deserves to be understood, however, that the Muslims fought
imperial armies, not civilians, and were forbidden to harm
non-combatants or destroy property. Islam guaranteed religious
freedom for Christians, Jews, and other minority sects, even
while they obliged these “protected” minorities to pay a small
tax in exchange for being absolved from military service.
Now 14 centuries have passed, and it needs to be recognized that
the Quran does not have an inherent, built-in agenda for
aggression or domination. The vast majority of Muslims are
content to live and let live. In fact, that is part of their
religion. Relations with other religious communities are based
on acceptance and encouragement to follow the best of your own
religion:
To each community among you has been prescribed a Law and a way
of life. If God had so willed He would have made you a single
people, but His plan is to test you in what He has given you: so
strive as in a race in all virtues. The goal of you all is to
God; it is He that will show you the truth of the matters in
which you differ. (5:48)
And Muslims believe that the God of Islam is not other than the
God of Abraham, Moses, and Jesus and that the diversity of
religions is according to Divine plan: “Truly those who keep the
faith, and the Jews, and the Christians, and the Sabaeans —
whoever believes in God and the Last Day and performs virtuous
deeds — surely their reward is with their Lord, and no fear
shall come upon them, neither shall they grieve.” (2:62)
Perhaps these verses help to explain why in the city of
Jerusalem, which has been ruled by Muslims for most of the last
13 centuries, the sacred sites of Jews and Christians have been
protected, and those communities themselves have for the most
part been able to live in peace together with Muslims. The
assertion that Islam or the Quran inherently call for a “war on
unbelievers” is sheer fallacy and fantasy. Peace be with you.
HOME - NEWSLETTERS - BOOKS - ARTICLES - CONTACT - FEEDBACK - UP
DISCLAIMER:
All material published by Al-Huda.com / And the Message Continues is the sole responsibility of its author's).
The opinions and/or assertions contained therein do not necessarily reflect the editorial views of this site,
nor of Al-Huda and its officers.