All praise belongs to Allaah the Creator of the Worlds, I bear witness that no one deserves to be worshiped except Him; He is one and has no partner. I also bear witness that Muhammad the son of ‘Abdullaah is His last messenger and final prophet – may Allaah be pleased with him, his household, his companions and those who follow their way till the day of recompense.
This writing is in response to the claims made by Dr Ijabla Raymond against Islam in his rejoinder to the article of Hannatu Musawa titled “Islam and the Doctrine of Peace”. The article dated 26/12/2016 was published by the New York based online news agency: Sahara Reporters.
googletag.cmd.push(function() { googletag.display('content1'); });
Unfortunately, Islam in the contemporary world is facing numerous challenges that range from terrorism, Islam phobia(“islamophobia”), lack of freedom for women just to mention a few. The existence of Islam is also been put into discourse due to the fanatical actions of few groups that exist within Islamic community. Consequently, it became an avenue for every Tom, Dick and Harry to make scandalous claims against Islam either through speech making or writing (speech or article). Even though, the claims are either made out of ignorance about Islam, poor findings, emotions, or out of hatred. In the same sense, these people quote the Quran and Authentic Ahadith out of their original contexts to serve their selfish interest.
Dr Ijabla is not an exception as he did not only show his lack of proper finding, but also showed the hatred he has towards Islam in his rejoinder by making false allegations against a religion whose followers represents one-quarter of the world population. He did so by quoting the Quran verses out of its context, and cited the Ahadith without its proper understanding. He made his readers to believe that Islam is evil by feeding them with false interpretation, a claim that holds no water. It could well be deduced that his article was written out of emotions and filled with hatred.
As for his accusations against Islam, it can be summarised as follows:
-Verses of the Quran and Ahadith supporting killings of non Muslims which is used as evidence by the so-called modern day Jihadi terrorists for the justification of their atrocities.
-Islam spread to every nuke and cranny of the world by the use of sword.
-The religious texts of Islam cannot be acquainted with literarily.
-Muslim Arabs enslaved the people for centuries only to be saved by Europeans.
-The concept of Taqiyyah (concealing the opposite of exhibited actions) is that of Islam.
-Paedophilia accusation of Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him). This will not be responded to in this article, but will be answered in separate article to be published.
Before proceeding to the response on Dr Ijabla’s accusations, I would like to make it clear that my response on Jihad will only be about Jihadul Qitaal (Jihad of Fighting). Given that, it is the type of Jihad which has long been plagued with controversies. As for the Jihadu Nnafs (Spiritual Jihad), there is no need for a repeat of it. The article of Hannatu Musawa “Islam and the Doctrine of Peace” is explicit enough on that. Kindly refer to her article for a clear picture of Spiritual Jihad.
Regarding his first accusation, all the Quran verses and Ahadith quoted by Dr Ijabla and the ones he did not, which indicate fighting and killing, are understood to be applicable to those who only fight with the Muslims(fighting the Muslims/in war with the Muslims). Fighting with the Muslims can either be in the form of combat, invasion of Muslim lands, or taking up of arms against the Muslims. Fighting back in this case will be considered as self-defence.
This was not understood metaphorically, but rather in the literal sense. How is that? There are principles through which the meanings of Quranic texts and authentic Ahadith are understood. One of those principles is Usuul Fiqh (Principles of Islamic Jurisprudence). Through Usuul Fiqh (Principles of Islam Jurisprudence), you get to recognize that a text can be ‘aam (general); which is defined as that word which is inclusive of many anwaa’ (types), ajnaas (categories) and afraad (individuals). Similarly, a text can be khaas (specific), and are indicative of only some types, categories and individuals. Hence, if there is no contradiction between the ‘aam (general) and the khaas (specific) texts, then each of them are independently acted upon. However, if a contradiction is presumed, then the ‘aam is specified and defined by the khaas (specific). This is the nature of the Holy Quran as it was not revealed as a whole but in parts over 23 years with each part revealed in different occasions to address different situations.
This is the case for both the texts of the Quran and authentic Ahadith which indicates fighting. For example: the first verse that was revealed in connection with Jihad is khaas (specific); Allaah the Almighty says: - the meaning - “And fight in the Way of Allaah those who fight you, but transgress not the limits. Truly, Allaah likes not the transgressors”- Q2:190.
The Prophet also says things of such in many authentic Ahadith. For example, he said: do not kill women and children, do not kill the elderly ones, do not destroy vegetations, do no desecrate religious places of the people of the book (i.e. churches and synagogues) and so on and so forth.
This and other verses alike, coupled with Ahadith Alkhaasah (specific Ahadith) were revealed to specify verses of the Quran, and texts of authentic Ahadith which indicate killing and fighting. This is the understanding of the early generation of Muslims and those who sincerely follow their path (i.e. the mainstream Muslims). This is the reason why 99.5% of the world Muslims’ population does not share the ideology of using violence outside the allowed framework. After all, it is not the entirety of Muslims that put on vests and belts to bomb people. Similarly, not all the Muslims take up knives to stab their fellow mankind.
The percentage that engages in these harmful acts is very infinitesimal compared to the percentage of those that are not engaging in it. But the mainstream media and bigots who are critics of Islam have decided to blow the issue out of proportion.
Likewise, the revealed verses of the Quran, and the texts of Ahadith have the contexts in which they were either revealed from Allaah the Most High, or said by the Prophet (peace be upon him). These contexts are binding for whomever that wants to practise these verses and Ahadith. But ignorant people who constitute the defiant and extremist groups like ISIS/ISIL, Al Qaedah, Boko Haram, and Al Shabab failed to understand these principles.
All they do is to quote texts out of their contexts, and cite verses that are general without taking heed at the other verses that specified the general ones. They do all this in other to satisfy their own political aims and goals while shielding themselves under the disguise of Islam. Their actions have got nothing to do with Islam, even if they cite and quote verses of the Quran, and texts of the Ahadiths. The Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA) of Uganda is one the Christian groups using verses of the Bible to justify their fanatical actions. Likewise the Ku Klux Klan (KKK) was a Christian organization that terrorised African-American in America. At a point in time, the KKK had over five million followers, but no one ever blamed the Bible or the Christian faith for their actions. Why is that of Islam different? This is no doubt but a clear double standard. I think Dr. Ijabla Raymond and other critics of Islam should be fair while making their criticism.
As for the second accusation, I believe Dr Ijabla really showed his own version of bigotry by saying that Islam spread to all the corners of the world through violence and sword. This accusation is not only outrageous, but also far from been logical. Did Muslims entered into every house of the world and say to its inhabitants: accept Islam or you will be killed by sword? It is a capital no! Rather, Islam entered into most of the countries of the world without force and war. Countries of South East Asia and those of West, East and South Africa all received Islam without any conquest.
Likewise North and South American countries all got Islam without any combat. Major parts of Europe are not excluded except for the countries that were under the control of Empires which rejected that Islam be preached to its inhabitants. For example, lands controlled by the Byzantine and Roman Empires came under the attack of Islamic Army so that their people will hear about Islam. Islam conquered these lands by engaging in combats with the Armies of these Empires and not the citizens.
After taking over the sovereignty of these lands, Islam allowed whoever wished from the inhabitants of these lands to keep their religions if they decided not to accept Islam. Allaah says: - the meaning - “There is no compulsion in religion. Verily, the Right Path (Islam) has become distinct from the wrong path...” Q2:256. That is the reason behind the existence of non Muslims in all the lands captured by Islam up till date. An evident example is Egypt that has the Coptic Christians still living there up to this modern day. Similarly, countries like Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, Syria all have non Muslims existing in them up till date without been forced to change their religion. Also, they are allowed to build their places of worship without any problem.
The only exempted place where non Muslims are not allowed to establish their places of worship is the Arabian Peninsula. This is line with the clear order given by the Holy Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him). They are allowed to live and practise their religion but in secrecy. Critics might ask why it is that places of worship for non Muslims cannot be built in the Arabian Peninsula. It is because, Arabian Peninsula is the region that houses the two holy Mosques (Makkah and Medina), and it also has the body of the Prophet buried in. The Vatican city of the Christian faith also shares similar ideology, so questions in this regard are insignificant.
As for the third accusation, where Dr. Ijabla opined that: “There is something inherently wrong with any book that cannot be read at face value and understood in a literal sense”, I think no knowledgeable person will ever agree with this blemishing opinion. Medical or Law text books cannot be read at face value and be understood in a literal sense except by a specialist in each field of study. Although, some aspects of these text books might be understood merely reading them at face value, but major aspects of it are vague for a non specialist of these fields. Does this simply mean something is inherently wrong with Medical and Law books?
In an instance of simple face reading and incomprehension of a concept in Medical or Law text books, a non specialist is required to ask Medical and Law experts for a better comprehension of concepts in their text books.
This is same for religious books which an amateur finds to be inexplicit enough for his comprehension. Regarding that, Allaah says: - the meaning - “... So ask the people of the Reminder (people who have better knowledge of the Scriptures) if you do not know” Q21:7. It could have been appropriate had Dr. Ijabla asked experts with better understanding of the Quran and Ahadith instead of trying to smear Islam with his false allegations.
I clearly believe that my response on his first allegation explains this third issue much better.
Regarding the fourth accusation, I would not have responded to it had Dr. Ijabla not tried to exonerate the Europeans from the same allegation he made against the Muslim Arabs who came into the Sub-Saharan Africa before the Europeans. Even though, the enslavement allegation of the Sub-Saharan people made against the Muslim Arabs remains a debatable issue till the present day. The truth of the matter is that Muslims Arabs were known for trading in the past, and through trading Islam spread to Sub-Saharan Africa and not through war as claimed by non Muslims.
And since slavery was part of the society then, the Muslim Arabs traded with owners of slaves by buying them for various purposes they needed them for. This was because kings and wealthy ones were possessors of slaves in their time, and they use to sell them to whomever wishes to have them for his need. This was what the Muslim Arabs did, but they never enslave the people of Western Africa as claimed by some historians of which Dr. Ijabla supported. On the contrary, it was the Europeans and Americans who came into Africa and enslave its inhabitants in their own lands.
They (the Europeans and Americans) stripped African of their honours right in their own domains and went more extreme by exporting slaves to their various countries subjecting them to shameful acts, strenuous works and punishments. The plantation in America was not cultivated by anyone other than the African-Americans. Blacks were seen as objects of sex and some were displayed as freaks (Sarah Baartman is a typical example). They stole the treasures that African countries had to develop their own lands, only to replace them with what they called Christianity for the Christians. The same Europeans are the ones Dr. Ijabla tried to exonerate in his rejoinder?
I hope he (Dr. Ijabla) and other critics of Islam always make investigative research on history and issues alike before making accusations without concrete facts.
The accusation of Taqiyyah (concealing the opposite of exhibited actions) has nothing to do with Islam as claimed by Dr. Ijabla. This is a concept that belongs to a certain sect who claims to be part of Islam while they are not. Taqiyyah is the major sign of hypocrites and Islam is the first to dissociate itself from such acts. Allaah the Almighty promised people with such qualities the lowest depth in the hell; Allaah says: -the meaning- “Verily, the hypocrites will be in the lowest depth (grade) of the Fire; no helper will you find for them: Q4:145.
In conclusion, Islam remains a peaceful religion as the name implies; submission to the will of Almighty Allaah with obedience and dissociation from polytheism and its people so as to achieve eternal peace. The accusations been made against it remain baseless and unsubstantiated. That is why the religion has been able to stand the tests of time since its inception. The issue of innocent killing through violence, which it has been frequently accused of, has nothing to do with the mainstream Islamic teachings which was rightfully taught by the Prophet of Islam (peace be upon him) and his truthful followers.
Written by:
Qazeem Adebumiti
Department of Arabic Linguistics
Islamic University, Madinah
Saudi Arabia.
Email: [email protected]
googletag.cmd.push(function() { googletag.display('comments'); });
googletag.cmd.push(function() { googletag.display('content2'); });