Friday, February 8, 2008
Chechnya - The Forgotten Land
Chechnya has become the forgotten land with so many others. We must support our brothers and sisters in Chechnya. We must keep them in our duas. For dua is the weapon of the beleiver. The Chechen people have gone through so many brutal atrocities. The Russians are destroying their population, day by day.
To support Chechnya visit these sites:
http://www.savechechnya.org/
http://www.chechenworld.info/
http://www.islamic-relief.com/
Speech given by Sheikh AbdurRaheem Green
Wikipedia...a dangerous source of information about Islam, Quran, Prophet Muhammad, Jihad etc.
The wrong and offensive information provided on Prophet Muhammad (which caused worldwide online protest) is not the only error contained in Wikipedia. You can find errors and misinformation everywhere related to Islam.
For example in the entry on Jihad it says that the legal definition of jihad is “to wage war against non-Muslims to establish the religion.”....It sounds that this definition is given by Robert Spencer...the Jihad watcher.
For example in the entry on Jihad it says that the legal definition of jihad is “to wage war against non-Muslims to establish the religion.”....It sounds that this definition is given by Robert Spencer...the Jihad watcher.
When anybody can edit the entries in Wikipedia, don't you suspect that the enemies of Islam...Robert Spencer, Michael Savage, Geert Wilders and the gang would get their hands all over the places to alter the information and attack Islam.
Certain pages are protected from editing and we are at the mercy of Wikipedia to change or to remove the nonsense. In the case of entry on Prophet Muhammad, Wikipedia has refused to delete the pictures despite the global protest.
Certain pages are protected from editing and we are at the mercy of Wikipedia to change or to remove the nonsense. In the case of entry on Prophet Muhammad, Wikipedia has refused to delete the pictures despite the global protest.
If you want to learn about Islam and related subjects online, visit reliable Islamic sites. If you want to learn about Islam the traditional way, learn from reliable teachers, gurus and scholars.
Wikipedia Prophet Images Irk Muslims
CAIRO — More than 90,000 people are asking Wikipedia, the biggest multilingual free-content encyclopedia on the Internet, to remove medieval images it says are of Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him).
"We Muslims respect all religions and expect the same respect from all," Nayyar Iqbal, Pakistan, wrote on Tuesday, February 5, adding his name to the online petition."Kindly remove the illustrations of our beloved prophet from the Wikipedia."The petition, posted on ThePetitionSite.com, was created on December 4 by Faraz Ahmad from the United Kingdom.When IslamOnline.net last checked it at 18:30 GMT, it was signed by 90,245 from 83,691 a day earlier. Check PetitionSkimming through the entities, which are both dated and serially numbered, suggests the petition has been signed by people from almost every world country. Many just write their names and country while others add their own comments but all agree on thing; Wikipedia must remove the photos."Please remove the false photographs of Prophet Mohammad as he himself in his own life had prohibited for his portraits," wrote Samad Ahmad, Albania.Some of images, which are believed to be drawn in the 12th century, are not merely illustrative, but offensive.One of them portrayed the Prophet as an idol to whom Muslims prayed for aid in battle. Another represents the Prophet as a monk and cardinal.Prophet Muhammad forbade Muslims to make images of living beings whether human or animals let alone himself.He feared that these images would lead to idolatry as images of pious and religious figures were often worshiped by many people in Arabia at the time as well as in other cultures and societies.No CompromiseThe San Francisco-based Wikimedia Foundation has been inundated by emails, urging it to remove the imagery."We have been noticing a lot more similar sounding, similar looking e-mails beginning mid-January," Jay Walsh, a spokesman for the Wikimedia Foundation, told The New York Times.Wikipedia considered but rejected a compromise that would allow visitors to choose whether to view the page with images."Since Wikipedia is an encyclopedia with the goal of representing all topics from a neutral point of view, Wikipedia is not censored for the benefit of any particular group," it explained the refusal.But the petitioners are not satisfied with this response."I strongly condemned this act by wiki and I demand immediate removal of the picture from wiki pages," Pakistani Hassaan Mustafa wrote Tuesday."Freedom of Speech doesn't mean that u start hurting millions humans personal feelings. Respect Every One."In September 2005, Danish mass-circulation Jyllands-Posten published 12 drawings including portrayals of a man the daily called the Prophet, wearing a bomb-shaped turban and another showing him as a knife-wielding nomad flanked by shrouded women.The cartoons, considered blasphemous under Islam, triggered mass protests across the world and strained Muslim-West ties. --(Islam Online)
"We Muslims respect all religions and expect the same respect from all," Nayyar Iqbal, Pakistan, wrote on Tuesday, February 5, adding his name to the online petition."Kindly remove the illustrations of our beloved prophet from the Wikipedia."The petition, posted on ThePetitionSite.com, was created on December 4 by Faraz Ahmad from the United Kingdom.When IslamOnline.net last checked it at 18:30 GMT, it was signed by 90,245 from 83,691 a day earlier. Check PetitionSkimming through the entities, which are both dated and serially numbered, suggests the petition has been signed by people from almost every world country. Many just write their names and country while others add their own comments but all agree on thing; Wikipedia must remove the photos."Please remove the false photographs of Prophet Mohammad as he himself in his own life had prohibited for his portraits," wrote Samad Ahmad, Albania.Some of images, which are believed to be drawn in the 12th century, are not merely illustrative, but offensive.One of them portrayed the Prophet as an idol to whom Muslims prayed for aid in battle. Another represents the Prophet as a monk and cardinal.Prophet Muhammad forbade Muslims to make images of living beings whether human or animals let alone himself.He feared that these images would lead to idolatry as images of pious and religious figures were often worshiped by many people in Arabia at the time as well as in other cultures and societies.No CompromiseThe San Francisco-based Wikimedia Foundation has been inundated by emails, urging it to remove the imagery."We have been noticing a lot more similar sounding, similar looking e-mails beginning mid-January," Jay Walsh, a spokesman for the Wikimedia Foundation, told The New York Times.Wikipedia considered but rejected a compromise that would allow visitors to choose whether to view the page with images."Since Wikipedia is an encyclopedia with the goal of representing all topics from a neutral point of view, Wikipedia is not censored for the benefit of any particular group," it explained the refusal.But the petitioners are not satisfied with this response."I strongly condemned this act by wiki and I demand immediate removal of the picture from wiki pages," Pakistani Hassaan Mustafa wrote Tuesday."Freedom of Speech doesn't mean that u start hurting millions humans personal feelings. Respect Every One."In September 2005, Danish mass-circulation Jyllands-Posten published 12 drawings including portrayals of a man the daily called the Prophet, wearing a bomb-shaped turban and another showing him as a knife-wielding nomad flanked by shrouded women.The cartoons, considered blasphemous under Islam, triggered mass protests across the world and strained Muslim-West ties. --(Islam Online)
Editor: I'm not a Mufti but I think it is HARAM (prohibited/forbidden) for Muslims to make donation to Wikipedia due to the lies and disrespect shown to our beloved Prophet Muhammad and Islam.
Mr Mathias Schindler (I think he is from German-language version of Wikipedia) sent me an e-mail asking:
"Hi Editor, can you specify where there is a lie in the Wikipedia article as you stated?"
Mr Mathias Schindler (I think he is from German-language version of Wikipedia) sent me an e-mail asking:
"Hi Editor, can you specify where there is a lie in the Wikipedia article as you stated?"
The answer is obvious: The article is lying about how Prophet Muhammad could looks like as Prophet Muhammad himself in his own life had prohibited his portraits. Every Muslim knows and believes it is prohibited. No true Muslim would draw the Prophet image, no true Muslim would insult the Prophet.
A picture may worth a thousand words but a thousand pictures will not even worth a single word to describe Prophet Muhammad's flawless personality and fine character.
A picture may worth a thousand words but a thousand pictures will not even worth a single word to describe Prophet Muhammad's flawless personality and fine character.
Archbishop of Canterbury: 'UK should adopt sharia law for Muslims'
The Archbishop of Canterbury, head of the Church of England said on Thursday the introduction of Shari'a (Islamic law) for British Muslims was "unavoidable."
Speaking on BBC Radio, Dr. Rowan Williams said that Muslims should be able to choose whether to have matters such as marital disputes dealt with under Shari'a law or the British legal system.
He said that the introduction of Shari'a law would mean that British Muslims would no longer have to choose between "the stark alternatives of cultural loyalty or state loyalty."
The Anglican leader advocated giving it official status in the UK on the grounds that it would help maintain social cohesion, as some Muslims do not relate to the British legal system.
"Muslims could choose to have marital disputes or financial matters dealt with in a Shari'a court," he said, for example.
"It seems unavoidable and, as a matter of fact, certain conditions of Shari'a are already recognized in our society and under our law, so it is not as if we are bringing in an alien and rival system," he said.
A spokesman for the Muslim Council of Britain confirmed that many British Muslims already use Shari'a in their day-to-day lives, such as banking and marriage, and added that the same principle of separate laws could easily be accepted for other faiths.
The archbishop said introducing Shari'a law for marriages would combat the problem of forced marriage because Islam required the consent of both parties.
"We already have in this country a number of situations in which the internal law of religious communities is recognized by the law of the land as justifying conscientious objections in certain circumstances," he said. "There is a place for finding what would be a constructive accommodation with some aspects of Muslim law, as we already do with aspects of other kinds of religious law."
The archbishop said he was not proposing the adoption of extreme interpretations of Shari'a, as practiced in some repressive regimes. "But there are ways of looking at marital disputes, for example, which provide an alternative to the divorce courts as we understand them. In some cultural and religious settings they would seem more appropriate."
The National Secular Society criticized his comments and said it was another example of Britain "sleepwalking to segregation... You can't have a country where you have separate laws for separate faith groups."
Williams said his proposal would only work if Shari'a law was properly understood, rather than seen through the eyes of biased media reports that "cloud" the issue.
The archbishop is joint president of the Council of Christians and Jews in the UK.
Speaking on BBC Radio, Dr. Rowan Williams said that Muslims should be able to choose whether to have matters such as marital disputes dealt with under Shari'a law or the British legal system.
He said that the introduction of Shari'a law would mean that British Muslims would no longer have to choose between "the stark alternatives of cultural loyalty or state loyalty."
The Anglican leader advocated giving it official status in the UK on the grounds that it would help maintain social cohesion, as some Muslims do not relate to the British legal system.
"Muslims could choose to have marital disputes or financial matters dealt with in a Shari'a court," he said, for example.
"It seems unavoidable and, as a matter of fact, certain conditions of Shari'a are already recognized in our society and under our law, so it is not as if we are bringing in an alien and rival system," he said.
A spokesman for the Muslim Council of Britain confirmed that many British Muslims already use Shari'a in their day-to-day lives, such as banking and marriage, and added that the same principle of separate laws could easily be accepted for other faiths.
The archbishop said introducing Shari'a law for marriages would combat the problem of forced marriage because Islam required the consent of both parties.
"We already have in this country a number of situations in which the internal law of religious communities is recognized by the law of the land as justifying conscientious objections in certain circumstances," he said. "There is a place for finding what would be a constructive accommodation with some aspects of Muslim law, as we already do with aspects of other kinds of religious law."
The archbishop said he was not proposing the adoption of extreme interpretations of Shari'a, as practiced in some repressive regimes. "But there are ways of looking at marital disputes, for example, which provide an alternative to the divorce courts as we understand them. In some cultural and religious settings they would seem more appropriate."
The National Secular Society criticized his comments and said it was another example of Britain "sleepwalking to segregation... You can't have a country where you have separate laws for separate faith groups."
Williams said his proposal would only work if Shari'a law was properly understood, rather than seen through the eyes of biased media reports that "cloud" the issue.
The archbishop is joint president of the Council of Christians and Jews in the UK.
UK Islamic organization condemns ban on Qaradawi
The Muslim Council of Britain (MCB) has condemned the UK government's decision to refuse a visa to renowned Egyptian scholar Yusuf al-Qaradawi, warning it would send the wrong message about the country's traditional right to free speech.
The MCB, the UK's largest Muslim umbrella group with over 500 affiliates, said it recognized Prime Minister Gordon Brown has been "under immense pressure from the pro-Zionist and neo-conservative lobby in recent weeks to take this decision." "It is regrettable that the government has finally given way to these unreasonable demands spearheaded by the Tory leader (David Cameron) whose government had in fact allowed Dr Qaradawi to visit the UK five times between 1995-97," it said.
MCB secretary general Abdul Bari said that the Islamic scholar, who has been outspoken in support the right of Palestinians to resist Israeli occupation, enjoyed "unparalleled respect and influence throughout the Muslim world." "I am afraid this decision will send the wrong message to Muslims everywhere about the state of British society and culture. Britain has had a long and established tradition of free speech, debate and intellectual pursuit," Bari said.
He said the principles of free speech were worth defending, especially as British government has claimed, it would like to see them spread throughout the world.
The ban from entering Britain comes after a sustained campaign over several years, led by the Zionist lobby. The sheikh, who lives in Qatar and has written over 50 books, previously has been a frequent visitor.
The MCB, the UK's largest Muslim umbrella group with over 500 affiliates, said it recognized Prime Minister Gordon Brown has been "under immense pressure from the pro-Zionist and neo-conservative lobby in recent weeks to take this decision." "It is regrettable that the government has finally given way to these unreasonable demands spearheaded by the Tory leader (David Cameron) whose government had in fact allowed Dr Qaradawi to visit the UK five times between 1995-97," it said.
MCB secretary general Abdul Bari said that the Islamic scholar, who has been outspoken in support the right of Palestinians to resist Israeli occupation, enjoyed "unparalleled respect and influence throughout the Muslim world." "I am afraid this decision will send the wrong message to Muslims everywhere about the state of British society and culture. Britain has had a long and established tradition of free speech, debate and intellectual pursuit," Bari said.
He said the principles of free speech were worth defending, especially as British government has claimed, it would like to see them spread throughout the world.
The ban from entering Britain comes after a sustained campaign over several years, led by the Zionist lobby. The sheikh, who lives in Qatar and has written over 50 books, previously has been a frequent visitor.
The Netherlands frets about the likely impact of a new anti-Islam film
THE Netherlands is going through a “considerable crisis”, says the prime minister. The Iranians are musing publicly about cutting diplomatic ties. The grand mufti of Syria has issued grave warnings of war and bloodshed. Dutch citizens living in Muslim countries have been asked to report any worrying incidents.
The one thing missing is the cause of the fuss: an anti-Islamic film neither made nor shown by a Dutch member of parliament, Geert Wilders. In November Mr Wilders revealed his plan to air on television an exposé of the wickedness of the Koran, which he calls an Islamic “Mein Kampf”. The film is said to include shots of him desecrating the Koran. Dutch state television appears reluctant to show it, so Mr Wilders now talks of a private broadcaster, or using the internet. But the mere talk of his film has been enough to ignite a renewed debate about Islam in Europe and the limits on free speech.
The Dutch have reason to worry. Two years ago the publication of Muhammad cartoons in a Danish newspaper triggered anti-Danish riots around the Muslim world. Two years before that a film about Islam, “Submission”, was shown on Dutch television; soon afterwards its director, Theo van Gogh, was butchered in an Amsterdam street by a radical Dutch Islamist, who also threatened the screenplay writer, Ayaan Hirsi Ali (now living in America). Mr Wilders's film could, some fear, have similarly violent consequences.
Mr Wilders's anti-immigrant party has nine seats in parliament, too few to affect the government's fairly tolerant policy towards the country's Muslim minority. But he has jabbed his finger into several sore spots. He has publicly questioned the loyalty of two cabinet members with dual nationality (ie, Turkish and Moroccan as well as Dutch). He called a third minister “barking mad” because of her liberal integration policies. And he has demanded a ban on immigration from Muslim countries.
Mr Wilders might seem just a provocateur. But his power lies in the rhetoric that he uses to contrast such liberal notions as gay rights and female emancipation with the image of an intolerant and anti-modern Islam, says Paul Schnabel, head of a Dutch government social-science institute. Polls show that the Dutch rate freedom of speech as one of their most important values—and many see Mr Wilders as its champion. He is a “modern conservative”, argues Mr Schnabel, able convincingly to demand of immigrants that they should show full loyalty to Dutch values.
As important as Mr Wilders's political talent is the absence of powerful countervailing voices speaking up for inclusiveness, pluralism and a more respectful public debate. Many Muslim immigrants suffer from relative poverty, from high levels of crime and from social segregation. The government focuses on policies to improve the education of second-generation Muslims, get more of them to work and find ways to reduce crime. The justice minister, Ernst Hirsch Ballin, insists that such measures offer the best hope of improving the sour relationship between Muslims and native Dutch folk. But the technospeak often used to describe them hardly matches the fiery one-liners launched from the right. --(TheEconomist)
The one thing missing is the cause of the fuss: an anti-Islamic film neither made nor shown by a Dutch member of parliament, Geert Wilders. In November Mr Wilders revealed his plan to air on television an exposé of the wickedness of the Koran, which he calls an Islamic “Mein Kampf”. The film is said to include shots of him desecrating the Koran. Dutch state television appears reluctant to show it, so Mr Wilders now talks of a private broadcaster, or using the internet. But the mere talk of his film has been enough to ignite a renewed debate about Islam in Europe and the limits on free speech.
The Dutch have reason to worry. Two years ago the publication of Muhammad cartoons in a Danish newspaper triggered anti-Danish riots around the Muslim world. Two years before that a film about Islam, “Submission”, was shown on Dutch television; soon afterwards its director, Theo van Gogh, was butchered in an Amsterdam street by a radical Dutch Islamist, who also threatened the screenplay writer, Ayaan Hirsi Ali (now living in America). Mr Wilders's film could, some fear, have similarly violent consequences.
Mr Wilders's anti-immigrant party has nine seats in parliament, too few to affect the government's fairly tolerant policy towards the country's Muslim minority. But he has jabbed his finger into several sore spots. He has publicly questioned the loyalty of two cabinet members with dual nationality (ie, Turkish and Moroccan as well as Dutch). He called a third minister “barking mad” because of her liberal integration policies. And he has demanded a ban on immigration from Muslim countries.
Mr Wilders might seem just a provocateur. But his power lies in the rhetoric that he uses to contrast such liberal notions as gay rights and female emancipation with the image of an intolerant and anti-modern Islam, says Paul Schnabel, head of a Dutch government social-science institute. Polls show that the Dutch rate freedom of speech as one of their most important values—and many see Mr Wilders as its champion. He is a “modern conservative”, argues Mr Schnabel, able convincingly to demand of immigrants that they should show full loyalty to Dutch values.
As important as Mr Wilders's political talent is the absence of powerful countervailing voices speaking up for inclusiveness, pluralism and a more respectful public debate. Many Muslim immigrants suffer from relative poverty, from high levels of crime and from social segregation. The government focuses on policies to improve the education of second-generation Muslims, get more of them to work and find ways to reduce crime. The justice minister, Ernst Hirsch Ballin, insists that such measures offer the best hope of improving the sour relationship between Muslims and native Dutch folk. But the technospeak often used to describe them hardly matches the fiery one-liners launched from the right. --(TheEconomist)
Reading the Qur’an, Islam’s holy book
by Eric Walberg
The great conundrum of Islam for the non- Arabic speaker is: Can the sacred text be translated without losing its sacredness? Is the true meaning “lost in the translation”?
Translations of the untranslatable abound: probably close to a hundred by now, with new ones appearing all the time. Of course, the Quran should be read in Arabic, for many reasons: according to the Prophet himself, for the magic of the sounds and the power of recitation of the poetic language, perhaps simply as a mountain to be climbed for the faithful. But fewer than 20 percent of Muslims speak Arabic, so most Muslims can study the text only in translation. The process began soon after Mohammed died: the first being of the Fatiha into Persian by Salman Al-Farasi, one of the Prophet’s dearest companions. The first Western translation—into Latin in 1143 by the English monk Robert of Ketton—was a belated recognition by the then crusading Catholic church of the need to understand the enemy, and was intended as a refutation.
By the 18th c there was an increase in Western translations of the Quran, reflecting the ascendancy of the West in the dunya and its need to penetrate, understand, convert and/or conquer its great rival.
Alexander Ross, chaplain to King Charles I, offered the first English version in 1649, The Alcoran of Mahomet translated out of Arabique into French, by the Sieur Du Ryer...And newly Englished, for the satisfaction for all that desire to look into the Turkish vanities, “that so viewing thine enemies in their full body, thou must the better prepare to encounter his Alcoran.”
George Sale, a lawyer and corrector of the Society to Promote Christian Knowledge’s Arabic New Testament translation, brought out The Al Koran of Mohammed in 1734, which until quite recently was the most widely available English translation. Sale based his translation on the 1698 Latin translation by Maracci, the confessor of Pope Innocent XI. His exhaustive Preliminary Discourse claims the work is a “manifest forgery”, his interest to “effectually expose the imposture” with rules for “the conversion of Mohammedans”. Though there are inaccuracies in the translation and an obvious bias on his part, he grudgingly showed admiration for Islam and provided a respectful rendition. It was republished in 1975 and is still available free on the Internet.
By the 19th c, as the grip of Christianity weakened in the West, a new appreciation of Islam took root. Whereas Dante assigned Mohammed to the depths of hell, Goethe in East- West Divan writes: “the Koran, at first disgusting us each time afresh, it soon attracts, astounds and in the end enforces our reverence. This book will go on exercising, through all ages, a most potent influence.”
Edward Ross’s 1877 preface to a new edition of Sale’s translation shows the advance in the understanding of Islam in the century and a half since Sale: “What was good in Muhammadanism was entirely ignored, and what was not good, in the eyes of Europe, was exaggerated or misinterpreted. The central doctrine preached by Muhammad to his contemporaries in Arabia, who worshipped the Stars, and the Turks, who had no particular worship, was the unity of God, and that the simplicity of his creed was probably a more potent factor in the spread of Islam than the sword of the Ghazis. Through all the vicissitudes of thirteen hundred years the Koran has remained the sacred book of all the Turks and Persians and of nearly a quarter of the population of India. Surely such a book as this deserves to be widely read in the West, more especially in these days when space and time have been almost annihilated by modern invention, and when public interest embraces the whole world.”
Unsympathetic translations persisted, however. Reverend J Rodwell produced a translation in 1861, inventing the so-called chronological sura order and requesting his missionaries to critique the Prophet’s revelation as resulting from “self-deception, catalepsy, or hallucination.” As late as 1937, University of Edinburgh Orientalist Richard Bell produced a translation still attempting to rearrange the text chronologically and arguing that the Quran was “actually written by Muhammad himself”.
Because of the increasing academic interest in Islam, there was a blossoming of English translations among scholars in the 20th c, the most notably being The Koran Interpreted by Cambridge Arabic scholar AJ Arberry in 1957, probably still the best by a non-Muslim in terms of both its approach and quality, the first non-Muslim to acknowledge the orthodox Muslim view that the Quran cannot be translated, but only interpreted.
NJ Dawood (Daud), an Iraqi Jew, produced a translation in 1956 which is still available in a Penguin edition and is perhaps the most widely circulated non-Muslim English translation. The author’s bias against Islam is readily observable in the introduction and he adopted an unusual sura order.
While it was Christian missionaries who spearheaded translations of the Quran, followed by academics, Islam also encourages conversion, and the increasing challenge of Christian missionaries around the world naturally spurred Muslims into launching their own efforts to make the sacred text more accessible to all. Indian Muslims were the first from within the faith to translate the Quran into English. All wrote at a time of British colonialism and intense missionary activity. In the introduction to his 1912 translation Mirza Dehlawi writes he was motivated consciously by a desire to give “a complete and exhaustive reply to the manifold criticisms of the Koran by various Christian authors such as Drs Sale, Rodwell, and Sir W Muir.”
This early 20th c reaction spurred a lasting translation trend. In 1917, Muhammad Ali published his translation which was adopted by the Nation of Islam, both under the stewardship of Elijah Muhammad and current leader Louis Farrakhan. Ali’s biases show through, however. Consistent with his Lahori-Ahmadi creed, he sought to eschew any reference to miracles; so, for instance, God’s command to Moses “Strike the rock with your staff” was changed to “March on to the rock with your staff”. The Quran makes frequent mention of jinn (spirits), from which the English word genie is derived, whom Ali curiously argues are the Jews and Christians. He also denies Jesus’s virgin birth.
Muhammad Marmaduke William Pickthall, an English intellectual, son of an Anglican clergyman, novelist, traveller, and educator, converted to Islam in 1917 and published his translation in London in 1930. He was the first Western translator to insist that the Quran was untranslatable but that the general meaning of the text could still be conveyed to English speakers. His work is now criticised for using archaic, if elegant, prose, though it is nonetheless popular and still available as a Penguin paperback. It provides scant explanatory notes and background information, restricting its usefulness for an uninitiated reader.
The most popular among the seven available at Amazon along with Pickthall’s and Hilali’s (see below) is Abdullah Yusuf Ali’s The Holy Quran: Translation and Commentary, published in Lahore in 1937. He sought to convey the music and richness of the Arabic with poetic English versification. In 1989, Saudi Arabia’s Ar-Rajhi banking company financed the US-based Amana Corporation’s project to revise the Yusuf Ali translation to reflect an interpretation more in line with Wahhabi thought. Ar-Rahji offered the resulting version free to mosques, schools, and libraries throughout the world. The footnoted commentary about Jews raised hackles in Zionist circles, and in April 2002 the Los Angeles school district banned its use at local schools; however, Yusuf Ali’s translation has not suffered and is still #8321 at Amazon. Whatever their respective merits, the enduring popularity of Yusuf Ali and Pickthall is largely due to their extensive distribution in Pakistan, India and Indonesia, where copyright laws are ignored and cheap editions are snapped up by the huge English-reading Muslim population.
Muhammad Taqiyuddin Al-Hilali and Muhammad Muhsin Khan published their Explanatory English Translation of the Holy Quran: A Summarized Version of Ibn Kathir Supplemented by At-Tabari with Comments from Sahih al-Bukhari in Chicago in 1977. Born in Morocco, Hilali taught at Baghdad University and the Islamic University in Medina. Now the most widely disseminated Quran in Islamic bookstores and Sunni mosques throughout the English-speaking world, again with Saudi backing, this new translation is meant to replace the Yusuf Ali edition and comes with a seal of approval from both the University of Medina and the Saudi Dar al-Ifta. It is highly criticised at Amazon and in US academic circles for using the commentaries of Ibn Kathir and Al-Bukhari who Mohammed Khaleel dismisses in the tendentious Middle East Quarterly (Spring 2005) as being “medievalists who knew nothing of modern concepts of pluralism”. Khaleel blasts Hilali’s translation as “a supremacist Muslim, anti- Semitic, anti-Christian polemic” and Amazon gives prominence to similar scathing reviews.
Muhammad Asad, né Leopold Weiss, a Jewish convert to Islam, published The Message of the Quran in 1980. It is the most highly praised of all available translations by readers at Amazon but is criticised by Muslims as deviating from the viewpoint of the Muslim orthodoxy on many counts. It is banned in Saudi Arabia. Asad denies the occurrence of such events as the throwing of Abraham into the fire and Jesus speaking in the cradle. He also regards Luqman, Khizr and Zulqarnain as mythical figures.
Sayyid Abul Ali Maududi, founder of the Islamic Party (Jamaat Islami) in Pakistan, published The Meaning of the Quran in Lahore in 1967. In advice to readers Maududi writes: “The Quran was not revealed as a complete book at one and the same time; nor did Allah hand over a written copy of it to Muhammad (peace be upon him) at the very beginning of his mission and command him to publish it and invite people to adopt a particular way of life. Moreover, it is not a literary work of the common conventional type that develops its central theme in a logical order; nor does it conform to the style of such a work.” Maududi thus provided introductions to each sura with historical background and explanation of the text which is very useful and is available online at the University of Southern California website.
The Internet has transformed Quranic studies, allowing you to pick from among perhaps 50 translations, with dozens available free online, including several heretical versions, which are interesting as examples of the challenges that Islam faces in the 21st c. Rashad Khalifa’s The Quran: The Final Scripture, published in (of all places) Tucson in 1978 is one such. Khalifa was an Egyptian chemist who emigrated to Texas, where he undertook an extensive computer analysis of the Quran beginning in 1968, claiming that he proved the divine origins of the Quran via the number 19. He was stabbed to death in a gruesome unsolved murder in 1990. His life and death are shrouded in mystery and his writings and translation of the Quran, completely rejecting the hadith (traditions associated with the Prophet) and sunnah (actions attributed to the Prophet), have developed a cult following.
Another just published, by Edip Yuksel, Layth Saleh al-Shaiban and Martha Schulte-Nafeh, The Quran: A Reformist Translation, also rejects the hadith, sunnah and tafsir (interpretation), dismissing them—Khaleel at the Middle East Quarterly would no doubt agree—as “ancient scholarly interpretations rooted in patriarchal hierarchies. It is time to remove the accumulated layers of man-made dogmas and traditions that have attached themselves to the text.”
Finally, Laleh Bakhtiar, a Chicago Sufi convert to Islam, published The Sublime Koran this year, billed as the first translation by an American woman and providing a woman’s point of view. She questions the conventional meanings of some of the Koranic concepts; in particular, in 4:34 “daraba” is usually translated as “to beat”, supposedly condoning husbands beating recalcitrant wives, which Bakhtiar translates as “to go away”.
As a result of the availibitiy of multiple translations and commentaries on the Internet and the revolution that blogging has brought about, there is a rising tension between the traditional guardians of Muslim orthodoxy and a new crop of secular educated Muslims. But that is another story. Suffice it to say that these revisionist translations, rejecting the accumulated wisdom of centuries as outmoded, would mean dispensing with the works of the great Islamic philosophers Al-Bukhari, Ibn Sina, Al-Farabi, Ibn Rushd, Ibn Arabi, and Omar Khayyam, to name but a few. As Maududi argued, to strip the Quran of its historical context is wrong; but to strip it of its history is just as wrong. The hadith, sunnah and tafsir are part of any educated Muslim’s heritage, and can only enrich one’s reading of the Quran.
So which to choose from? This depends on your purpose. Downloading from the Internet is no substitute to having your own personal copy. And translations are only interpretations, so if you want to have the definitive experience in reading the text, you must read it in Arabic. In that case, your choice would be a bilingual edition where the English is as literal as possible, striving to provide a neutral, accurate translation with good tafsir (however patriarchal). In fact, a literary translation gets in the way of the Arabic novice’s efforts.
The Hilali text is easily available and adequate for this purpose, provided free from the Conveying Islamic Message Society (CIMS) in Alexandria in a user-friendly format in 30 durable paperback modules (one for each day of Ramadan), making it possible to read and carry a section comfortably. It has the extensive footnotes of important hadith and tafsir which offend the likes of Khaleel at the Middle East Quarterly, but we are all adults and can think for ourselves. CIMS does a fine service for non-Arabic speakers, providing many books about Islam free in many languages. It is a delight to get a post with several books from them—somehow it seems wrong to pay money for one’s spiritual sustenance. But it is possible to use Arberry, Pickthall or many others as reference texts for your reading of the Arabic original.
If you want a literary translation in English that aims to capture the poetry, both rhyme as well as metre, of the Arabic there are several works that attempt this in addition toYusuf Ali. Fazlollah Nikayin published Quran, A Poetic Translation from the Original in 1999 though it is now out of print. The Meaning of the Holy Koran Translated into English by Mohamed Hamed and Ahmad Hamid, completed in 2004 and awaiting publication, uses rhyme and metre to imitate the spellbinding musical quality of the Arabic text (see caption). An Egyptian doctor, Ahmad began the translation in 1933 and it was completed by his son Mohamed, also a doctor. If you want to memorise passages in English, this translation will be useful, as poetry is easier to memorise than prose. Mohamed argues that “the Arabic language is essentially a bicameral language, i.e., a language addressing two chambers of cognition simultaneously, allegorical and rational, so that a native Arabic translator has a distinct advantage over an English speaker, and a poetic text helps the reader to get closer to the experience of reading the text in Arabic.”
We have no final answer to the original question: Is the sacredness of the Quran translatable? Structuralists argue that language itself is a human attribute, and question to what extent something fixed in language can itself be sacred. They go so far as to ask whether this total focus on the reading of the Quran (the literal translation of Quran is “what is read"), where each word is the truth and cannot be challenged, is itself not akin to idol worship. In the Sufi tradition, the only truth is in heaven—anything contaminated by the dunya is a corruption. So just as the previous sacred texts, the Torah and the Gospels, are criticised by Muslims as corrupted, our reading of the Quran is inevitably corrupted by our limitations as humans living in history, with our various traditions and conceptions of the world muddying our sacred experience. Texts evolve as humans and human societies evolve, whereas the written word is fixed in a false worldly time (not heavenly eternal time).
While Islam has the advantage over Christianity and Judaism of being more focussed on the direct connection between Allah and man, some argue that the highly ritualised text- centric orthodox Islam can act as a stumbling block in this—the real—religious experience. Sufis are more laid back about the rituals of Islam, though no less concerned with the religious experience itself. Ibn Arabi urged followers when they pray to stay awake till they achieved a dream-waking state where a glimpse of paradise could be found. Though not a Sufi, Ibn Rushd argued in the 12th c that the prayers and rituals are marginal to charity, the monotheistic vow itself and pilgrimage. So to focus totally on finding the perfect translation is missing the spiritual point. If one is focused on the spiritual experience, just about any translation—by Muslim or non-Muslim—will do if used intelligently and with caution.
Then there is controversy between the monotheisms as to what constitutes a sacred text. If only Jews and Christians could agree that Jesus and Mohammed were prophets, a lot of problems would be solved in an instant. But even then, Muslims believe that the earlier revelations of prophets—the Torah and the preaching of Jesus—were neglected or corrupted by the Jews and Christians and have been replaced by God’s final and perfect revelation, the Quran. Jews and Christians counter that the historical biblical archaeological record, in particular the Dead Sea Scrolls, refutes this assertion, though it is unlikely this issue will ever be resolved. However if the proof is in the pudding, there is little doubt that the Quran wins hands down.
Any translation, any text for that matter, will inevitably reflect the limitations of both transmitter, writer, translator and/or reader in pursuit of the transcendental experience itself, which is beyond any words and any language. Just making a more approachable or enjoyable version is no guarantee that the reader will achieve enlightenment. And are ever newer and newer translations really necessary? But what more noble cause can a spiritually motivated person dedicate his/her life and intellect to?
A few words of advice to new readers of the Quran: THE QURAN presents various problems for the reader, especially a reader unfamiliar with Islam and Islamic history. The text assumes familiarity with many events from Jewish and Christian scriptures, retelling some of these events in partial and distinctive ways, and referring obliquely to others. It rarely offers detailed accounts of historical events; the emphasis is typically on the moral significance of an event, rather than its narrative sequence.
The revelation of the Quran began and went hand in hand with the preaching of the message over a span of 23 years. The different parts of the Quran were revealed step by step according to the many changing requirements of the Islamic movement during these stages. It therefore could not possibly possess the kind of coherence and systematic sequence expected of, say, a scholarly treatise or a tightly organised programme.
Moreover, the various fragments of the Quran, which were revealed in harmony with the growth of the Islamic movement, were not published in the form of written treatises, but were spread orally. Their style, therefore, bears an oratorical flavor rather than the character of a literary composition. This explains the many repetitions. The interests of a message and a movement demand that during a particular stage emphasis should be placed only on those subjects which are appropriate at that stage, to the exclusion of matters pertaining to later stages. As a result, certain subjects may require continual emphasis for months or even years. Interestingly, this can just as well apply to converts today, who may find the full programme of Islam overwhelming at first.
When the Prophet’s mission was completed, the chronological sequence of the various parts of the Quran could in no way be suitable to the changed situation. What was now required was a different sequence in tune with the changed context resulting from the completion of the mission. The order settled on was partly pragmatic—by size (from long to short), partly by theme (Islamic programme, accounts of prophets end-times) and period of revelation (Medinah or Makka).
There is also the structuralist and post-structuralist debate about the structure and significance of the Quran. Norman O Brown observes that the seeming “disorganisation” of Quranic literary expression—its scattered or fragmented mode of composition—is a literary device capable of delivering “profound effects, as if the intensity of the prophetic message were shattering the vehicle of human language in which it was being communicated.” Michael Sells, in Approaching the Quran, also argues that the repetition in the Quran is a valuable literary device: “The values presented in the very early Meccan revelations are repeated throughout the hymnic suras. There is a sense of directness, of intimacy, as if the hearer were being asked repeatedly a simple question: What will be of value at the end of a human life?”
Originally published on Al Ahram online
The great conundrum of Islam for the non- Arabic speaker is: Can the sacred text be translated without losing its sacredness? Is the true meaning “lost in the translation”?
Translations of the untranslatable abound: probably close to a hundred by now, with new ones appearing all the time. Of course, the Quran should be read in Arabic, for many reasons: according to the Prophet himself, for the magic of the sounds and the power of recitation of the poetic language, perhaps simply as a mountain to be climbed for the faithful. But fewer than 20 percent of Muslims speak Arabic, so most Muslims can study the text only in translation. The process began soon after Mohammed died: the first being of the Fatiha into Persian by Salman Al-Farasi, one of the Prophet’s dearest companions. The first Western translation—into Latin in 1143 by the English monk Robert of Ketton—was a belated recognition by the then crusading Catholic church of the need to understand the enemy, and was intended as a refutation.
By the 18th c there was an increase in Western translations of the Quran, reflecting the ascendancy of the West in the dunya and its need to penetrate, understand, convert and/or conquer its great rival.
Alexander Ross, chaplain to King Charles I, offered the first English version in 1649, The Alcoran of Mahomet translated out of Arabique into French, by the Sieur Du Ryer...And newly Englished, for the satisfaction for all that desire to look into the Turkish vanities, “that so viewing thine enemies in their full body, thou must the better prepare to encounter his Alcoran.”
George Sale, a lawyer and corrector of the Society to Promote Christian Knowledge’s Arabic New Testament translation, brought out The Al Koran of Mohammed in 1734, which until quite recently was the most widely available English translation. Sale based his translation on the 1698 Latin translation by Maracci, the confessor of Pope Innocent XI. His exhaustive Preliminary Discourse claims the work is a “manifest forgery”, his interest to “effectually expose the imposture” with rules for “the conversion of Mohammedans”. Though there are inaccuracies in the translation and an obvious bias on his part, he grudgingly showed admiration for Islam and provided a respectful rendition. It was republished in 1975 and is still available free on the Internet.
By the 19th c, as the grip of Christianity weakened in the West, a new appreciation of Islam took root. Whereas Dante assigned Mohammed to the depths of hell, Goethe in East- West Divan writes: “the Koran, at first disgusting us each time afresh, it soon attracts, astounds and in the end enforces our reverence. This book will go on exercising, through all ages, a most potent influence.”
Edward Ross’s 1877 preface to a new edition of Sale’s translation shows the advance in the understanding of Islam in the century and a half since Sale: “What was good in Muhammadanism was entirely ignored, and what was not good, in the eyes of Europe, was exaggerated or misinterpreted. The central doctrine preached by Muhammad to his contemporaries in Arabia, who worshipped the Stars, and the Turks, who had no particular worship, was the unity of God, and that the simplicity of his creed was probably a more potent factor in the spread of Islam than the sword of the Ghazis. Through all the vicissitudes of thirteen hundred years the Koran has remained the sacred book of all the Turks and Persians and of nearly a quarter of the population of India. Surely such a book as this deserves to be widely read in the West, more especially in these days when space and time have been almost annihilated by modern invention, and when public interest embraces the whole world.”
Unsympathetic translations persisted, however. Reverend J Rodwell produced a translation in 1861, inventing the so-called chronological sura order and requesting his missionaries to critique the Prophet’s revelation as resulting from “self-deception, catalepsy, or hallucination.” As late as 1937, University of Edinburgh Orientalist Richard Bell produced a translation still attempting to rearrange the text chronologically and arguing that the Quran was “actually written by Muhammad himself”.
Because of the increasing academic interest in Islam, there was a blossoming of English translations among scholars in the 20th c, the most notably being The Koran Interpreted by Cambridge Arabic scholar AJ Arberry in 1957, probably still the best by a non-Muslim in terms of both its approach and quality, the first non-Muslim to acknowledge the orthodox Muslim view that the Quran cannot be translated, but only interpreted.
NJ Dawood (Daud), an Iraqi Jew, produced a translation in 1956 which is still available in a Penguin edition and is perhaps the most widely circulated non-Muslim English translation. The author’s bias against Islam is readily observable in the introduction and he adopted an unusual sura order.
While it was Christian missionaries who spearheaded translations of the Quran, followed by academics, Islam also encourages conversion, and the increasing challenge of Christian missionaries around the world naturally spurred Muslims into launching their own efforts to make the sacred text more accessible to all. Indian Muslims were the first from within the faith to translate the Quran into English. All wrote at a time of British colonialism and intense missionary activity. In the introduction to his 1912 translation Mirza Dehlawi writes he was motivated consciously by a desire to give “a complete and exhaustive reply to the manifold criticisms of the Koran by various Christian authors such as Drs Sale, Rodwell, and Sir W Muir.”
This early 20th c reaction spurred a lasting translation trend. In 1917, Muhammad Ali published his translation which was adopted by the Nation of Islam, both under the stewardship of Elijah Muhammad and current leader Louis Farrakhan. Ali’s biases show through, however. Consistent with his Lahori-Ahmadi creed, he sought to eschew any reference to miracles; so, for instance, God’s command to Moses “Strike the rock with your staff” was changed to “March on to the rock with your staff”. The Quran makes frequent mention of jinn (spirits), from which the English word genie is derived, whom Ali curiously argues are the Jews and Christians. He also denies Jesus’s virgin birth.
Muhammad Marmaduke William Pickthall, an English intellectual, son of an Anglican clergyman, novelist, traveller, and educator, converted to Islam in 1917 and published his translation in London in 1930. He was the first Western translator to insist that the Quran was untranslatable but that the general meaning of the text could still be conveyed to English speakers. His work is now criticised for using archaic, if elegant, prose, though it is nonetheless popular and still available as a Penguin paperback. It provides scant explanatory notes and background information, restricting its usefulness for an uninitiated reader.
The most popular among the seven available at Amazon along with Pickthall’s and Hilali’s (see below) is Abdullah Yusuf Ali’s The Holy Quran: Translation and Commentary, published in Lahore in 1937. He sought to convey the music and richness of the Arabic with poetic English versification. In 1989, Saudi Arabia’s Ar-Rajhi banking company financed the US-based Amana Corporation’s project to revise the Yusuf Ali translation to reflect an interpretation more in line with Wahhabi thought. Ar-Rahji offered the resulting version free to mosques, schools, and libraries throughout the world. The footnoted commentary about Jews raised hackles in Zionist circles, and in April 2002 the Los Angeles school district banned its use at local schools; however, Yusuf Ali’s translation has not suffered and is still #8321 at Amazon. Whatever their respective merits, the enduring popularity of Yusuf Ali and Pickthall is largely due to their extensive distribution in Pakistan, India and Indonesia, where copyright laws are ignored and cheap editions are snapped up by the huge English-reading Muslim population.
Muhammad Taqiyuddin Al-Hilali and Muhammad Muhsin Khan published their Explanatory English Translation of the Holy Quran: A Summarized Version of Ibn Kathir Supplemented by At-Tabari with Comments from Sahih al-Bukhari in Chicago in 1977. Born in Morocco, Hilali taught at Baghdad University and the Islamic University in Medina. Now the most widely disseminated Quran in Islamic bookstores and Sunni mosques throughout the English-speaking world, again with Saudi backing, this new translation is meant to replace the Yusuf Ali edition and comes with a seal of approval from both the University of Medina and the Saudi Dar al-Ifta. It is highly criticised at Amazon and in US academic circles for using the commentaries of Ibn Kathir and Al-Bukhari who Mohammed Khaleel dismisses in the tendentious Middle East Quarterly (Spring 2005) as being “medievalists who knew nothing of modern concepts of pluralism”. Khaleel blasts Hilali’s translation as “a supremacist Muslim, anti- Semitic, anti-Christian polemic” and Amazon gives prominence to similar scathing reviews.
Muhammad Asad, né Leopold Weiss, a Jewish convert to Islam, published The Message of the Quran in 1980. It is the most highly praised of all available translations by readers at Amazon but is criticised by Muslims as deviating from the viewpoint of the Muslim orthodoxy on many counts. It is banned in Saudi Arabia. Asad denies the occurrence of such events as the throwing of Abraham into the fire and Jesus speaking in the cradle. He also regards Luqman, Khizr and Zulqarnain as mythical figures.
Sayyid Abul Ali Maududi, founder of the Islamic Party (Jamaat Islami) in Pakistan, published The Meaning of the Quran in Lahore in 1967. In advice to readers Maududi writes: “The Quran was not revealed as a complete book at one and the same time; nor did Allah hand over a written copy of it to Muhammad (peace be upon him) at the very beginning of his mission and command him to publish it and invite people to adopt a particular way of life. Moreover, it is not a literary work of the common conventional type that develops its central theme in a logical order; nor does it conform to the style of such a work.” Maududi thus provided introductions to each sura with historical background and explanation of the text which is very useful and is available online at the University of Southern California website.
The Internet has transformed Quranic studies, allowing you to pick from among perhaps 50 translations, with dozens available free online, including several heretical versions, which are interesting as examples of the challenges that Islam faces in the 21st c. Rashad Khalifa’s The Quran: The Final Scripture, published in (of all places) Tucson in 1978 is one such. Khalifa was an Egyptian chemist who emigrated to Texas, where he undertook an extensive computer analysis of the Quran beginning in 1968, claiming that he proved the divine origins of the Quran via the number 19. He was stabbed to death in a gruesome unsolved murder in 1990. His life and death are shrouded in mystery and his writings and translation of the Quran, completely rejecting the hadith (traditions associated with the Prophet) and sunnah (actions attributed to the Prophet), have developed a cult following.
Another just published, by Edip Yuksel, Layth Saleh al-Shaiban and Martha Schulte-Nafeh, The Quran: A Reformist Translation, also rejects the hadith, sunnah and tafsir (interpretation), dismissing them—Khaleel at the Middle East Quarterly would no doubt agree—as “ancient scholarly interpretations rooted in patriarchal hierarchies. It is time to remove the accumulated layers of man-made dogmas and traditions that have attached themselves to the text.”
Finally, Laleh Bakhtiar, a Chicago Sufi convert to Islam, published The Sublime Koran this year, billed as the first translation by an American woman and providing a woman’s point of view. She questions the conventional meanings of some of the Koranic concepts; in particular, in 4:34 “daraba” is usually translated as “to beat”, supposedly condoning husbands beating recalcitrant wives, which Bakhtiar translates as “to go away”.
As a result of the availibitiy of multiple translations and commentaries on the Internet and the revolution that blogging has brought about, there is a rising tension between the traditional guardians of Muslim orthodoxy and a new crop of secular educated Muslims. But that is another story. Suffice it to say that these revisionist translations, rejecting the accumulated wisdom of centuries as outmoded, would mean dispensing with the works of the great Islamic philosophers Al-Bukhari, Ibn Sina, Al-Farabi, Ibn Rushd, Ibn Arabi, and Omar Khayyam, to name but a few. As Maududi argued, to strip the Quran of its historical context is wrong; but to strip it of its history is just as wrong. The hadith, sunnah and tafsir are part of any educated Muslim’s heritage, and can only enrich one’s reading of the Quran.
So which to choose from? This depends on your purpose. Downloading from the Internet is no substitute to having your own personal copy. And translations are only interpretations, so if you want to have the definitive experience in reading the text, you must read it in Arabic. In that case, your choice would be a bilingual edition where the English is as literal as possible, striving to provide a neutral, accurate translation with good tafsir (however patriarchal). In fact, a literary translation gets in the way of the Arabic novice’s efforts.
The Hilali text is easily available and adequate for this purpose, provided free from the Conveying Islamic Message Society (CIMS) in Alexandria in a user-friendly format in 30 durable paperback modules (one for each day of Ramadan), making it possible to read and carry a section comfortably. It has the extensive footnotes of important hadith and tafsir which offend the likes of Khaleel at the Middle East Quarterly, but we are all adults and can think for ourselves. CIMS does a fine service for non-Arabic speakers, providing many books about Islam free in many languages. It is a delight to get a post with several books from them—somehow it seems wrong to pay money for one’s spiritual sustenance. But it is possible to use Arberry, Pickthall or many others as reference texts for your reading of the Arabic original.
If you want a literary translation in English that aims to capture the poetry, both rhyme as well as metre, of the Arabic there are several works that attempt this in addition toYusuf Ali. Fazlollah Nikayin published Quran, A Poetic Translation from the Original in 1999 though it is now out of print. The Meaning of the Holy Koran Translated into English by Mohamed Hamed and Ahmad Hamid, completed in 2004 and awaiting publication, uses rhyme and metre to imitate the spellbinding musical quality of the Arabic text (see caption). An Egyptian doctor, Ahmad began the translation in 1933 and it was completed by his son Mohamed, also a doctor. If you want to memorise passages in English, this translation will be useful, as poetry is easier to memorise than prose. Mohamed argues that “the Arabic language is essentially a bicameral language, i.e., a language addressing two chambers of cognition simultaneously, allegorical and rational, so that a native Arabic translator has a distinct advantage over an English speaker, and a poetic text helps the reader to get closer to the experience of reading the text in Arabic.”
We have no final answer to the original question: Is the sacredness of the Quran translatable? Structuralists argue that language itself is a human attribute, and question to what extent something fixed in language can itself be sacred. They go so far as to ask whether this total focus on the reading of the Quran (the literal translation of Quran is “what is read"), where each word is the truth and cannot be challenged, is itself not akin to idol worship. In the Sufi tradition, the only truth is in heaven—anything contaminated by the dunya is a corruption. So just as the previous sacred texts, the Torah and the Gospels, are criticised by Muslims as corrupted, our reading of the Quran is inevitably corrupted by our limitations as humans living in history, with our various traditions and conceptions of the world muddying our sacred experience. Texts evolve as humans and human societies evolve, whereas the written word is fixed in a false worldly time (not heavenly eternal time).
While Islam has the advantage over Christianity and Judaism of being more focussed on the direct connection between Allah and man, some argue that the highly ritualised text- centric orthodox Islam can act as a stumbling block in this—the real—religious experience. Sufis are more laid back about the rituals of Islam, though no less concerned with the religious experience itself. Ibn Arabi urged followers when they pray to stay awake till they achieved a dream-waking state where a glimpse of paradise could be found. Though not a Sufi, Ibn Rushd argued in the 12th c that the prayers and rituals are marginal to charity, the monotheistic vow itself and pilgrimage. So to focus totally on finding the perfect translation is missing the spiritual point. If one is focused on the spiritual experience, just about any translation—by Muslim or non-Muslim—will do if used intelligently and with caution.
Then there is controversy between the monotheisms as to what constitutes a sacred text. If only Jews and Christians could agree that Jesus and Mohammed were prophets, a lot of problems would be solved in an instant. But even then, Muslims believe that the earlier revelations of prophets—the Torah and the preaching of Jesus—were neglected or corrupted by the Jews and Christians and have been replaced by God’s final and perfect revelation, the Quran. Jews and Christians counter that the historical biblical archaeological record, in particular the Dead Sea Scrolls, refutes this assertion, though it is unlikely this issue will ever be resolved. However if the proof is in the pudding, there is little doubt that the Quran wins hands down.
Any translation, any text for that matter, will inevitably reflect the limitations of both transmitter, writer, translator and/or reader in pursuit of the transcendental experience itself, which is beyond any words and any language. Just making a more approachable or enjoyable version is no guarantee that the reader will achieve enlightenment. And are ever newer and newer translations really necessary? But what more noble cause can a spiritually motivated person dedicate his/her life and intellect to?
A few words of advice to new readers of the Quran: THE QURAN presents various problems for the reader, especially a reader unfamiliar with Islam and Islamic history. The text assumes familiarity with many events from Jewish and Christian scriptures, retelling some of these events in partial and distinctive ways, and referring obliquely to others. It rarely offers detailed accounts of historical events; the emphasis is typically on the moral significance of an event, rather than its narrative sequence.
The revelation of the Quran began and went hand in hand with the preaching of the message over a span of 23 years. The different parts of the Quran were revealed step by step according to the many changing requirements of the Islamic movement during these stages. It therefore could not possibly possess the kind of coherence and systematic sequence expected of, say, a scholarly treatise or a tightly organised programme.
Moreover, the various fragments of the Quran, which were revealed in harmony with the growth of the Islamic movement, were not published in the form of written treatises, but were spread orally. Their style, therefore, bears an oratorical flavor rather than the character of a literary composition. This explains the many repetitions. The interests of a message and a movement demand that during a particular stage emphasis should be placed only on those subjects which are appropriate at that stage, to the exclusion of matters pertaining to later stages. As a result, certain subjects may require continual emphasis for months or even years. Interestingly, this can just as well apply to converts today, who may find the full programme of Islam overwhelming at first.
When the Prophet’s mission was completed, the chronological sequence of the various parts of the Quran could in no way be suitable to the changed situation. What was now required was a different sequence in tune with the changed context resulting from the completion of the mission. The order settled on was partly pragmatic—by size (from long to short), partly by theme (Islamic programme, accounts of prophets end-times) and period of revelation (Medinah or Makka).
There is also the structuralist and post-structuralist debate about the structure and significance of the Quran. Norman O Brown observes that the seeming “disorganisation” of Quranic literary expression—its scattered or fragmented mode of composition—is a literary device capable of delivering “profound effects, as if the intensity of the prophetic message were shattering the vehicle of human language in which it was being communicated.” Michael Sells, in Approaching the Quran, also argues that the repetition in the Quran is a valuable literary device: “The values presented in the very early Meccan revelations are repeated throughout the hymnic suras. There is a sense of directness, of intimacy, as if the hearer were being asked repeatedly a simple question: What will be of value at the end of a human life?”
Originally published on Al Ahram online
Jihad Explained
In the linguistic sense, the Arabic word "jihad" means struggling or striving and applies to any effort exerted by anyone. In this sense, a student struggles and strives to get an education and pass course work; an employee strives to fulfill his/her job and maintain good relations with his/her employer; a politician strives to maintain or increase his popularity with his constituents and so on. The term strive or struggle may be used for/by Muslims as well as non-Muslims; for example, Allah, the One and Only True God says in the Qur'an:
"We have enjoined on people kindness to parents; but if they STRIVE (JAHADAKA) to make you ascribe partners with Me that of which you have no knowledge, then obey them not..." (29:8; also see 31:15)
In the above two verses of the Qur'an , it is non-Muslim parents who strive (jahadaka) to convert their Muslim child back to their religion. In the West, "jihad" is generally translated as "holy war," a usage the media has popularized. According to Islamic teachings, it is UNHOLY to instigate or start war; however, some wars are inevitable and justifiable. If we translate the words "holy war" back into Arabic, we find "harbun muqaddasatu," or for "the holy war," "al-harbu al-muqaddasatu." WE CHALLENGE any researcher or scholar to find the meaning of "jihad" as holy war in the Qur'an or authentic Hadith collections or in early Islamic literature. Unfortunately, some Muslim writers and translators of the Qur'an, the Hadith and other Islamic literature translate the term "jihad" as "holy war," due to the influence of centuries-old Western propaganda. This could be a reflection of the Christian use of the term "Holy War" to refer to the Crusades of a thousand years ago. However, the Arabic words for "war" are "harb" or "qital," which are found in the Qur'an and Hadith.
For Muslims the term JIHAD is applied to all forms of STRIVING and has developed some special meanings over time. The sources of this development are the Qur'an (the Word of God revealed to Prophet Muhammad (S) [(S) denotes Sall-Allahu 'alayhi wa sallam, meaning peace and blessings of Allah be upon him]. The Qur'an and the Hadith use the word "jihad" in several different contexts which are given below:
1. RECOGNIZING THE CREATOR AND LOVING HIM MOST:
It is human nature to love what is seen with the eyes and felt with the senses more than the UNSEEN REALITY. The Creator of the Universe and the One God is Allah. He is the Unseen Reality which we tend to ignore and not recognize. The Qur'an addresses those who claim to be believers:
"O you who believe! Choose not your fathers nor your brethren for protectors if they love disbelief over belief; whoever of you takes them for protectors, such are wrong-doers. Say: if your fathers, and your children, and your brethren, and your spouses, and your tribe, and the wealth you have acquired, and business for which you fear shrinkage, and houses you are pleased with are dearer to you than Allah and His Messenger and STRIVING in His way: then wait till Allah brings His command to pass. Allah does not guide disobedient folk." (9:23, 24)
It is indeed a struggle to put Allah ahead of our loved ones, our wealth, our worldly ambitions and our own lives. Especially for a non-Muslim who embraces Islam, it may be a tough struggle due to the opposition of his family, peers and society.
2. RESISTING PRESSURE OF PARENTS, PEERS, AND SOCIETY:
Once a person has made up his mind to put the Creator of the Universe above all else, he often comes under intense pressures. It is not easy to resist such pressures and STRIVE to maintain dedication and love of Allah over all else. A person who has turned to Islam from another religion may be subjected to pressures designed to turn him back to the religion of the family. We read in the Qur'an:
"So obey not the rejecters of faith, but strive (jahidhum) against them by it (the Qur'an) with a great endeavor." (25:52)
3. STAYING ON THE STRAIGHT PATH STEADFASTLY:
Allah says in the Qur'an: "And STRIVE (JADIHU) for Allah with the endeavor (JIHADIHI) which is His right. He has chosen you and has not laid upon you in the DEEN (religion) any hardship..." (22:78) "And whosoever STRIVES (JAHADA), STRIVES (YUJAHIDU) only for himself, for lo! Allah is altogether independent of the universe." (29:6)
As for those who strive and struggle to live as true Muslims whose lives are made difficult due to persecution by their opponents, they are advised to migrate to a more peaceful and tolerant land and continue with their struggle in the cause of Allah. Allah says in the Qur'an:
"Lo! As for those whom the angels take (in death) while they wronged themselves, (the angels) will ask: 'In what you were engaged?' They will way: 'We were oppressed in the land.' (The angels) will say: 'Was not Allah's earth spacious that you could have migrated therein?'" (4:97) "Lo! Those who believe, and those who emigrate (to escape persecution) and STRIVE (JAHADU) in the way of Allah, these have hope of Allah's mercy..." (2:218)
Allah tests the believers in their faith and their steadfastness:
"Or did you think that you would enter Paradise while yet Allah knows not those of you who really STRIVE (JAHADU), nor knows those (of you) who are steadfast." (3:142) "And surely We shall try you with something of fear and hunger, and loss of wealth and lives and fruits; but give tidings to the steadfast." (2:155)
We find that the Prophet Muhammad (S) and his clan were boycotted socially and economically for three years to force him to stop his message and compromise with the pagans but he resisted and realized a moral victory (2).
4. STRIVING FOR RIGHTEOUS DEEDS:
Allah declares in the Qur'an:
"As for those who STRIVE (JAHADU) in Us (the cause of Allah), We surely guide them to Our paths, and lo! Allah is with the good doers." (29:69)
When we are faced with two competing interests, it becomes jihad to choose the right one, as the following Hadith exemplify: "Aisha, wife of the Prophet (S) asked, 'O Messenger of Allah, we see jihad as the best of deeds, so shouldn't we join it?' He replied, 'But the best of jihad is a perfect Hajj (pilgrimage to Makkah).'" (Sahih Al-Bukhari #2784) At another occasion, a man asked the Prophet Muhammad (S): "'Should I join the jihad?' He asked, 'Do you have parents?' The man said, 'Yes!' The Prophet (S) said, 'Then strive by serving them!'" (Sahih Al-Bukhari #5972) Yet another man asked the Messenger of Allah (S): "'What kind of jihad is better?' He replied, 'A word of truth in front of an oppressive ruler!'" (Sunan Al-Nasa'i #4209) The Messenger of Allah (S) said: "...the MUJAHID (one who carries out jihad) is he who STRIVES against himself for the sake of Allah, and the MUHAJIR (one who emigrates) is he who abandons evil deeds and sin." (Sahih Ibn Hibban #4862)
5. HAVING COURAGE AND STEADFASTNESS TO CONVEY THE MESSAGE OF ISLAM:
The Qur'an narrates the experiences of a large number of Prophets and good people who suffered a great deal trying to convey the message of Allah to mankind. For examples, see the Qur'an 26:1-190, 36:13-32. In the Qur'an, Allah specifically praises those who strive to convey His message: "Who is better in speech than one who calls (other people) to Allah, works righteous, and declares that he is from the Muslims." (41:33) Under adverse conditions it takes great courage to remain a Muslim, declare oneself to be a Muslim and call others to Islam. We read in the Qur'an:
"The (true) believers are only those who believe in Allah and his messenger and afterward doubt not, but STRIVE with their wealth and their selves for the cause of Allah. Such are the truthful." (49:15)
6. DEFENDING ISLAM AND THE COMMUNITY:
Allah declares in the Qur'an:
"To those against whom war is made, permission is given (to defend themselves), because they are wronged - and verily, Allah is Most Powerful to give them victory - (they are) those who have been expelled from their homes in defiance of right - (for no cause) except that they say, 'Our Lord is Allah'..." (22:39-40)
The Qur'an permits fighting to defend the religion of Islam and the Muslims. This permission includes fighting in self-defense and for the protection of family and property. The early Muslims fought many battles against their enemies under the leadership of the Prophet Muhammad (S) or his representatives. For example, when the pagans of Quraysh brought armies against Prophet Muhammad (S), the Muslims fought to defend their faith and community (3). The Qur'an adds:
"Fight in the cause of Allah against those who fight against you, but do not transgress limits. Lo! Allah loves not aggressors. ...And fight them until persecution is no more, and religion is for Allah. But if they desist, then let there be no hostility except against transgressors." (2:190, 193)
7. HELPING ALLIED PEOPLE WHO MAY NOT BE MUSLIM:
In the late period of the Prophet Muhammad's (S) life, the tribe of Banu Khuza'ah became his ally. They were living near Makkah which was under the rule of the pagan Quraysh, Prophet Muhammad's (S) own tribe. The tribe of Banu Bakr, an ally of Quraysh, with the help of some elements of Quraysh, attacked Banu Khuza'ah invoked the treaty and demanded Prophet Muhammad (S) to come to their help and punish Quraysh. The Prophet Muhammad (S) organized a campaign against Quraysh of Makkah which resulted in the conquest of Makkah which occurred without any battle (4).
8. REMOVING TREACHEROUS PEOPLE FROM POWER:
Allah orders the Muslims in the Qur'an: "If you fear treachery from any group, throw back (their treaty) to them, (so as to be) on equal terms. Lo! Allah loves not the treacherous." (8:58) Prophet Muhammad (S) undertook a number of armed campaigns to remove treacherous people from power and their lodgings. He had entered into pacts with several tribes, however, some of them proved themselves treacherous. Prophet Muhammad (S) launched armed campaigns against these tribes, defeated and exiled them from Medina and its surroundings (5).
9. DEFENDING THROUGH PREEMPTIVE STRIKES:
Indeed, it is difficult to mobilize people to fight when they see no invaders in their territory; however, those who are charged with responsibility see dangers ahead of time and must provide leadership. The Messenger of Allah, Muhammad (S), had the responsibility to protect his people and the religion he established in Arabia. Whenever he received intelligence reports about enemies gathering near his borders he carried out preemptive strikes, broke their power and dispersed them (6). Allah ordered Muslims in the Qur'an: "Fighting is prescribed upon you, and you dislike it. But it may happen that you dislike a thing which is good for you, and it may happen that you love a thing which is bad for you. And Allah knows and you know not." (2:216)
10. GAINING FREEDOM TO INFORM, EDUCATE AND CONVEY THE MESSAGE OF ISLAM IN AN OPEN AND FREE ENVIRONMENT:
Allah declares in the Qur'an:
"They ask you (Muhammad) concerning fighting in the Sacred Month. Say, 'Fighting therein is a grave (offense) but graver is it in the sight of Allah to prevent access to the path of Allah, to deny Him, to prevent access to the Sacred Mosque, and drive out its inhabitants. Persecution is worse than killing. Nor will they cease fighting you until they turn you back from your faith, if they can..." (2:217) "And those who, when an oppressive wrong is inflicted on them, (are not cowed but) fight back." (42:39)
To gain this freedom, Prophet Muhammad (S) said: "STRIVE (JAHIDU) against the disbelievers with your hands and tongues." (Sahih Ibn Hibban #4708) The life of the Prophet Muhammad (S) was full of STRIVING to gain the freedom to inform and convey the message of Islam. During his stay in Makkah he used non-violent methods and after the establishment of his government in Madinah, by the permission of Allah, he used armed struggle against his enemies whenever he found it inevitable.
11. FREEING PEOPLE FROM TYRANNY:
Allah admonishes Muslims in the Qur'an:
"And why should you not fight in the cause of Allah and of those who, being weak, are ill-treated (and oppressed)? - Men, women, and children, whose cry is: 'Our Lord! Rescue us from this town, whose people are oppressors; and raise for us from You, one who will protect; and raise for us from You, one who will help.'" (4:75)
The mission of the Prophet Muhammad (S) was to free people from tyranny and exploitation by oppressive systems. Once free, individuals in the society were then free to chose Islam or not. Prophet Muhammad's (S) successors continued in his footsteps and went to help oppressed people. For example, after the repeated call by the oppressed people of Spain to the Muslims for help, Spain was liberated by Muslim forces and the tyrant rulers removed. After the conquest of Syria and Iraq by the Muslims, the Christian population of Hims reportedly said to the Muslims: "We like your rule and justice far better than the state of oppression and tyranny under which we have been living." (7) The defeated rulers of Syria were Roman Christians, and Iraq was ruled by Zoarastrian Persians.
WHAT SHOULD MUSLIMS DO WHEN THEY ARE VICTORIOUS?
Muslims should remove tyranny, treachery, bigotry, and ignorance and replace them with justice and equity. We should provide truthful knowledge and free people from the bondage of 'associationism' (SHIRK, or multiple gods), prejudice, superstition and mythology. Muslims remove immorality, fear, crime, exploitation and replace them with divine morality, peace and education. The Qur'an declares:
"Lo! Allah commands you that you restore deposits to their owners, and if you judge between mankind that you judge justly. Lo! It is proper that Allah admonishes you. Lo! Allah is ever Hearer, Seer." (4:58)
"O you who believe! Stand out firmly for Allah's witnesses to fair dealing, and let not the hatred of others to you make you swerve to wrong and depart from justice. Be just: that is next to Piety and fear Allah. And Allah is well acquainted with all that you do." (5:8)
"And of those whom We have created there is a nation who guides with the Truth and establishes justice with it." (7:181)
"Lo! Allah enjoins justice and kindness, and giving to kinsfolk, and forbids lewdness and abomination and wickedness. He exhorts you in order that you may take heed." (16:90)
"Those who, if We give them power in the land, establish prescribed prayers (SALAH) and pay the poor-due (ZAKAH) and enjoin right conduct and forbid evil. And with Allah rests the end (and decision) of (all) affairs." (22:41)
DID ISLAM SPREAD BY FORCE, SWORDS OR GUNS?
The unequivocal and emphatic answer is NO! The Qur'an declares:
"Let there be no compulsion (or coercion) in the religion (Islam). The right direction is distinctly clear from error." (2:256)
Here is a good study of the question of the spread of Islam by a Christian missionary, T. W. Arnold: "...of any organized attempt to force the acceptance of Islam on the non-Muslim population, or of any systematic persecution intended to stamp out the Christian religion, we hear nothing. Had the caliphs chosen to adopt either course of action, they might have swept away Christianity as easily as Ferdinand and Isabella drove Islam out of Spain, or Louis XIV made Protestantism penal in France, or the Jews were kept out of England for 350 years. The Eastern Churches in Asia were entirely cut off from communion with the rest of Christiandom throughout which no one would have been found to lift a finger on their behalf, as heretical communions. So that the very survival of these Churches to the present day is a strong proof of the generally tolerant attitude of Mohammedan [sic] governments towards them" (8). Islam does not teach, nor do Muslims desire, conversion of any people for fear, greed, marriage or any other form of coercion. In conclusion, jihad in Islam is STRIVING IN THE WAY OF ALLAH by pen, tongue, hand, media and, if inevitable, with arms. However, jihad in Islam does not include striving for individual or national power, dominance, glory, wealth, prestige or pride.
REFERENCES:
1. For the sake of simplicity and easy reading, masculine pronouns have been used throughout this brochure. No exclusion of females is intended.
2. Haykal, M. H., THE LIFE OF MUHAMMAD, Tr. Ismail R. Faruqi, American Trust Publications, 1976, p. 132.
3. Haykal, pp. 216, 242, 299 and 414 for the Battles of Badr, Uhud, Al-Khandaq and Hunayn, respectively.
4. Haykal, p. 395 for the conquest of Makkah.
5. Haykal, pp. 245, 277, 311 and 326 for campaigns against the tribes of Banu Qaynuqa', Banu Al-Nadir, Banu Qurayzah and Banu Lihyan, respectively. Also, see p. 283 for the Battle of Dhat Al-Riqa'.
6. Haykal, pp. 284, 327, 366, 387, 393, 443 and 515 for the Battles of Dawmat Al-Jandal, Banu Al-Mustaliq, Khayber, Mu'tah, Dhat Al-Salasil, Tabuk and the Campaign of Usama Ibn Zayd, respectively.
7. Hitti, Philip K., HISTORY OF THE ARABS, St. Martin's Press, New York, 1970, p. 153.
8. Arnold, Sir Thomas W. THE PREACHING OF ISLAM, A HISTORY OF THE PROPAGATION OF THE MUSLIM FAITH, Westminister A. Constable & Co., London, 1896, p. 80.
For more information, please contact: The Institute of Islamic Information and Education 4390 North Elston Avenue Chicago, Illinois, 60641-2146 Tel. (312) 777-7443 Fax (312) 777-7199
visit GLOBALPRO
"We have enjoined on people kindness to parents; but if they STRIVE (JAHADAKA) to make you ascribe partners with Me that of which you have no knowledge, then obey them not..." (29:8; also see 31:15)
In the above two verses of the Qur'an , it is non-Muslim parents who strive (jahadaka) to convert their Muslim child back to their religion. In the West, "jihad" is generally translated as "holy war," a usage the media has popularized. According to Islamic teachings, it is UNHOLY to instigate or start war; however, some wars are inevitable and justifiable. If we translate the words "holy war" back into Arabic, we find "harbun muqaddasatu," or for "the holy war," "al-harbu al-muqaddasatu." WE CHALLENGE any researcher or scholar to find the meaning of "jihad" as holy war in the Qur'an or authentic Hadith collections or in early Islamic literature. Unfortunately, some Muslim writers and translators of the Qur'an, the Hadith and other Islamic literature translate the term "jihad" as "holy war," due to the influence of centuries-old Western propaganda. This could be a reflection of the Christian use of the term "Holy War" to refer to the Crusades of a thousand years ago. However, the Arabic words for "war" are "harb" or "qital," which are found in the Qur'an and Hadith.
For Muslims the term JIHAD is applied to all forms of STRIVING and has developed some special meanings over time. The sources of this development are the Qur'an (the Word of God revealed to Prophet Muhammad (S) [(S) denotes Sall-Allahu 'alayhi wa sallam, meaning peace and blessings of Allah be upon him]. The Qur'an and the Hadith use the word "jihad" in several different contexts which are given below:
1. RECOGNIZING THE CREATOR AND LOVING HIM MOST:
It is human nature to love what is seen with the eyes and felt with the senses more than the UNSEEN REALITY. The Creator of the Universe and the One God is Allah. He is the Unseen Reality which we tend to ignore and not recognize. The Qur'an addresses those who claim to be believers:
"O you who believe! Choose not your fathers nor your brethren for protectors if they love disbelief over belief; whoever of you takes them for protectors, such are wrong-doers. Say: if your fathers, and your children, and your brethren, and your spouses, and your tribe, and the wealth you have acquired, and business for which you fear shrinkage, and houses you are pleased with are dearer to you than Allah and His Messenger and STRIVING in His way: then wait till Allah brings His command to pass. Allah does not guide disobedient folk." (9:23, 24)
It is indeed a struggle to put Allah ahead of our loved ones, our wealth, our worldly ambitions and our own lives. Especially for a non-Muslim who embraces Islam, it may be a tough struggle due to the opposition of his family, peers and society.
2. RESISTING PRESSURE OF PARENTS, PEERS, AND SOCIETY:
Once a person has made up his mind to put the Creator of the Universe above all else, he often comes under intense pressures. It is not easy to resist such pressures and STRIVE to maintain dedication and love of Allah over all else. A person who has turned to Islam from another religion may be subjected to pressures designed to turn him back to the religion of the family. We read in the Qur'an:
"So obey not the rejecters of faith, but strive (jahidhum) against them by it (the Qur'an) with a great endeavor." (25:52)
3. STAYING ON THE STRAIGHT PATH STEADFASTLY:
Allah says in the Qur'an: "And STRIVE (JADIHU) for Allah with the endeavor (JIHADIHI) which is His right. He has chosen you and has not laid upon you in the DEEN (religion) any hardship..." (22:78) "And whosoever STRIVES (JAHADA), STRIVES (YUJAHIDU) only for himself, for lo! Allah is altogether independent of the universe." (29:6)
As for those who strive and struggle to live as true Muslims whose lives are made difficult due to persecution by their opponents, they are advised to migrate to a more peaceful and tolerant land and continue with their struggle in the cause of Allah. Allah says in the Qur'an:
"Lo! As for those whom the angels take (in death) while they wronged themselves, (the angels) will ask: 'In what you were engaged?' They will way: 'We were oppressed in the land.' (The angels) will say: 'Was not Allah's earth spacious that you could have migrated therein?'" (4:97) "Lo! Those who believe, and those who emigrate (to escape persecution) and STRIVE (JAHADU) in the way of Allah, these have hope of Allah's mercy..." (2:218)
Allah tests the believers in their faith and their steadfastness:
"Or did you think that you would enter Paradise while yet Allah knows not those of you who really STRIVE (JAHADU), nor knows those (of you) who are steadfast." (3:142) "And surely We shall try you with something of fear and hunger, and loss of wealth and lives and fruits; but give tidings to the steadfast." (2:155)
We find that the Prophet Muhammad (S) and his clan were boycotted socially and economically for three years to force him to stop his message and compromise with the pagans but he resisted and realized a moral victory (2).
4. STRIVING FOR RIGHTEOUS DEEDS:
Allah declares in the Qur'an:
"As for those who STRIVE (JAHADU) in Us (the cause of Allah), We surely guide them to Our paths, and lo! Allah is with the good doers." (29:69)
When we are faced with two competing interests, it becomes jihad to choose the right one, as the following Hadith exemplify: "Aisha, wife of the Prophet (S) asked, 'O Messenger of Allah, we see jihad as the best of deeds, so shouldn't we join it?' He replied, 'But the best of jihad is a perfect Hajj (pilgrimage to Makkah).'" (Sahih Al-Bukhari #2784) At another occasion, a man asked the Prophet Muhammad (S): "'Should I join the jihad?' He asked, 'Do you have parents?' The man said, 'Yes!' The Prophet (S) said, 'Then strive by serving them!'" (Sahih Al-Bukhari #5972) Yet another man asked the Messenger of Allah (S): "'What kind of jihad is better?' He replied, 'A word of truth in front of an oppressive ruler!'" (Sunan Al-Nasa'i #4209) The Messenger of Allah (S) said: "...the MUJAHID (one who carries out jihad) is he who STRIVES against himself for the sake of Allah, and the MUHAJIR (one who emigrates) is he who abandons evil deeds and sin." (Sahih Ibn Hibban #4862)
5. HAVING COURAGE AND STEADFASTNESS TO CONVEY THE MESSAGE OF ISLAM:
The Qur'an narrates the experiences of a large number of Prophets and good people who suffered a great deal trying to convey the message of Allah to mankind. For examples, see the Qur'an 26:1-190, 36:13-32. In the Qur'an, Allah specifically praises those who strive to convey His message: "Who is better in speech than one who calls (other people) to Allah, works righteous, and declares that he is from the Muslims." (41:33) Under adverse conditions it takes great courage to remain a Muslim, declare oneself to be a Muslim and call others to Islam. We read in the Qur'an:
"The (true) believers are only those who believe in Allah and his messenger and afterward doubt not, but STRIVE with their wealth and their selves for the cause of Allah. Such are the truthful." (49:15)
6. DEFENDING ISLAM AND THE COMMUNITY:
Allah declares in the Qur'an:
"To those against whom war is made, permission is given (to defend themselves), because they are wronged - and verily, Allah is Most Powerful to give them victory - (they are) those who have been expelled from their homes in defiance of right - (for no cause) except that they say, 'Our Lord is Allah'..." (22:39-40)
The Qur'an permits fighting to defend the religion of Islam and the Muslims. This permission includes fighting in self-defense and for the protection of family and property. The early Muslims fought many battles against their enemies under the leadership of the Prophet Muhammad (S) or his representatives. For example, when the pagans of Quraysh brought armies against Prophet Muhammad (S), the Muslims fought to defend their faith and community (3). The Qur'an adds:
"Fight in the cause of Allah against those who fight against you, but do not transgress limits. Lo! Allah loves not aggressors. ...And fight them until persecution is no more, and religion is for Allah. But if they desist, then let there be no hostility except against transgressors." (2:190, 193)
7. HELPING ALLIED PEOPLE WHO MAY NOT BE MUSLIM:
In the late period of the Prophet Muhammad's (S) life, the tribe of Banu Khuza'ah became his ally. They were living near Makkah which was under the rule of the pagan Quraysh, Prophet Muhammad's (S) own tribe. The tribe of Banu Bakr, an ally of Quraysh, with the help of some elements of Quraysh, attacked Banu Khuza'ah invoked the treaty and demanded Prophet Muhammad (S) to come to their help and punish Quraysh. The Prophet Muhammad (S) organized a campaign against Quraysh of Makkah which resulted in the conquest of Makkah which occurred without any battle (4).
8. REMOVING TREACHEROUS PEOPLE FROM POWER:
Allah orders the Muslims in the Qur'an: "If you fear treachery from any group, throw back (their treaty) to them, (so as to be) on equal terms. Lo! Allah loves not the treacherous." (8:58) Prophet Muhammad (S) undertook a number of armed campaigns to remove treacherous people from power and their lodgings. He had entered into pacts with several tribes, however, some of them proved themselves treacherous. Prophet Muhammad (S) launched armed campaigns against these tribes, defeated and exiled them from Medina and its surroundings (5).
9. DEFENDING THROUGH PREEMPTIVE STRIKES:
Indeed, it is difficult to mobilize people to fight when they see no invaders in their territory; however, those who are charged with responsibility see dangers ahead of time and must provide leadership. The Messenger of Allah, Muhammad (S), had the responsibility to protect his people and the religion he established in Arabia. Whenever he received intelligence reports about enemies gathering near his borders he carried out preemptive strikes, broke their power and dispersed them (6). Allah ordered Muslims in the Qur'an: "Fighting is prescribed upon you, and you dislike it. But it may happen that you dislike a thing which is good for you, and it may happen that you love a thing which is bad for you. And Allah knows and you know not." (2:216)
10. GAINING FREEDOM TO INFORM, EDUCATE AND CONVEY THE MESSAGE OF ISLAM IN AN OPEN AND FREE ENVIRONMENT:
Allah declares in the Qur'an:
"They ask you (Muhammad) concerning fighting in the Sacred Month. Say, 'Fighting therein is a grave (offense) but graver is it in the sight of Allah to prevent access to the path of Allah, to deny Him, to prevent access to the Sacred Mosque, and drive out its inhabitants. Persecution is worse than killing. Nor will they cease fighting you until they turn you back from your faith, if they can..." (2:217) "And those who, when an oppressive wrong is inflicted on them, (are not cowed but) fight back." (42:39)
To gain this freedom, Prophet Muhammad (S) said: "STRIVE (JAHIDU) against the disbelievers with your hands and tongues." (Sahih Ibn Hibban #4708) The life of the Prophet Muhammad (S) was full of STRIVING to gain the freedom to inform and convey the message of Islam. During his stay in Makkah he used non-violent methods and after the establishment of his government in Madinah, by the permission of Allah, he used armed struggle against his enemies whenever he found it inevitable.
11. FREEING PEOPLE FROM TYRANNY:
Allah admonishes Muslims in the Qur'an:
"And why should you not fight in the cause of Allah and of those who, being weak, are ill-treated (and oppressed)? - Men, women, and children, whose cry is: 'Our Lord! Rescue us from this town, whose people are oppressors; and raise for us from You, one who will protect; and raise for us from You, one who will help.'" (4:75)
The mission of the Prophet Muhammad (S) was to free people from tyranny and exploitation by oppressive systems. Once free, individuals in the society were then free to chose Islam or not. Prophet Muhammad's (S) successors continued in his footsteps and went to help oppressed people. For example, after the repeated call by the oppressed people of Spain to the Muslims for help, Spain was liberated by Muslim forces and the tyrant rulers removed. After the conquest of Syria and Iraq by the Muslims, the Christian population of Hims reportedly said to the Muslims: "We like your rule and justice far better than the state of oppression and tyranny under which we have been living." (7) The defeated rulers of Syria were Roman Christians, and Iraq was ruled by Zoarastrian Persians.
WHAT SHOULD MUSLIMS DO WHEN THEY ARE VICTORIOUS?
Muslims should remove tyranny, treachery, bigotry, and ignorance and replace them with justice and equity. We should provide truthful knowledge and free people from the bondage of 'associationism' (SHIRK, or multiple gods), prejudice, superstition and mythology. Muslims remove immorality, fear, crime, exploitation and replace them with divine morality, peace and education. The Qur'an declares:
"Lo! Allah commands you that you restore deposits to their owners, and if you judge between mankind that you judge justly. Lo! It is proper that Allah admonishes you. Lo! Allah is ever Hearer, Seer." (4:58)
"O you who believe! Stand out firmly for Allah's witnesses to fair dealing, and let not the hatred of others to you make you swerve to wrong and depart from justice. Be just: that is next to Piety and fear Allah. And Allah is well acquainted with all that you do." (5:8)
"And of those whom We have created there is a nation who guides with the Truth and establishes justice with it." (7:181)
"Lo! Allah enjoins justice and kindness, and giving to kinsfolk, and forbids lewdness and abomination and wickedness. He exhorts you in order that you may take heed." (16:90)
"Those who, if We give them power in the land, establish prescribed prayers (SALAH) and pay the poor-due (ZAKAH) and enjoin right conduct and forbid evil. And with Allah rests the end (and decision) of (all) affairs." (22:41)
DID ISLAM SPREAD BY FORCE, SWORDS OR GUNS?
The unequivocal and emphatic answer is NO! The Qur'an declares:
"Let there be no compulsion (or coercion) in the religion (Islam). The right direction is distinctly clear from error." (2:256)
Here is a good study of the question of the spread of Islam by a Christian missionary, T. W. Arnold: "...of any organized attempt to force the acceptance of Islam on the non-Muslim population, or of any systematic persecution intended to stamp out the Christian religion, we hear nothing. Had the caliphs chosen to adopt either course of action, they might have swept away Christianity as easily as Ferdinand and Isabella drove Islam out of Spain, or Louis XIV made Protestantism penal in France, or the Jews were kept out of England for 350 years. The Eastern Churches in Asia were entirely cut off from communion with the rest of Christiandom throughout which no one would have been found to lift a finger on their behalf, as heretical communions. So that the very survival of these Churches to the present day is a strong proof of the generally tolerant attitude of Mohammedan [sic] governments towards them" (8). Islam does not teach, nor do Muslims desire, conversion of any people for fear, greed, marriage or any other form of coercion. In conclusion, jihad in Islam is STRIVING IN THE WAY OF ALLAH by pen, tongue, hand, media and, if inevitable, with arms. However, jihad in Islam does not include striving for individual or national power, dominance, glory, wealth, prestige or pride.
REFERENCES:
1. For the sake of simplicity and easy reading, masculine pronouns have been used throughout this brochure. No exclusion of females is intended.
2. Haykal, M. H., THE LIFE OF MUHAMMAD, Tr. Ismail R. Faruqi, American Trust Publications, 1976, p. 132.
3. Haykal, pp. 216, 242, 299 and 414 for the Battles of Badr, Uhud, Al-Khandaq and Hunayn, respectively.
4. Haykal, p. 395 for the conquest of Makkah.
5. Haykal, pp. 245, 277, 311 and 326 for campaigns against the tribes of Banu Qaynuqa', Banu Al-Nadir, Banu Qurayzah and Banu Lihyan, respectively. Also, see p. 283 for the Battle of Dhat Al-Riqa'.
6. Haykal, pp. 284, 327, 366, 387, 393, 443 and 515 for the Battles of Dawmat Al-Jandal, Banu Al-Mustaliq, Khayber, Mu'tah, Dhat Al-Salasil, Tabuk and the Campaign of Usama Ibn Zayd, respectively.
7. Hitti, Philip K., HISTORY OF THE ARABS, St. Martin's Press, New York, 1970, p. 153.
8. Arnold, Sir Thomas W. THE PREACHING OF ISLAM, A HISTORY OF THE PROPAGATION OF THE MUSLIM FAITH, Westminister A. Constable & Co., London, 1896, p. 80.
For more information, please contact: The Institute of Islamic Information and Education 4390 North Elston Avenue Chicago, Illinois, 60641-2146 Tel. (312) 777-7443 Fax (312) 777-7199
visit GLOBALPRO
Thursday, February 7, 2008
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)