by Raymond Ibrahim
Originally published by VIE.
News recently emerged that Russia was banning
key Islamic scriptures—including Sahih Bukhari—on the charge that they
promote “exclusivity [supremacism] of one of the world’s religions,”
namely Islam; or, in the words of a senior assistant to the prosecutor
of Tatarstan Ruslan Galliev, “a militant Islam” which “arouses ethnic,
religious enmity.”
If Sahih Bukhari, a nine-volume hadith
collection compiled in the 9th century and seen by Sunni Muslims as
second in importance only to the Koran itself is being banned for
inciting hostility, where does that leave the Koran?
After all, if Sahih Bukhari contains pro-terrorism statements
attributed to the prophet of Islam and calls to kill Muslims who leave
Islam, the Koran, Islam’s number one holy book itself is full of
intolerance and calls for violence against non-believers. A tiny
sampling of proclamations from Allah follows:
- “I will cast terror into the hearts of the unbelievers, so strike [them] upon the necks [behead them] and strike from them every fingertip’” (Koran 8:12).
- “Fight those among the People of the Book [Christians and Jews] who do not believe in Allah nor the Last Day, who do not forbid what Allah and His Messenger have forbidden, and who do not embrace the religion of truth [Islam], until they pay the jizya with willing submissiveness and feel themselves utterly subdued” (Koran 9:29).
- “Then, when the sacred months have passed, slay the idolaters wherever you find them—seize them, besiege them, and make ready to ambush them!” (Koran 9:5).
- “Fighting has been enjoined upon you [Muslims] while it is hateful to you” (2:216).
That Islam’s core texts incite violence and intolerance has many ramifications, for those willing to go down this path of logic.
For example, as I argued more fully here,
although Muslims around the world, especially in the guise of the
57-member state Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), continue to
push for the enforcement of “religious defamation” laws in the
international arena, one great irony is lost, especially on Muslims: if
such laws would ban movies and cartoons that defame Islam, they would
also, by logical extension, need to ban the religion of Islam itself—the
only religion whose core texts actively defame other religions.
Consider what the word “defamation” means:
“to blacken another’s reputation” and “false or unjustified injury of
the good reputation of another, as by slander or libel,” are typical
dictionary definitions.
What, then, do we do with Islam’s core
religious texts—not just Sahih Bukhari but the Koran itself, which
slanders, denigrates and blackens the reputation of other religions?
Consider Christianity alone: Koran 5:73
declares that “Infidels are they who say God [or “Allah”] is one of
three,” a reference to the Christian Trinity; Koran 5:72 says “Infidels
are they who say God is the Christ, [Jesus] son of Mary”; and Koran 9:30
complains that “the Christians say the Christ is the son of God … may
Allah’s curse be upon them!”
Surely such verses defame the Christian
religion and its central tenets—not to mention create hostility towards
its practitioners.
In short, the argument that some Islamic
books should be banned on grounds that they incite segregation and
violence is applicable to the Koran itself, which unequivocally defames
and creates hostility for unbelievers, that is, non-Muslims.
That said, in the “real world” (as it
currently stands), the very idea of banning the Koran—believed by over a
billion people to be the unalterable word of God—must seem
inconceivable.
For starters, whenever Muslims are pressed
about the violent verses in the Koran, they often take refuge in the
argument that other scriptures of other religions are also replete with
calls to violence and intolerance—so why single out the Koran?
To prove this, Muslim apologists almost
always point to the Hebrew Scriptures, more widely known as the “Old
Testament.” And in fact, the Old Testament is replete with violence and
intolerance—all prompted by the Judeo-Christian God.
The difference between the violent passages in the Koran and those in the Old Testament (as more comprehensively explained here)
is this: the Old Testament is clearly describing historic episodes
whereas the Koran, while also developed within a historical context,
uses generic, open-ended language that transcends time and space,
inciting believers to attack and slay nonbelievers today no less than
yesterday.
Thus in the Old Testament God commands the
Hebrews to fight and kill “Hittites,” “Amorites,” “Canaanites,”
“Perizzites,” “Hivites,” and “Jebusites”—all specific peoples rooted to a
specific time and place; all specific peoples that have not existed for
millennia. At no time did God give an open-ended command for the
Hebrews, and by extension their Jewish descendants, to fight and kill
all “unbelievers.”
To be sure, Muslims argue that the verses of
the Koran also deal with temporal, historical opponents, including the
polytheists of Mecca, and to a lesser extent, the Byzantine and
Sassanian empires.
The problem, however, is that rarely if ever
does the Koran specify who its antagonists are the way the Old Testament
does. Instead, Muslims were (and are) commanded to fight the “People
of the Book,” which Islamic exegesis interprets as people with
scriptures, namely, Christians and Jews—“until they pay the jizya with willing submissiveness and feel themselves utterly subdued” (9:29) and to “slay the idolaters wherever you find them” (9:5).
The two Arabic conjunctions “until” (hata) and “wherever” (haythu)
demonstrate the perpetual and ubiquitous nature of these commandments:
There are still “People of the Book” who have yet to “feel themselves
utterly subdued” (especially all throughout the Americas, Europe, and
Israel) and “idolaters” to be slain “wherever” one looks (especially
Asia and sub-Saharan Africa).
In fact, the salient feature of almost all of
the violent commandments in Islamic scriptures is their open-ended and
generic nature: “Fight them until there is no more chaos and [all] religion belongs to Allah” (Koran 8:39).
This fact will ensure that as long as the
Koran proliferates and is read as God’s literal word, its readers will
continue to exist in a dichotomized world, themselves versus the rest.
Raymond Ibrahim is a Shillman Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center, a Judith Friedman Rosen Writing Fellow at the Middle East Forum and a CBN News contributor. He is the author of Crucified Again: Exposing Islam’s New War on Christians (2013) and The Al Qaeda Reader (2007).
Source: http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/raymond-ibrahim/the-koran-and-eternal-war/
Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.
No comments:
Post a Comment