هل الإسلام دين إرهابي يدعو لقتل الغربيين؟

Does Islam Call for Killing Westerners؟
Mustafa Eljaili, PhD, Defense Language Institute, Monterey California

The question may seem hostile or inappropriate, but it is crucial and needs to be openly and objectively addressed. The nonstop arbitrary killings of innocent people by Muslim extremists, accompanied by the ability of these extremists to attract growing numbers of educated youth worries millions of people around the globe.

To lead a focused discussion and to detect the practical intents of the extremists, we will pose two simple and direct questions to be answered, supposedly, by an Islamic state applying the Sharia laws. (1) Is fighting Jihad an essential obligation in Islam (2) Are Christians, Jews, and atheists, second-class citizens in the Islamic state

Certainly, answers to both questions in the predominant understanding of Islam as backed by all traditional authoritative institutions like the Islamic World League, the Azhar and other Islamic universities, and the ministries of religions, is “yes”.

Jihad is an essential duty; the Qur’an says: “Fight them; Allah will punish them by your hands and will disgrace them and give you victory over them and satisfy the breasts of a believing people. 9: 14”. Prophet Mohamed said: “Whoever dies without an intention of making jihad or invasion, dies with a portion of hypocrisy in his heart” (4).

As to the second question, the Qur’an strictly prohibits the Muslims to seek advocacy and alliance with non-Muslims; “O you who have believed, do not take the Jews and the Christians as allies. They are [in fact] allies of one another. And whoever is an ally to them among you - then indeed, he is [one] of them. 5: 51”. Also, the Qur’an says: “Fight those who do not believe in Allah or in the Last Day and who do not consider unlawful what Allah and His Messenger have made unlawful and who do not adopt the religion of truth from those who were given the Scripture … 9: 29”. Thus, conventional Islam accepts jihad, and approves inequality between Muslims and non-Muslims.

Nonetheless, the greater majority of Muslims have, for very long, adopted ways not to apply these strict and clear texts. Many modernist writers call for a separation between religion and policy; that is operating the state on secular bases, and limiting belief to individual practice. Some refute the texts by quoting verses of a contrary meaning that are on naskh (disabled as rules, as we will explain shortly) such as “Let there be no compulsion in religion: Truth stands out clear from Error. 2: 256”. Others claim to disprove the authority and clarity of the texts, which makes no coherent point, given that Prophet Mohamed had already illustrated the texts by practically applying them on real life.

As a matter of fact, the ISIS, al-Qaida, and the Muslim Brothers justify many of their cruel actions by reciting scripts of Qur’an or sayings of Prophet Mohamed. For example, the saying of the Prophet “I came to you with the slaughtering!” is sighted in all basic reference books, and so is the approval of political assassinations, and the killing of whoever hurts Allah and His Messenger. Al-Nawawi said: "That who do not cast-off the non-Muslims, like the Christians, doubt their infidelity, or defend their beliefs, is also an infidel, even if he showed with that Islam”. The Quran says: “And whoever desires other than Islam as religion - never will it be accepted from him, and he, in the Hereafter, will be among the losers. 3: 85” (5).

In short, the clergy and the traditional institutions of Islam cannot defy the extremists’ arguments simply because their only difference from the terrorist groups is that the latter put the ideas to action, and hence, push the issues to their inevitable conclusion. The Islamic modernists, on the other hand, cannot defeat the extremists’ arguments, for they, right from the beginning depend non-religious logic and sources. Following fanatic logic, those modernists are in themselves targets of Jihad.

A convincing theses to review in this short account, is by Ustath Mahmoud Mohamed Taha, the founder of a big intellectual movement in Sudan. Unlike other Islamic modernists, he relies solely on Qur’an and sayings of the Prophet, and he applies what he calls for and so do his followers to a large extent. He, alone, wrote more than thirty books, and now the publications of his followers have already reached thousands.

The Qur’an, explains Taha, has two distinct approaches. The first is the Meccan that was revealed earlier in Mecca, when Islam was just starting and Muslims were only a few, calling for peace, freedom and equality. The second is the Medinan Qur’an that was publicized later after the Muslims were opposed, fought and forced to migrate to Medina, enacting jihad, inequalities, and the buildup of capital.

The Meccan verses declare the principles of Islam. They call for peace: “And Allah invites to the Home of Peace and guides whom He wills to a straight path. 10:25” and advocate freedom of opinion “Invite to the way of your Lord with wisdom and good instruction, and argue with them in a way that is best. 16: 125”. Meccan verses also address equality between men and women before the law “And due to the women is similar to what is expected of them. 2: 228” and plea for equal distribution of resources “And they ask you what they should spend. Say, ‘The excess’ [beyond needs]. 2: 219”. These are only a few to quickly show that the Meccan Qur’an came with the original principles of Islam.

The Medinan Qur’an, on the other hand, negates – put on naskh-- these principles (of peace, freedom and equality) and replaces them with the branches that better served the seventh Century reality. The Medinan Quran declared jihad “And prepare against them whatever you are able of power and of steeds of war by which you may terrify the enemy of Allah and your enemy. 8: 60”. It placed men as guardians over women “… and the share of a male, is equal to the share of two females. 4:11”, and allowed the growth of capital, where that Zakat [annual taxes] is about 2.5% of the total capital. Because the Medinan verses came later, they concluded the revelation and formulated the conventional understanding of Islam.

Taha introduced the concept "rule of time" to mean that the legislations are responses to social demands. The Qur’an says: “He has ordained for you of religion what He enjoined upon Noah and that which We have revealed to you, [O Muhammad], and what We enjoined upon Abraham and Moses and Jesus - to establish the religion and not be divided therein. 42: 13” meaning that the change is always in the laws in response to the social needs, dictated by the “rule of time”. What was accepted in the law of Prophet Adam, explains Taha, was banned in the teachings of Noah, and what were teachings in the Torah of Moses were unlawful in the Sharia of Mohamed.
As such, Taha tells that the teachings of the Medinan Qur’an allowing war, guardianship, and inequalities are not suitable for today. He based his doctrine of a transfer from the Medinan texts to the Meccan texts upon an understanding as demonstrated and told by Prophet Mohamed. The message of Islam began with the principle assets (peace, freedom and equality) and were in action for the first thirteen years. Then, when the Muslims got harassed, tortured, and endangered, they were ordered to migrate to Medina, where the assets were disabled (as rules) and replaced by the branches (i.e., war, autocracy and capitalism), as we said, to cater for the primitive social needs of the time.

In 1953, Taha proclaimed “The small world in which humanity lives is a single geographical entity. Fast modern transportation and communication media have connected its distant parts in such a way that time and space have shrunk. … Whoever traces the evolution of life will clearly see that the global unity is the final destiny when its time comes; it is just a matter of time. The League of Nations, following World War II was a practical step in that direction. The United Nations is as such another step. Still, however, between us and the global unity are a number of many stretched steps”.(2)

It is natural then according to the "rule of time" to expect conflicts such as the bloody civil wars and the many tragic terrorist attacks as they represent a costly price for eliminating the barriers towards global unity. That is why, since an early time, Taha warned against the Islamic terrorism as an expected global hazard: “Fanaticism that is rapidly spreading over the Islamic world has to be confronted with strong convictions that uncover its fallacies, and immunize people against its mix-up.” (3).

Given that Taha was tried for apostasy and executed in January 18, 1985 only because of his ideas, and that this was masterminded by the Muslim Brothers in Sudan buoyed by the Azhar, the Muslim World League, and all the traditional Islamic institutions, proves that these institutions do not have an understanding, let alone a solution, to the problem of terrorism.

(1) “The Noble Quran” Translation, QURAN.COM. 2015
(2) Mahmoud Mohamed Taha (1974) as the second of a series of letters and articles book, Omdurman.
(3) Republican Brothers (1980) "Fanaticism Threatens the Security and Unity of Nations", Omdurman.
(4) Muslim, Muslim ibn al-Hajjaj Qushayri Alnisabure (2006/1427) Sahih Muslim. Dar Alkhair.
(5) Nawawi, Abu Zakaria Yahya bin Sharaf (1991/1412) Rawdat Attalibin. Islamic Office.


Mustafa Eljaili, PhD, Obtained PhD from Clark University (1988), taught in Khartoum University and Taiz University. Worked as an Academic Consultant at the Embassy of Qatar, Washington DC, and finally an Associate Professor at the Defense Language Institute (DoD), Monterey California, for the last 12 years.