Ineffable Questions for the Leaders of Islam

One of my Google Alerts turned up an article  at News Blaze purportedly written by two Australian Muslims.  Their names arouse some suspicion: Salem Yalekum and Ashraef Ahmed.  The questions which they propound tend to arouse further doubts.  

At the bottom line, the authors seem to confirm my suspicions in one sentence, and pull back from the precipice in the next. [Emphasis added.]

Reform Islam, protect the faith. Muslim people are now questioning their own faith and want clarification. We want assimilation we do not want to stick out like a sore thumb. We have had enough of the inaction.

Their use of the third person in the first sentence inspires doubt.  Reversion to the first person in the next raises the question: is it style, or is it content.

    There is another crucial tip off: did they quote from an appendix to Craig Winn's The Prophet of Doom.

• "Believers, take neither Jews nor Christians for your friends." (Surah 5:51)
• "Believers, take not Jews and Christians for your friends. They are but friends and protectors to each other."

Islam Awakened has the largest collection of parallel translations known to me; none of them  exactly matched the quote. I tried their quote of 8:36- with the same frustrating results. Those quotes are all over the web, without attribution to the translator.  The meaning transmitted can be justified, but  it appears that someone has selected bits and pieces from several translations and melded them together in the style of Craig Winn.  

    Are the authors reform minded Muslims or agent provocateurs?  I do not have sufficient evidence, though I lean to the latter conclusion.  The time has come to consider some of their questions.

    The fifteen questions in this enumerated list, followed by a very sharp supernumerary question  cause me to conclude that the authors are either Kaffirs  poking Muslims with a sharp stick or Muslims in name only, taking a leap of apostasy.  

1. Why is the Islamic community allowing terrorists to hijack their religion to justify their hideous evil attacks on western countries?

2. What are the true "moderate Muslims" doing to prevent this abuse of our religion by their radical brothers and sisters in Islam?

3. When the Muslim community do nothing except complain about the reaction of the west to the radical elements in Islam, what do we expect them to do?

4. Why are we are doing nothing about them?

5. Isn't it the responsibility of every moderate Muslim to claim ownership of Islam, and openly denounce any Muslim using the Koran to justify their evil acts?

6. Do you agree that when the civilized Islamic community takes control of Islam, people might view us in a different light and we might regain our dignity?

7. Do the Islamic nations agree it should NOT be up to the western nations to clean up the mess left behind by radical Islamists?

8. Do Muslims living in the west totally accept that as a direct result of the inaction of the Islamic community, the west has no option but to protect themselves?

9. Why have Islamic communities failed to protect our religion?

10. Do the true Muslims feel ashamed and embarrassed by the 100,000's of YouTube videos and internet sites where our religious leaders are promoting absolute vile barbaric and evil doctrines in the name of Islam?

11. What are our Islamic leaders doing to protect the name of Islam from these radicals?

12. Why do the Islamic leaders fail to acknowledge these people are the ones totally damaging the name of Islam and turning the west against Islam?

13. What is the Muslim community doing about them or going to do about them and when?

14. When is Islam going to accept responsibility for the evil actions of radical Muslims acting in the name of ALLAH?

15. What does the Koran tell us Muslims about dealing with any Muslim perverting the word of the Koran? 

More so, we ask what Islamic scholars are going to do about the suras in the Koran that incite violence, call for the killing of Jews and Christians.

 

1. They ain't.  Islam was contrived for the purpose of rationalizing, justifying and perpetuating attacks because its founder derived his  wealth and income from razia, ghazwat & extortion. Refer to Islam's Mercenary Mission  for the details. Islam has not been hijacked, it is violent by design.  
2. Passive Muslims do nothing to resist believers because they are pacifists. It is the believers who are armed & dangerous. They have the will  to kill as well as the capacity.  Those pacifist Muslims who abjure jihad  got a label from Moe: hypocrites. See 4:88-89. 
3. What is your alternative?  Will you debate the fine points of fard al-kifaya with the salafists?  On what scriptural basis will you defeat them in debate? Consider what Allah said about Jihad. Consider what Moe said and did about it. How can you argue  against Allah and his Messenger?
4. Because there is nothing you can do  or will do. You are not armed and you lack the initiative to take action. You have neither the will nor the means to remove the salafists from the face of the earth. 
5. How can you condemn  salafists for using the Qur'an for its intended purpose?  The Qur'an was revealed for the purpose of incentivising and perpetuating warfare. 
6. There is no civilized community in Islam. Civilization and Islam are polar opposites.  You do not take control of Islam, it took control of you.  Are you aware of the fact that Islam's loss of dignity is a function of abandoning jihad?  Read the translator's foot note to 2:190, which defines jihad. The sad fact is confirmed in  Sunan Abu Dawud 23.3455. 
7. No, they don't agree that they should "clean up the mess" of the salafists. They are part of the problem, not part of the solution. 
8. No, they don't agree that we have no option but self-defense.  The Islamic position is that kuffar have no right to defend themselves and must submit to Islam.
9. Protect it from what / whom?  From the salafists?  Islam is all about salafism!  Did you read the Qur'an?  It tells you to obey Allah and his Messenger. What did they command you to do?  
10. No, they are not ashamed, they are proud of Islam. 
11. Spewing al-taqiyya to deceive the kuffars, telling us that Islam is "the religion of peace".
12. Because they bought into the promises of Allah, that  it will give you victory and you will dominate the world. 
13. You  will continue to obey them and honor them. 
14. On the 33^rd day of the month of Never.
15. It tells you to wage war against the hypocrites and gather them into Hell along with the kuffar. 

    In  the presence of the western media, they will deny those surahs, claiming that they do not exist.  In the Mosque, absent kuffar, they will continue to preach and teach those violent verses and exhort their congregants to join the jihad.

    The Surahs which command  aggressive conquest, particularly Al-Anfal & At-Taubah, are a permanent part of the Qur'an. They are imperatives which  can not be edited, deleted, abrogated, re-interpreted or ignored.  Allah said:   [Emphasis added.]

• 3:78. And verily, among them is a party who distort the Book with their tongues (as they read), so that you may think it is from the Book, but it is not from the Book, and they say: "This is from Allâh," but it is not from Allâh; and they speak a lie against Allâh while they know it. 
• 6:115. And the Word of your Lord has been fulfilled in truth and in justice. None can change His Words. And He is the All­Hearer, the All­Knower.
• 6:93. And who can be more unjust than he who invents a lie against Allâh, or says: "I have received inspiration," whereas he is not inspired in anything; and who says, "I will reveal the like of what Allâh has revealed." And if you could but see when the Zâlimûn (polytheists and wrong­doers, etc.) are in the agonies of death, while the angels are stretching forth their hands (saying): "Deliver your souls! This day you shall be recompensed with the torment of degradation because of what you used to utter against Allâh other than the truth. And you used to reject His Ayât (proofs, evidences, verses, lessons, signs, revelations, etc.) with disrespect! " 
• 10:64. For them are glad tidings, in the life of the present world (i.e. righteous dream seen by the person himself or shown to others), and in the Hereafter. No change can there be in the Words of Allâh, this is indeed the supreme success. 
• 18:27. And recite what has been revealed to you (O Muhammad ) of the Book (the Qur'ân) of your Lord (i.e. recite it, understand and follow its teachings and act on its orders and preach it to men). None can change His Words, and none will you find as a refuge other than Him.
• 30:30. So set you (O Muhammad ) your face towards the religion of pure Islâmic Monotheism Hanifa (worship none but Allâh Alone) Allâh's Fitrah (i.e. Allâh's Islâmic Monotheism), with which He has created mankind. No change let there be in Khalq­illâk (i.e. the Religion of Allâh Islâmic Monotheism), that is the straight religion, but most of men know not. [Tafsir At­Tabarî, Vol 21, Page 41] 

    Moe said: [Emphasis added.]

•  

  Sahih Bukhari Volume 9, Book 88, Number 174:

  Narrated Sahl bin Sa'd:

  I heard the Prophet saying, "I am your predecessor at the Lake-Fount (Kauthar), and whoever will come to it, will drink from it, and whoever will drink from it, will never become thirsty after that. There will come to me some people whom I know and they know me, and then a barrier will be set up between me and them." Abu Sa'id Al-Khudri added that the Prophet further said: "I will say those people are from me. It will be said, 'You do not know what changes and new things they did after you.' Then I will say, 'Far removed (from mercy), far removed (from mercy), those who changed (the religion) after me! "

    When you deny any verse of the Qur'an, you sign your death warrant.  Reliance of the Traveller o8.7 lists twenty acts & attitudes that entail apostasy.  This is one of them:

• -7- to deny any verse of the Koran or anything which by scholarly consensus (def: b7) belongs to it, or to add a verse that does belong to it;

Item 7 is on  page  615.  Scroll up to 613 to read 08.1 & 9.2 to confirm the penalty.  

    A Muslim who has moral reservations about conquest, terrorism & genocide has no recourse but apostasy because reform is impossible.   You can't improve perfection. 

Sphere: Related Content

Swiss Minaret Ban: Big Deal

Regular readers of my blog posts know that I waste few opportunities to blast Islam with facts. They must be wondering why I have not written about the Nov. 29 referendum which banned new minarets in Switzerland. There are two primary reasons. First, I am not entirely in agreement with the concept. Second, I wanted to let others write first so that I could take the role of clean up writer.

First and foremost, I am opposed to superficial, symbolic attacks which accomplish nothing beyond the counter productive stimulation of Islamic resentment. Beards, burkas & hijabs are symbolic, but they are not more important to the wearer as they are to us. Their value is more than symbolic, they are warning signs. Like a skunk's stripes and a rattle snake's noisy tail, they serve to alert us to the proximity of danger.

Second, I perceive the vote to be a temporary victory. I have little doubt that the result will be overturned in the courts. The vote serves mainly as a signal of rising public awareness of Islam's true nature and the existential threat it poses to Western Civilization.

My readers know that I will take on anyone, without fear or favor. While other writings have been more deserving of criticism, My choice did a better job of clarifying some of the issues involved. Dr. Sami Alrabaa wrote an exclusive for Family Security Matters: Minarets are Symbols of Bigotry. I will quote some good parts, but you really should click the link and read the entire article because the quotes which follow are taken out of context. .

It is also true that huge lavish mosques funded by petrodollars are being constructed to prove that Islam is omnipresent everywhere and Islam – the best religion on earth! – is increasingly being accepted and practiced all over the world.

The huge mosques & soaring minarets are symbols of Islamic supremacism & domination.

Minaret construction is an exhibition of political power spearheaded by Islamists. These “towers” are simply aggressive symbols of fanatic defying power.

Minaret construction has nothing to do with freedom of religion. It is a symbol of bigotry.

If we allow the erection of minarets without offering resistance, our silent acquiescence is a token of surrender. The Swiss electorate decided not to surrender, but they stopped short of effective resistance. They attacked symbolism, not substance.

But when it comes to referendum, the majority in the Western world would also reject Islam as a stone-age “religion.” I am pretty sure that if the Swiss referendum were held in other European countries, the majority would also vote in favor of banning the construction of minarets. The European public is better informed than their self-appointed defenders of Islam.

I am not yet convinced that a majority are fully aware of the nature of Islam. But the Swiss vote may indicate a trend of increasing awareness. Lapidation may be a stone age execution method, but Moe had weapons made of more advanced materials. 610 was hardly part of the stone age.

It is also true that the Swiss and the rest of the world are not against Muslims practicing their own religion in peace like all followers of other religions.

Islam can not be practiced in peace. Jihad is an intrinsic and inseverable part of Islam. Al-Anfal & At-Taubah are permanent parts of Islamic scripture. If we are not against the practice of Islam, then we are passively surrendering.

If, however, people around the globe, especially in the West, read the Koran and Hadith and realize how this religion incites to hatred and violence against non-Muslims, and discrimination against women, they would classify it as an extremist ideology, as politically incorrect and demand banning it like all extremist organizations. Check out “Is Islam a Violent Faith?” and “Women in Hadith.”

Nevertheless, the world community, including Switzerland, accepts Islam as a “religion” and allows its followers to practice it under the principle of religious freedom.

We accept Islam as a "religion" and allow its practice, but if we read Islam's canon of scripture and tradition we would reject it. Will anyone get a clue from those vital paragraphs?

Before the West accepts Islam as a religion it must demand that Muslim states reform Islam; accept/apply universal human rights and religious freedom in their societies.

Preaching hatred and violence must be banned and their perpetrators must be punished. Additionally, the free civilized world must demand from Muslims and their religious institutions and states: Drop all those atrocious passages from your Koran and Hadith if you want to be part of the civilized world.

So Islam must be reformed; the violent passages must be removed from its canon of scripture & tradition. You forgot one, Dr. Alrabaa : Shari'ah. Islamic law reflects Islamic scripture & tradition. How many of those texts exist in book stores and in libraries all over the world? How many exist in computer hard disks and web pages? How do you hope to edit all of them? Who will edit all the copies of Ibn Kathir's Tafsir and Riyad us-saliheen?

Allah tells us in 5:3 & 11:1 that Islam and its scripture are perfected. Perfection can only be defiled, not improved. Allah tells us in 6:115, 10:64 and 30:30 that the Koran and the "religion" of which it is the foundation can not be changed. In Sahih Bukhari 9.78.174 Moe is on record cursing anyone who changes Islam after his death, saying that they will be far removed from mercy. Abu Dawud 23.3455 has Moe saying that if Muslims abandon Jihad in favor of agriculture, "Allah will make disgrace prevail over you, and will not withdraw it until you return to your original religion." [Emphasis added.]


Muslims who would reform Islam risk fatwa as apostates. Muslims Against Sharia is a prime example. Their Koran revision leaves As-Saff 10-13 intact. while Surah At-Taubah has been entirely excised. Surahs 8 & 47 lose context & continuity when the violent ayat are removed.

Perhaps you'd prefer to re-interpret the Koran. But the gates of ijtihad have been closed for 900 years. They are not about to spring open. Who knows the interpretation better than the one who revealed it? His Sunna & Sira show us what the Koran means. What does this mean?

8:39. And fight them until there is no more Fitnah (disbelief and polytheism: i.e. worshipping others besides Allâh) and the religion (worship) will all be for Allâh Alone [in the whole of the world ]. But if they cease (worshipping others besides Allâh), then certainly, Allâh is All-Seer of what they do.

Moe will tell you what it means!

Sahih Bukhari Volume 1, Book 8, Number 387:
Narrated Anas bin Malik:
Allah's Apostle said, "I have been ordered to fight the people till they say: 'None has the right to be worshipped but Allah.' And if they say so, pray like our prayers, face our Qibla and slaughter as we slaughter, then their blood and property will be sacred to us and we will not interfere with them except legally and their reckoning will be with Allah." Narrated Maimun ibn Siyah that he asked Anas bin Malik, "O Abu Hamza! What makes the life and property of a person sacred?" He replied, "Whoever says, 'None has the right to be worshipped but Allah', faces our Qibla during the prayers, prays like us and eats our slaughtered animal, then he is a Muslim, and has got the same rights and obligations as other Muslims have." [Emphasis added.]

Allah's jihad imperatives mean exactly what they say. They can not be edited, and if they were, they would eventually be restored.

Sunan Abu Dawud Book 37, Number 4278:

Narrated AbuHurayrah:

The Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) said: Allah will raise for this community at the end of every hundred years the one who will renovate its religion for it.

The Swiss initiative is symbolic, with no effect beyond giving visibility to the rising tide of rejection of Islam. Islam is an intolerable predator which can not be reformed. That leaves Western Civilization one alternative: Islam must be prohibited by law. Ban the substance, not its symbols.

Dr. Sami Alrabaa asserts that we would reject Islam and favor banning it if we understood it from reading the Koran & hadith. You can test that hypothesis without slogging through thousands of pages of musty text. The ayat most relevant to Islamic aggression, the tafsir which explain them and the ahadith which confirm them are contained in EgregiousAyat.chm, along with the most important part of Shari'ah which codifies them into law.

The practical application of those texts is found in fiqh: rulings by Islamic jurists. FOMIJihad.chm's Jihad in Fiqh chapter presents a significant sample of relevant rulings. For those who prefer the hard slog method, the Muslim Student Association at USC maintains a data base containing three parallel translations of the Koran and four of the six canonical hadith collections.

For those who need the look, feel, permanence & aroma of printed text:

• The Meaning Of The Holy Quran by Abdullah Yusuf Ali (Hardcover - May 2004) Buy new: $24.95 $20.60
• The English Translation of Sahih Al Bukhari With the Arabic Text (9 volume set) by Muhammad Ibn Ismail Bukhari and Muhammad Muhsin Khan (Hardcover - Oct 1996) 2 new from $158.98 2 used from $169.23
• Tafsir Ibn Kathir (10 Volumes; Abridged) by Hafiz Ibn Kathir (Hardcover - Sep 1, 2000) Buy new: $279.50
• Reliance of the Traveller: The Classic Manual of Islamic Sacred Law Umdat Al-Salik by Ahmad Ibn Lulu Ibn Al-Naqib and Noah Ha Mim Keller (Hardcover - Jul 1, 1997) Buy new: $29.95 $25.60

Sphere: Related Content

Its Time to Face Reality

Regular readers of these posts know that I am an equal opportunity offender, telling it as I see it without fear or favor. This time I tear off a few pieces from Don't Let ''Allahu Akbar'' Become A Pejorative by Jordan Sekulow. [Original at Huffington Post.] As usual, I will intersperse my comments among excerpts in block quote format.

Islam continues to linger at a crossroads. After the tragic events of 9/11, the free world has taken pains to differentiate their War on Terror from notions of a war on Islam. We have repeatedly called Islamic terrorists "extremists" that only represent a small minority within the Islamic faith. Considering, however, recent news involving Islamic places of worship -- such as the mosque raids and revealed ties between several imams and terrorist cells -- the time is ripe for innocent Muslim-Americans to stand up and prevent "Allahu Akbar" from becoming a pejorative. In particular, peaceful, innocent adherents to the faith should more strongly challenge members of its leadership who openly condone acts of violence.

We did not start this war; Islam started it in 623. It is a war of Islam against all Kafir. The declaration includes five verses in the Qur'an: 8:39, 8:60, 8:65, 9:29 & 9:123. Those verses command fighting pagans, building and equipping an army to intimidate potential victims, urging Muslims to fight, fighting "people of the book" and fighting disbelievers, the closest first. The commands in 8:39 & 9:29 are confirmed by hadith: Sahih Bukhari 1.8.367 and codified in Reliance of the Traveller, Book O 9.8 & 9.9.

Terrorism is not an enemy, it is a tactic, sanctified by 3:151 & 8:12 and exemplified by 33:26 & 59.2. The founder of Islam was a terrorist, by his own admission: "made victorious with terror" and "Allah made me victorious by awe" . Moe's recitation and sunna set the standard of Islam; terrorism is the rule, not the exception. Terrorists are zealous believers, obeying Allah & emulating Moe, not extremists.

Passive Muslims, who neither approve of, participate in nor support Jihad are hypocrites, not believers. Muslims are explicitly forbidden to question their leaders in the manner suggested.

O8.7

• -4- to revile Allah or His messenger (Allah bless him and give him peace);

• -6- to be sarcastic about Allah's name, His command, His interdiction, His promise, or His threat;

• -7- to deny any verse of the Koran or anything which by scholarly consensus (def: b7) belongs to it, or to add a verse that does belong to it;

• -14- to deny the obligatory character of something which by the consensus of Muslims (ijma`, def: B7) is part of Islam, when it is well known as such, like the prayer (salat) or even one rak'a from one of the five obligatory prayers, if there is no excuse (def: u2.4);

• -16- to revile the religion of Islam;

• -19- to be sarcastic about any ruling of the Sacred Law;

Allah made the matter explicitly clear.

33:36. It is not for a believer, man or woman, when Allâh and His Messenger have decreed a matter that they should have any option in their decision. And whoever disobeys Allâh and His Messenger, he has indeed strayed in a plain error.

Allah decreed the matter and Moe confirmed it. Then, he exemplified it with a battle every six weeks for the last nine years of his life. No Muslim has a right to question it.

So where is the condemnation? Where is the outrage? Sure, we hear from ordinary Muslims who express their disgust at these attacks, but why do we hear nothing from Islamic leaders? While the controversial Council on American Islamic Relations condemned Hasan's actions, we also learned that a frequent speaker at CAIR events, Zaid Shakir, said that, "Islam doesn't permit us to hijack airplanes filled with civilian people. If you hijack an airplane filled with the 82nd Airborne, that's something else."

An Imam or a King would write himself out of Islam, signing his death warrant by condemning what Allah commanded and Moe exemplified.

There is no better time for Muslims to engage in what Salman Rushdie called a "Muslim Reformation". Muslims, especially Muslim-Americans, should unite and collectively take back their religion. They should demand that their leaders not only condemn acts of terrorism and jihadist violence, but also actively expel radicals from their mosques. More importantly, if leaders fail to take the appropriate actions, they should be removed. Covering up true problems within the faith will backfire -- just ask Catholic leaders. Democracy's War on Islam is exactly the war Islamic terrorists have been hoping to ignite, and we must not let them succeed.

Muslims can not "take back their religion", they have maintained possession of it; it has not been hijacked nor has it been twisted or perverted. Muslim leaders can not condemn what Allah commanded them to do and Moe exemplified for them to emulate.

The faith is the problem; it is evil by design. The relationship between Allah and the Muslims is master: slave. Allah purchased the Muslims with admission to Paradise so they fight in his cause, kill and are killed. Don't take my word for it, read 9:111. Its all about getting the top 20% of the spoils for Moe. Don't take my word for it, read 8:1 & 8:41.

Islam can not be reformed. Perfection can only be defiled, not improved. Allah's word says "fight them". Allah's word says "cast terror". Allah's word can not be changed.

6:115. And the Word of your Lord has been fulfilled in truth and in justice. None can change His Words. And He is the All­Hearer, the All­Knower.

10:64. For them are glad tidings, in the life of the present world (i.e. righteous dream seen by the person himself or shown to others), and in the Hereafter. No change can there be in the Words of Allâh, this is indeed the supreme success

18:27. And recite what has been revealed to you (O Muhammad ) of the Book (the Qur'ân) of your Lord (i.e. recite it, understand and follow its teachings and act on its orders and preach it to men). None can change His Words, and none will you find as a refuge other than Him.

30:30. So set you (O Muhammad ) your face towards the religion of pure Islâmic Monotheism Hanifa (worship none but Allâh Alone) Allâh's Fitrah (i.e. Allâh's Islâmic Monotheism), with which He has created mankind. No change let there be in Khalq­illâh (i.e. the Religion of Allâh Islâmic Monotheism), that is the straight religion, but most of men know not. [Tafsir At­Tabarî, Vol 21, Page 41] [Emphasis added for clarity.]

If that is not iron clad enough to convince you, Moe cursed anyone who would change it; without mercy, you are destined for the fire.

[...]"I will say those people are from me. It will be said, 'You do not know what changes and new things they did after you.' Then I will say, 'Far removed (from mercy), far removed (from mercy), those who changed (the religion) after me! "[...] Sahih Bukhari 9.88.174 [Emphasis added for clarity.]

Sphere: Related Content