Judicial Hypocrisy in India: Critical Update

Update!! New information has been discovered which I was not able to find at the time of the original publication of this article.

BNET ran a Times of India article dated April 17, '10, which reports that India's Supreme Court ruled in favor of banning a book titled "Islam A Concept of Political World Invasion by Muslims".

Upon further research, I found that the article heralds the finalization of a ruling issued earlier this year. I also discovered two resources which should prove to be of inestimable value in the search for truth.

• Mark Humphrys posted this link to the text of Islam, a concept of political world invasion by Muslims by R.V. Bhasin (2003) .
• V. Sundaram uttered and published a seven page analysis of the injustice performed by the Supreme Court of India in this case.

Particular complaint was made, illegally, according to Sundaram, of the author's quotes from the Qur'an and his interpretation of their meaning. The court appointed a special master to translate the Qur'an for them. I found that chapter 7 contains a quote of 9:29 which, while imperfect, transmits the essential meaning of the verse without distortion. Chapter 15 contains additional quotes.

After examining the second listed chapter, I find that the quotes are sufficiently full and accurate to convey their meaning. I also find this among the concluding paragraphs. It speaks directly to the issue involved in the ban.

Whereas there are yet many more Ayats that go on to speak against the non-believers in Islam. India having declared itself a secular country believes also in guarding the religious feelings of the minority communities, The Constitution of India and many laws made thereunder are specially enacted to keep the internal atmosphere within the country free of communal tensions. 1 have therefore laboured to keep away many of of the positively provocative Ayats to which all Muslims must owe their allegiance. Hence, while it is possible to add to the above number of 16 Ayats, material declared in Quaran as binding to the Muslims yet it may not be conducive for a non-Muslim writing this book to state more than what 1 have done. Indeed, It is possible for many critics to draw my own chosen path not to have included them in this publication for the reason that such further inclusion could cause bitterness in the society comprising of Hindus and Muslims living in India.

I find in chapter 16 that 18:22 is mis-cited. Other than that, the quotes are reasonably accurate. I find further that my guess that the author was influenced by the Calcutta Qur'an Petition appears to be vindicated. I presume that the book was written in another language and translated into English.

I can not dispute such of the author's conclusions as I have encountered in my brief survey of a few chapters. I am more convinced that the book was banned unjustly; the ban should have been reversed on appeal.

The rough translation and selection of background and foreground colors make the book difficult to read. In my opinion, it is well worth reading and ought to receive a wide audience.
-------------------------

DNA reports that the Bombay High Court upheld a state ban on the publication of Islam — A concept of Political World Invasion by RV Bhasin.

Freedom of expression granted by the Constitution, the bench said, should not be used to trigger “senseless destruction of lives and property and breach of public order”.

If a book describing Islamic doctrines and practices is judged to trigger violence, then what about the Qur'an, which sanctifies and mandates genocidal terrorism? The Calcutta Qur'an Petition was arbitrarily dismissed,. yet this case upholds this book banning. Which is worse, a book which perpetuates an order to engage in aggressive warfare or a book which describes its effects? It is obvious that the wrong book was banned.

Sphere: Related Content

Jihad-in-Islam-by-Maududi

S. Abul A'la Maududi gave a lecture about Jihad in Lahore, April 13, 1939, Jihad In Islam. Sayed means that Maududi was a direct descendant of one of Moe's daughters. He was a theologian and philosopher who founded Jamaat-e-Islami.

His major work is Tafhim al-Qur’an which explains the meaning of the Qur'an. A quick survey of his tafsir should convince you that he knew his subject matter. [Qur'an links in this post are to Tafhim al-Qur’an.]

Jihad In Islam brings up some important concepts which deserve careful consideration. On the first page, Maududi brings up the concept of Jihad, and turns it against Islam's detractors with a reverse projection. He accuses the West of making war for economic gain, contrasting that with Jihad in the way of Allah, for the holy purpose of making things right in the world. Of course, he overlooks Moe's mercenary motivation, which was revealed by Allah in 8:67.

On the second page, Maududi punches a large hole through the fiction of Islamic passivity. [Emphasis added.]

We have now officially denounced armed. struggle of all sorts just to convince and satisfy our overlords. Now the term Jihad only refers to word-war through spoken or written word.

Another significant revelation, on the third page, could be overlooked too easily. A misunderstanding of the nature of Islam is partially responsible for misunderstanding Jihad.

The first misunderstanding is that Islam is taken as a religion in the conventional I sense of the term ‘religion’.

Maududi proceeds to define that conventional sense. Pay close attention to this.

Religion as a common term means nothing more than a hotch potch of some beliefs, prayers and rituals.

Maududi told his audience that, under this definition, religion should be "a private affair". ... "There is no occasion- and justification to take up arms in this process. "

If we quit reading there, we miss the message. On the next page, Maududi deflates the balloon.

...if Islam is taken as a conventional type of religion, the institution of Jihad cannot be justified.

So why was Maududi lecturing about Jihad?

In fact Islam is neither a religion, nor the Muslims are a nation in the conventional sense of these terms. Islam, instead, is a revolutionary concept and ideology which seeks to change and revolutionise the world social order and reshape it according to its own concept and ideals.

This concept is further developed beginning on page 9.

It is the .most important, rather fundamental ideal of the Muslims, the most outstanding revolutionary party to sacrifice its life and and all the resources at its command to fight, against the evil forces. of the world, not to take their place but completely eliminate the evil and to enforce the word of Allah all over the world.

Islam is a revolutionary program to impose itself upon the entire world by force if necessary. But there is more. At the end of the page 10, another important concept is introduced: Allah's sovereignty.

No one has the right to become self-appointed ruler and order and prohibit whatever he likes on his own volition and authority.

Any ruler not ruling by the Qur'an is an evil tyrant who must be overthrown. The following verses are cited to support these ideas: 26:151-152, 18:28, 11:18-19, 12:39, 28:38, 79:24, 2:258 and 41:15.

Page 15 of the lecture spells out the intention of Islam with some clarity. [Emphasis added.]

...Islam is not merely a religious creed or a set of rituals but it is a comprehensive system that tends to annihilate all tyrannical and evil systems in the world and to enforce its own reformation programme which it deems best in the interest of mankind.

Any system that is not Islamic is necessarily tyrannical and evil. Islam decides what is good for us and imposes it by force of arms, annihilating our system of government and way of life.

On page 16 we learn that the purpose of the Party of Allah is

to eliminate the hegemony of un-Islamic aystems replacing them with a balanced social and cultural order called the Word of Allah by the holy Quran,

To support this, Maududi cites 3:110, which describes Muslims as the best of peoples. Sahih Bukhari 6.60.80 explains what makes them the best: bringing us with chains on our necks until we embrace Islam.

In the lecture's next page, Maududi cites three ayat as the scriptural basis for Jihad: 2:193, 8:73 and 9:33. On that basis, the Party of Allah must "capture power".

On page 18, Maududi explains why the Muslims living among kuffar is compelled to strive for "the extirpation of the rule opposed to their ideology and bring their own ideology into power". They can't tolerate the ideological conflict.

Maududi restates Islam's strategic objective on page 20.

...that the objective of ‘Jihad’ in Islam is to liquidate the suzerainty of an un-Islamic system of life and replace it with the rule of Islam.

We learn next that Islam must be expanded, that it must be imposed globally. This is made plain on page 21.

...no State can fully implement her ideology without expanding it to her neighbouring States.

Maududi presents the example of Islam's founder, who invited the rulers of neighboring states to embrace Islam and "resolved to take military action" against those who refused. It should become clear to you that Islam is violent, not peaceful; that it seeks to impose its will upon the entire world, destroying our way of life in the process. Islam is waging an existential conflict against us; what are we going to do about it?

While I urge everyone to read translations of the original sources: the Qur'an & Sahih Bukhari and their derivatives such as Reliance of the Traveller and Ibn Kathir's Tafsir, much can be learned from Jihad In Islam, Ibn Khaldun's Muqaddimah and The Religious and Moral Doctrine On Jihad and from many secondary sources. “Radical Islam: A Threat America Must Take Seriously” will be web cast Saturday, April 24, '10 from 10 to 5 EDT.

Sphere: Related Content

Rush: Thank you, Mr President

In case you missed this:



'Nuff said!

Sphere: Related Content

Jihad in the Way of Allah

This Facebook page was linked on the wall of the Ban Islam!! Group. The image above is an actual, unedited clip from a screen shot of the Wall of
Jihad in the way of Allah is best way which boasts 76 fans.

That constitutes advocacy of waging war against anyone who rejects Islam and refuses to submit to extortion. This exposes Islam for exactly what it is: a piratical predator.

Jihad is defined in Islamic law as war against non-Muslims. Jizya is a humiliating extortion demanded from conquered "people of the book". The subject is introduced in Surah at-Taubah 29.

Now there is another boycott movement, calling for a boycott of Facebook from June 9-11 if they do not remove all of the anti-Islamic groups. The group boasts 10,855 members. Meanwhile, a five month old post about a boycott protesting the Qur'an Toilet Paper Group is still getting hits.

Sphere: Related Content

Syria Spews al-Taqeyya

On April 12, 2010, Syria's U.N. Ambassador addressed the 14^th session of the Ad Hoc Committee on Measures to eliminate international terrorism on behalf of the OIC. I have selected three crucial excerpts from his prepared remarks.

It has been very well known to the international community that the OIC Group strongly condemns all acts and practices of terrorism and remains convinced that terrorism, irrespective of its motivation, objectives, forms and manifestations, committed by whomsoever and wherever, can never be justified. [Pg. 2]

That statement needs to be juxtaposed with another which came later in the speech.

To achieve this objective the OIC Group supports a comprehensive strategy to combat terrorism that must address the root causes of terrorism including unlawful use of force, aggression, foreign occupation, festering international disputes, denial of the right of peoples living under foreign occupation to self-determination, political and economic injustices, and political marginalization and alienation.[Pg.3]

First they condemn terrorism, then they make excuses for it. The cause of Islamic terrorism is not included in that list. Islamic doctrine is the cause of Islamic terrorism. Islam's strategic objective is total world conquest; to impose its system upon the entire world. Terrorism is a tactic in pursuit of that strategic objective.

Brigadier S.K. Malik wrote The Qur'anic Concept of War as a training manual for the Pakistani Army. The book reflects Pakistan's military doctrine. Pay close attention to this quote from page 59.

Terror struck into the hearts of the enemies is not only a means, it is the end in itself. Once a condition of terror into the opponents heart is obtained, hardly anything is left to be achieved. It is the point where the means and the end meet and merge. Terror is not a means of imposing decision upon the enemy; it is me decision we wish to impose upon him.

Another quote from the third page of the prepared remarks contains the camel excrement which provides boilerplate for several U.N. resolutions.

The OIC Group reaffirms that terrorism should not be associated with any religion, race, faith, theology, values, culture, society or group. NO religion or religious doctrine encourages or inspires acts of terrorism, and, thus, none should be portrayed as such.

The pernicious institution which perfected terrorism continues to deny the connection, assuming that we are too stupid, ignorant and gullible to perceive the truth. Allah said that he would cast terror into the hearts of disbelievers.

• We shall cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve,...[3:151]
• ...I will cast terror into the hearts of those who have disbelieved, so strike them over the necks, and smite over all their fingers and toes. ... [8:12]
• ...Verily, you (believers in the Oneness of Allâh - Islâmic Monotheism) are more awful as a fear in their (Jews of Banî An-Nadîr) breasts than Allâh. ...[59:13]

Allah cast terror into the hearts of the disbelievers.

• ...Allâh brought them down from their forts and cast terror into their hearts, (so that) a group (of them) you killed, and a group (of them) you made captives.[33:26]
• ...But Allâh's (Torment) reached them from a place whereof they expected it not, and He cast terror into their hearts, so that they destroyed their own dwellings with their own hands and the hands of the believers. Then take admonition, O you with eyes (to see). [59:2]

Take a close look at the last sentence in 59:2 )Then take admonition, O you with eyes) another ayeh will make its meaning crystal clear.

• So if you gain the mastery over them in war, punish them severely in order to disperse those who are behind them, so that they may learn a lesson. [8:59]
  

Muslims are commanded to punish their victims severely in order to disperse those behind them; observers are told to take admonition. Got a clue yet?
I have a clue for you, it is found in Abdullah Yusuf Ali's translation of 8:60.

• Against them make ready your strength to the utmost of your power, including steeds of war, to strike terror into (the hearts of) the enemies, of God and your enemies, and others besides, whom ye may not know, but whom God doth know....

"To strike terror into (the hearts of) the enemies"; the purpose of maximal armed force. I have another clue for the clueless; Moe bragged about his practice of terrorism.

• ...1. Allah made me victorious by awe, (by His frightening my enemies) for a distance of one month's journey.... [Sahih Bukhari 1.7.331]
• ...I have been made victorious with terror (cast in the hearts of the enemy),... [Sahih Bukhari 4.52.220]

Lets put the two horns of this dilemma together for easy examination.

• "NO religion or religious doctrine encourages or inspires acts of terrorism,"
• "We shall cast terror"
• "I will cast terror"
• "Allâh ... cast terror into their hearts"
• " a group (of them) you killed, and a group (of them) you made captives."
• "He cast terror into their hearts"
• "victorious by awe"
• "made victorious with terror"

If you believe that Islam and terrorism are not cause and effect, please explain your belief in a comment and tell us your IQ score. How stupid must one be to believe such absurd al-taqeyya?

Sphere: Related Content