Blogging the Qur’an: Sura 9, “Repentance,” verses 14-28
posted at 8:00 am on November 25, 2007 by Robert Spencer
In March 2006, a twenty-two-year-old Iranian student named Mohammed Reza Taheri-azar drove an SUV onto the campus of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, deliberately trying to kill people and succeeding in injuring nine. After the incident, he seemed singularly pleased with himself, smiling and waving to crowds after a court appearance at which he explained that he was “thankful for the opportunity to spread the will of Allah.” Later he wrote six letters to the Daily Tar Heel, the student newspaper of the University of North Carolina, explaining why he did it. In one of them, he gives a list of “Qur’an Notes Relevant to 3/3/06 Attack.”
These include “Instructions and guidelines for fighting and killing in the cause of Allah.” Under “Reasons for fighting in the cause of Allah,” he cited verses 14 and 15 of sura 9, explaining that fight was “to release anger and rage from Allah’s followers’ hearts.” And indeed, in those verses Allah promises that as he punishes the unbelievers at the hands of the believers and covers them with shame, he will “heal the breasts of believers, and still the indignation of their hearts.” Ibn Juzayy and the Tafsir al-Jalalayn, however, focus on the portion of the verse that says that “Allah turns to anyone He wills.” Ibn Juzayy explains: “Allah will turn to some of those unbelievers and so that they become Muslims.” That decision, as we have seen, is all Allah’s. Allah will not leave bereft those who “strive with might and main” (v. 16). The word used here is jahadu (جَاهَدُواْ), a form of “jihad,” as it is rendered here.
Then verses 17-22 declare that the idolaters or polytheists (mushrikeena, ْمُشْرِكِينَ, from mushrik, polytheist) are not worthy to take care of the Sacred Mosque in Mecca – although at the time of the revelation of this sura the pagans still control that mosque. They control it, but as comments Ibn Juzayy, “they do not have either the right or the duty to do so. They inhabit them through forceful occupation and injustice.” They have no right to the mosque because, according to Ibn Kathir and, indeed, generalized Islamic tradition, Abraham himself built it as a shrine to Allah.
Verses 23-28 tell the believers to separate from and fight the unbelievers. The believers should cut ties even with their own families if they are not Muslims (verses 23-24). Says Ibn Kathir: “Allah commands shunning the disbelievers, even if they are one’s parents or children, and prohibits taking them as supporters if they choose disbelief instead of faith.” Ibn Juzayy notes that v. 24, with its warning that one should value nothing in this life higher than Allah, is “a threat to anyone who prefers his family, property or home to emigration and jihad.” “Emigration” refers to the move to Medina which at that time was incumbent upon all true believers.
Verses 25 and 26 refer to the Battle of Hunayn, which took place after Muhammad conquered Mecca. Once he was the master of Mecca, there was one additional great obstacle between him and mastery of all Arabia. Malik ibn ‘Awf, a member of the Hawazin tribe of the city of Ta’if, south of Mecca, began to assemble a force to fight the Muslims. The people of Ta’if had rejected Muhammad and treated him shabbily when he presented his prophetic claim to them ten years earlier. They were historic rivals of the Quraysh, and viewed the conversion of the latter to Islam with disdain. Malik assembled a force and marched out to face the Muslims; Muhammad, according to Ibn Ishaq, met him with an army 12,000 strong, and said, in an echo of v. 25 (“your great numbers delighted you”), “We shall not be worsted today for want of numbers.”
The two forces met at a wadi – a dry riverbed — called Hunayn, near Mecca. Malik and his men had arrived first and taken up positions that gave them an immense tactical advantage. The Muslims, despite their superior numbers, were routed. As they broke ranks and fled, Muhammad called out: “Where are you going, men? Come to me. I am God’s apostle. I am Muhammad the son of ‘Abdullah.” Some of the Muslims did take heart, and gradually the tide began to turn – although with tremendous loss of life on both sides.
The Muslims eventually prevailed, wiping out the last major force that stood between the Prophet of Islam and mastery of Arabia. After the battle Muhammad received another revelation explaining that the Muslims had won because of supernatural help (v. 26). With Malik defeated, the Muslims later conquered Ta’if with little resistance. On his way into the city, Muhammad stopped under a tree, and, finding the property to his liking, sent word to the owner: “Either come out or we will destroy your wall.” But the owner refused to appear before Muhammad, so the Muslims indeed destroyed his property. Endeavoring, however, to win the tribesmen of Ta’if to Islam, Muhammad was lenient toward them. In his distribution of the booty, he also favored some of the recent converts among the Quraysh, hoping to cement their allegiance to Islam. His favoritism, however, led to grumbling. One Muslim approached him boldly: “Muhammad, I’ve seen what you have done today…I don’t think you have been just.”
The Prophet of Islam was incredulous. “If justice is not to be found with me then where will you find it?” Indeed, for Islam Muhammad’s words and deeds are the highest pattern of conduct, forming the only absolute standard: anything sanctioned by the example of the Prophet is good.
According to Ibn Juzayy, the promise that “Allah will turn to whomever he wills” (v. 27) means that “the tribe of Hawazin who had fought the Muslims at Hunayn became Muslim.”
The unbelievers are unclean, and thus must not enter the Sacred Mosque (v. 28). Shi’ites in particular regard this as a matter of ritual purity. The Ayatollah Sistani, whom many observers have identified as a beacon of democratic hope for Iraq, likely does not envision a state in which unbelievers have equal rights with believers, since he puts non-Muslims on the level of other impure things:
The following ten things are essentially najis [impure, unclean]:
1. Urine
2. Faeces
3. Semen
4. Dead body
5. Blood
6. Dog
7. Pig
8. Kafir [unbeliever]
9. Alcoholic liquors
10. The sweat of an animal who persistently eats najasat
This idea is based on v. 28. The Tafsir al-Jalalayn says that the polytheists are “impure because of their inward foulness,” and As-Suyuti adds that some say “they are actually impure so that they must do ghusl [the full ablution] if they become Muslim and one must do wudu’ [the partial ablution] after shaking hands with them.” As-Suyuti also notes that this verse forbids unbelievers to enter the Sacred Mosque in Mecca, although he points out that “Abu Hanifa says that People of the Book are not prevented because it is specific to idolaters.” Because of Muhammad’s prohibition on non-Muslims in Arabia, it is unlikely that a member of the People of the Book would be able to enter Mecca today.
Next week: The command to fight against and subjugate Jews and Christians.
(Here you can find links to all the earlier “Blogging the Qur’an” segments. Here is a good Arabic/English Qur’an, here are two popular Muslim translations, those of Abdullah Yusuf Ali and Mohammed Marmaduke Pickthall, along with a third by M. H. Shakir. Here is another popular translation, that of Muhammad Asad. And here is an omnibus of ten Qur’an translations.)
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
DO YOUR HOMEWORK BETTER, HOT AIR!
.
It’s really unfortunate that you chose the photo of the of the most senior and most influential Shia Ayatollah in IRAQ as the poster boy for this article, rather than one of the nutter Ayatollahs of IRAN.
.
This Iraqi gentleman, who’s name escapes me at the moment, has been pivotal in keeping the lid on Shia reaction to the Sunni insurgency in Iraq. Continuously counseling moderation and non-violence, he’s probably the one man who prevented out-and-out civil war in Iraq, when Al Qaeda did their best to provoke it with their Shia shrine and mosque bombings.
.
He’s also the Shia leader who counseled the Shia Iraqis to have faith in Democracy and get involved and vote in the elections.
.
HE is the kind of moderate Muslim leader who will be pivotal in adopting Democracy and reforming Islam, if that actually does happen.
DavePa on November 25, 2007 at 8:17 AM
DavePa:
Please blame me, not Hot Air. That is a photo of the Ayatollah Sistani, who is mentioned in this week’s Q-Blog. I suggested to Bryan that that photo be used, and even sent it to him.
Why?
Well, first off because he is mentioned in the Q-Blog, in connection with verse 28, which declares unbelievers unclean. He himself holds the view that unbelievers are unclean, as the link to his website above demonstrates. Perhaps I failed to draw out adequately the implications of this. It isn’t just a ritual or religious concept. Those who are considered unclean can never be accorded the full rights of citizens in an Islamic state. Thus Sistani’s view bodes ill for Iraqi Christians, over half of whom have now left the country because of persecution at the hands of others who likewise considered them unclean. (Some are, most certainly, returning now.)
Please look around Sistani’s website. I have long contended that there is no indication that he supported the democracy project out of some deeply held Jeffersonianism, but solely because the Shia have an absolute majority in Iraq, and he saw one-man one-vote as a chance for the Shia to gain political power in Iraq — political power they had long been denied. He refused on several occasions to meet with Paul Bremer — I suspect in part because of his views on the uncleanliness of infidels.
Sistani has been quite silent since late 2006. If he would speak up and declare his opposition to the rule of Islamic law in Iraq, it would be clear that he really does want to see a Western-style democracy there. But up to this point he has never made that clear in any way.
Anyway, I hope this thread doesn’t turn into a discussion of Iraq and Iraq policy. Sistani’s picture is up there because of his lumping unbelievers in with pigs and feces — which he does undeniably, and the link to his website where he does it is provided above. That is the only reason why his picture is there.
Robert Spencer on November 25, 2007 at 8:36 AM
Just one question…what the heck is najasat?
flipflop on November 25, 2007 at 9:28 AM
Uh, never mind. I think I got it. Najasat is some form (plural?) of najis, right?
flipflop on November 25, 2007 at 9:32 AM
Mr. Spencer, I stand corrected…and apologize for my hasty words.
.
I was laboring under the misconception that Sistani was much more moderate than the evidence you cited show him to really be. Teaches me about relying on “background” columns in the MSM, eh?
.
Anyway, thanks very much for enlightening me on Sistani. I’m one of many who are getting educated by your expertise on Islam.
DavePa on November 25, 2007 at 9:50 AM
Wait, blood and dead bodies are unclean? Then why do they love it so much when they’re covered in blood and surrounded by dead bodies? Wouldn’t that prevent them from getting into Paradise?
Tony737 on November 25, 2007 at 10:53 AM
I wonder if Islamic cleanliness is so extreme that it would forbid traditional composting practices like humanure composting. If so, how have muslims dealt with sewerage?
Given the other lunacies of Islam, this could be most amusing.
thuja on November 25, 2007 at 11:19 AM
I’m still trying to figure out where the actual “repentance” is in this section. I understand all about the cleansing after contact with impurities of the world, but what is repentant about that?
progressoverpeace on November 25, 2007 at 12:07 PM
Robert
In 9:28, does ‘najasun’ (presumably the word for ‘unclean’) actually translate to impure/unclean? Unlike in English, where impure and unclean imply pretty mild degrees of contamination, I was under the impression that in languages in the East, the opposite of pure/clean would be ‘contaminated/polluted/repugnant/purgatory’ – i.e. it would indicate a level of contamination not adequately conveyed by innocuous terms such as ‘unclean’ or ‘impure’.
infidelpride on November 25, 2007 at 1:11 PM
Robert,
I find it hard to understand all of this in respect to religion in general. In broad, general terms, religion has caused incomprehensible harm for more than ten millenia, so how does Islam in particular compare to other religions? Am I to fear or worry about Islam more than say, Judaism? If so, why? If atrocities have been carried out in the name of Allah, Christ, Hinduism, any number of Pharaohs, Caesars, etc. Then how can you justify singling out Islam over all the other religions?
I would like to see you begin dissecting Judaism the same way that you are Islam, in order to put your research into a context. I would like to see Judaism and Islam compared, to help us who are not allowed into a Synagogue understand the two of them, in the context of each other. The little I do know of Judaism, it seems to have much in common with Islam and many of the basic tenents of the Muslim life style. The treatment of women, the views on marriage, the xenophobia and racism, many of the underpinnings for Islam that we are told to fear, are common themes for each religion. I think it would help if you could start a “Blogging the Tanakh and Talmud” in conjuction with “Blogging the Qur’an”. It would be great if you could also do the same for Christianity. I feel you are meticulous in your research and presentation, but since many of us are already somewhat familiar with the Bible and it would be a HUGE workload for you to take on to do all three, (I’m guessing) a focus on the two would be a real eye-opener for all of us, I’m sure.
Thank you for the work you do.
KMC1 on November 25, 2007 at 2:12 PM
Infidel Pride:
Yes, it means unclean, but it does give the connotation of contaminated or polluted — especially in Shi’ite contexts. At one point in Iran, for example, Jews were forbidden to go out in the rain, for if rainwater splashed from them onto a nearby Muslim, the Muslim would be rendered unclean. There is, in short, nothing innocuous about this designation.
Robert Spencer on November 25, 2007 at 2:13 PM
KMC1:
There is no simple answer to this that I am able to give in this comments field. I’ve written a book about it, which I hope you’ll pardon me for recommending to you: Religion of Peace?. In it I contend, contrary to some of the assumptions you appear to be making, that while people have done evil in the name of every belief system, not every system of beliefs and practices that goes by the name of “religion” is equal in its effects to everything else that goes by that name, and all should not be lumped together. I invite you to read the book with an open mind.
Yes.
Because Islam has a doctrine, theology, and legal system mandating warfare against and the subjugation of unbelievers. Judaism does not. Because there are armed Islamic groups around the world today committing violent acts in the name of those doctrines. There are no such groups of Jews in countries around the world.
In part because there are armed Islamic groups around the world today committing violent acts in the name of Islam’s supremacist doctrines. There are no such groups of Christians or Hindus committing violence today and justifying it on the basis of Christian or Hindu teaching. The Christians who committed violence in the past did not and could not point to the words of Christ to justify those acts of violence. Thus the possibility for reform was there. In Islam today, all too many Muslims are committing violence in the name of Islam and justifying it by reference to Islamic scripture. Muslims and non-Muslims of good will need to confront that fact, acknowledge the existence of Islamic supremacist teachings, and work to reform them.
Sorry. This is not going to happen. But I invite you again to look at my book comparing various aspects of Christianity and Islam.
I am not Jewish myself, but I have attended synagogue worship. Nobody ever said I was not welcome. Where were you not allowed into a synagogue? Islam forbids non-Muslims to attend Islamic worship, but as far as I know Judaism does not, or at very least this law is commonly ignored.
I’m sorry, but from what I know of Judaism I don’t believe this is remotely the case. For example, I don’t think you’ll find anything in Judaism comparable to the notorious “wife-beating” verse in the Qur’an, 4:34.
As I said, it’s not going to happen. And the bottom line is that it’s irrelevant. The Q-Blog explores the Qur’an. The Qur’an says what it says regardless of what Judaism and Christianity teach. One doesn’t need to know anything about Judaism and Christianity in order to explore the teachings of the Qur’an. Also, Judaism and Christianity may for the sake of argument be granted to be the worst belief-systems in human history, and that would tell us nothing one way or the other about what Islam teaches or what the significance of those teachings might be for non-Muslims.
Robert Spencer on November 25, 2007 at 2:32 PM
Robert,
Thank you for your recommendation on your book. I think I will give it a read, as I am continually in search of ways to learn more and think I will enjoy your writing style from what I’ve seen on the ‘net.
I agree with your point regarding the constant violence taking place in the name of Islam. It’s a valid point, and as is continually pointed out, the primary reason so many people refuse to even discuss Islam in totality even though it is a tiny minority who are committing the violence.
However, there has been violence constantly throughout History in the name of religion, so I don’t think we can justifiably ignore all other religions just because Islam is The Hot Topic today. It’s only a matter of time before there will be violence again in the name of (name a religion other than Islam) – hopefully I am wrong about this, but if History is any guide….
To your point of Islam having a system in place to subjugate non-believers, isn’t that precisely what is written in The Pentateuch? Isn’t the exact same framework in place through the 613 (Yes, six Hundred thirteen completely seperate and specific) Commandments in it? Most of them are punishable by death. So I don’t really see how we can condemn Islam, without a context of what we’re siding with and funding:
I completely disagree with this statement unless you are specifically referencing The Crusades? If so, then yes, it wasn’t scripture, it was Papal greed and diversion, (who owned their power through being the gateway to the word of Christ) but there has been tremendous violence committed in the name of Christ for many different things. The American Indians are just one example of the supremacist ideology of the followers of Christ displacing an entire civilization isn’t it?
In any respect, I don’t mean to debate you point for point. I am simpy looking for help from someone knowledgable on a subject, that whether we like it or not, is affecting every aspect of our society, and yet we don’t really understand how or why. I respect your work from what I’ve seen and read, and would deeply value and trust your findings / opinions.
To answer your question, I have never been refused entry into a Synagogue, but again, I know very little of Judaism and my understanding is that non-jews are not allowed into them. I could be completely wrong about that. Anyone familiar care to elighten on this point? I can totally understand your reluctance to dissect Judaism however. I also would be very scared to publicly criticize Judiasm and point out the similarities with Islam in our current PC climate. NOT that we need to fear being ostracized, shunned or unemployed, right? (wink, wink).
Anyway, I appreciate you taking the time to answer my request, and again, I do appreciate the work that you do.
KMC1 on November 25, 2007 at 3:24 PM
NOTE:
After “Funding” there should have been this link: http://www.wrmea.com/us_aid_to_israel/index.htm which didn’t post for some reason.
I also meant to comment about the exclusionary (xenophobic) immigration law Israel currently has when commenting about the system of subjugation of non-Jews.
Sorry, I’m in a rush and it was a long post….
KMC1 on November 25, 2007 at 3:31 PM
KMC1
Please provide an example of this. Specific and accurate example.
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Read.aspx?GUID={17B14B54-AE89-49CB-A225-A61B732F9DC3}
CrimsonFisted on November 25, 2007 at 6:11 PM
CrimsonFisted, can you please clarify your request? What would you like an example of, exactly?
KMC1 on November 25, 2007 at 8:59 PM
Exclusionary immigration laws? Immigration is not a human right. If it was then the left would be demanding Japan be nuked again.
aengus on November 25, 2007 at 9:18 PM
Sorry for the OT.
aengus on November 25, 2007 at 9:18 PM
Robert Spencer:
I don’t know about that. It seems to me that much of the the Qur’an is a perversion and violent rejoinder to Christian/Judaic Scriptures. Without the knowledge of what it was reacting against, the Qur’an would not make much sense to me.
HeIsSailing on November 25, 2007 at 9:26 PM
A sample, rather a diary entry or some other, where the Pilgrims or other early Americans, displaced the inhabitants in early America?
I take personal offense. Since my grandfather was ACTUALLY a pilgrim, George Soule, I would really like to hear how my family helped to displace an entire civilization. I am asking for specific examples how this was done. What did we do? Eat? Breathe? What?
Accurate examples, not historical revisions.
CrimsonFisted on November 25, 2007 at 9:28 PM
Robert Spencer:
Yeah. Abraham built it, I believe it, that settles it.
I know we will get to this later in the Quran, but I can’t help but ask now. Just what do we know about the pre-Islamic history of The Great Mosque and the Kaaba that has not been lost in the mists of Islamic legend? Am I correct in my (wild) assumption that pigs will fly before an archeologist’s spade touches anywhere near that area?
HeIsSailing on November 25, 2007 at 9:33 PM
CrimsonFisted:
You forgot a crucial part of your challenge. KMC1 claims that the displacement of entire native American civilizations was a result of “the supremacist ideology of the followers of Christ”. So it had to not only be a garden variety displacement, but one done in the name of Christ.
HeIsSailing on November 25, 2007 at 9:38 PM
CrimsonFisted on November 25, 2007 at 9:46 PM
Crap. The blockquote. Bah. I missed the tags. Apologies.
CrimsonFisted on November 25, 2007 at 9:47 PM
The Ayatollah Sistani says:
What, no shellfish?
Robert, the only place in the Qur’an I can find which spells out dietary abominations is 5:3, which in no way even resembles Sistani’s list. Is there any place in the Qur’an where unbelievers are lumped in with such abominations as ‘feces, urine, dogs and pigs’? Or is this another case of the wishful interpretation of scripture from an overzealous cleric passing as scripture?
HeIsSailing on November 25, 2007 at 9:50 PM
Wait. Are you, HelsSailing and you, CrimsonFisted actually disputing the Genocide of the American Indians?
I don’t feel this is the correct forum, since this really is Mr. Spencers forum for the Q-blog and obviously this would then turn into a HUGE thread, I’m sure.
Pretty neat to learn that you’re a descendant of some of the original Pilgrims, although I’m not sure why YOU would take personal offense to the Historical occurances? I think it’s silly for you to get worked up like that.
There are some really great resources out there for your research however. If you would be interested, you may wish to research Pope Alexender VI as a starting point, although the racism pervasive throughout the entire Catholic Church during The Middle Ages covers many years, and many countries. I would suggest you focus on Spain, and Pope Alexander VI. You could also expand into Christopher Columbus, and the enslavement of the Indigenous Peoples all over South and North America, as well as the Carribbean by the Spaniards.
Also, Teddy Roosevelt had some heart-felt words for the American Indians, as did Andrew Jackson, you could look into both of their Federal Policies for some good examples of federalized ethnic cleansing.
If you’re looking for a specific example of the atrocities committed by European settlers, you could look into:
Trail of Tears: The Rise and Fall of the Cherokee Nation, by John Ehle.
One of the intricacies in that book, is the conundrum of the American Indians being the lost tribes of Judah. Interesting, ironic stuff.
KMC1 on November 25, 2007 at 10:09 PM
Wow, you aren’t wasting anytime making sure you bring the conversation down a few pegs, are you?
KMC1 on November 25, 2007 at 10:13 PM
KMC1 – sorry. tomorrow. Late for me and I work in the am here in the EST.
The Pope? with the Pilgrims? Ok. will do. Will research.
However, this thread is about blogging the Koran.
Just identifying a comment.
CrimsonFisted on November 25, 2007 at 10:17 PM
KMC1: I don’t think the mass deaths of the American Indians is what is in dispute. What is in dispute is whether there was any actual genocidal intent, and whether that intent, if it existed, was animated by any authentic Christian doctrines.
HeIs Sailing:
9:28 — which identifies unbelievers as unclean, thus placing them in the same category as other unclean things.
Robert Spencer on November 25, 2007 at 10:24 PM
KMC1, I don’t doubt the horrors caused by the catholic or protestant church for a second. I have done plenty of reading of my own, and am well aware of the dangerous power of religion. I am no apologist for Christianity, believe me. But I do think claiming that genocide of the Native American race was done solely for the cause of Christ is myopic. There were many factors that played into those events of long ago, not just religion.
We cannot forget, or repeat those horrors from history. And hopefully the Christian church has learned. But, the Christian church does not have the political power or authority it once had, therefore the critical focus of politics must shift to Islam, which has both. It sounds like you have read your history, so you know that when state and religion mix, as they are now in Islamic nations, the result is always disasterous. Islam is the current threat and danger to our world today, not Christianity, not Judaism. Islam restricts, represses, tortures and remains stuck in a medieval world of darkness. Modern Christianity is, by contrast, by and large progressive and reactive to the world and culture around it. That is why Islam is a current danger, and Christianity is not. That is why I am interested in learning about the Qur’an and Islam, and that is why I am here. The critique of Islam via their own Scriptures is a rarity, it is timely, it is important, and it is necessary in today’s paradigm of terrorism.
Sorry for hijacking this article. I will comment on this no further.
HeIsSailing on November 25, 2007 at 10:39 PM
He may have a vague smattering of historical knowledge but earlier in the thread professes a near-complete ignorance of Christianity, Islam and Judaism.
Paging Charles Johnson! So after all the unpleasantness was over they magically changed from Europeans to Americans? Yippee.
aengus on November 25, 2007 at 11:11 PM
KMC1, that’s pretty ridiculous. If you want to discuss in-depth the doctrines of the church and the teachings and verses of the Gospel and the rest of the Bible, that’s fine. But be aware that you may have assumptions about what it means to be Christian that are patently untrue.
Spencer is completely correct, by the way, and such Papal abuses are often part of the dispute among Christians regarding the Great Schism. Suffice it to say that ALSO, unlike the Muslims we’re quite aware of the problem. I’m not anti-papist, but I’m also not Roman Catholic.
We may mock the Crusades (and surely there were terrible things about it) but more or less it brought Europe back to life from the dark ages. I understand now a little more about the character of man than I used to, and it allows me to accept the crusades (bad stuff and all.)
People who argue that such a civilization (that of the medieval dark ages) was best for man are perhaps religiously Christian but not philosophically Christian.
This thread is about Islam, though. I wanted to not let that one slide completely.
It seems to me clearer and clearer each Q-blog that Islam really is an attempt to restore the ancient monotheism – to somehow recapture the time before the world changed. A vain attempt to turn back both physical and psychological time.
Future’s here, boys. And its got exoskeletons.
Robert, is it true that Islam is more or less designed to be (Structured around being) a state religion? Thus, Al-Qaeda is an aberration; not in terms of what their scripture teaches, but in terms of the totality of Islam? Do you think a Western heretical philosophy (since Islam is an amalgam, for the most part, of heretical philosophies) is responsible for the emergence of Jihad writ large? I.e. that Islam has had its ‘restorationist’ movement and this is it?
Anyway, cool stuff.
RiverCocytus on November 26, 2007 at 12:14 AM
RiverCocytus:
Historically, yes, ever since the Hijra.
I wouldn’t say an aberration so much as a revivalist movement. Al-Qaeda and other jihad groups point to the abolition of the caliphate by the secular Turkish government in 1924 — the symbolic demise of political Islam — as the beginning of the troubles of the modern umma. They are trying to end those troubles by restoring the caliphate and the purity of Islam.
Well, Wahhab was a reformer, and this is certainly a restorationist movement. What that has to do with Western heretical philosophy, I do not know.
Robert Spencer on November 26, 2007 at 5:35 AM
KMC1:
Hi. I’m a Torah observant Jew, what’s usually called an Orthodox Jew in this day and age.
The Torah has commandments about subjugating those people of the 7 nations that lived in Cana’an at the time that the Nation Of Israel entered the land with Moses and then Joshua as its leader, when such people are willing to accept the rule of Israel.
Since the time of Sanherib, no one has been able to point out a Cana’anite, Hittite, Yebusite, etc., amongst any people anywhere in the world, Israel included.
So we are dealing with 3500 year old laws, which have since become acedemic because of the facts on the ground.
You have no idea what you’re talking about. This is totally off the wall.
This is wrong, too. But let’s not play with numbers. Let’s clear the air. There are plenty of Torah commandments which are capital crimes. Adultery, violating the Sabbath, murder. So? What about it?
Incidentally, there hasn’t been a Jewish court that has handed down a capital punishment in over 2000 years. Why don’t you try investigating why it was ceased. Also, try looking up what the Talmud had to say about capital punishment in the time when it was still meted out.
HINT: If you pick up your “facts” about Judaism on white racist trash sites, you’ll never know.
There is no such Jewish law nor custom. If you are dressed modestly and behave appropriately, anyone who would ask you to step outside is simply an impolite turd or, worse, an ignorant bigot.
Yep, completely wrong. The only thing you might be confusing this with is that Gentiles are not allowed to enter the inner areas of the Temple Mount, where Jews were allowed to enter under certain pre-conditions of purification when the Temple was standing. Today, this prohibition appplies equally to Jews and Gentiles.
Nudge, nudge. You’re full of false pre-assumptions. Maybe you are what you want to be.
Spill it out. Don’t hold yourself back. Unless you really think you know it all. So far, you don’t know, Jack!
Shy Guy on November 26, 2007 at 7:44 AM
ShyGuy:
Thanks. I was not going to engage these ridiculous false charges about Judaism from KMC1 any longer, but I’m grateful for your clearing the air.
Robert Spencer on November 26, 2007 at 8:30 AM
Excellent Post, Robert.
And a great string of comments~
I’m curious to know if KMC1 has been enlightened or will carry on with the ignorant accusations of the different religions. (just a curiosity…I won’t be losing sleep. lol)
bridgetown on November 26, 2007 at 8:45 AM
It seems, at least on the surface KMC1 is acting in “good faith” albeit an ignorant, bigoted faith. KMC1, would you please point to a Christian doctrine of ANY denomination that prescribes genocide as the duty of the Christian. Since you have little knowledge of any religion except what you read in comic books, I don’t know that you’ll be able to do that today. I am not a Jew (but I am a big fan) I also would like to hear from KRS-one of any genocidal Jewish movements since the days of the OT.
ConstantSorrow on November 26, 2007 at 10:27 AM
The main difference between islamic culture and Judeo-Christian culture is very simple and explains almost all that we see:
Judeo-Christian culture is based on Individualism, Guilt and Atonement while islamic culture is based on Tribalism, Shame and Revenge.
I tried to softly tease this point out by remarking that there is no “repentance” to be found in this islamic explanation of “repentance”, but no one seemed to be pick up on it. Repenting is not part of islam. Revenge is. This is because there is no real concept of individual guilt in islam, but only shame for the group.
The difference between guilt and shame is huge, as no one needs to know what one has done for one to feel guilty (it is a totally private and individual notion) while one cannot feel shame UNLESS it is public knowledge. Further along those lines, the solution to guilt is atonement, again a private and individual concept, while the solution to shame is revenge, a public and tribal concept.
This basic difference between islam and Judeo-Christian culture goes a long way to explain most of the problems we see with islam.
progressoverpeace on November 26, 2007 at 10:51 AM
Robert, allow me to be more specific. There is a heresy – or what becomes one anyway, called the ‘Social Gospel’. It views Jesus mainly or wholly as a social reformer – it won’t deny him his co-eternal nature but is basically philosophical Arianism. The sister of this idea is Marxism, and they may more or less stem from the same source. Do you think there is more than just a tinge of Marxist philosophy in this Islamic Restoration?
RiverCocytus on November 26, 2007 at 10:57 AM
Wow. Ask a couple questions, and next thing you know, you’re intimated to be “white racist trash”. Even with the qualifier in place, that I am NOT familiar with Judaism… um… which was the whole point of my asking if Robert would be willing to examine other religions in conjuntion with Islam to give us a context. Robert (rather smartly) refused to even glance at Judaism, even though Islam and Judaism are at the root causes of all the strife in the Western Hemisphere and Middle East. Even though we’re practically wearing our Underoos to go through airport security now, and our phones being wire tapped under the “Patriot Act”. But, you’re right, I MUST be “white racist trash” to dare even ASK to learn more about it…..
Ooooo… Kkkkkk then…..You’re absolutely correct, Robert (and ALL the rest of us) has NOTHING to worry about if he were to critically examine Judaism and compare it to Islam… NOTHING AT ALL… NOT that he would need to worry about being branded a racist, or the label du jour “anti-Semite” or anything like that… “nudge, nudge”….And I am happy to report that you have no such preconceived notions yourself….Wow.
However, thank you for clarifying the situation regarding entrance into a Synagogue. My understanding dates back to my days in Sunday School, so it’s possible that I’m remembering that I was not allowed to go into a Synagogue because I am Catholic and maybe that was what we were told? In any case, I appreciate your clarification on the matter. I guess I should be labeled an anti-semite and lashed 200 times for printing this in the press? Sheesh…
Well, there’s a lot of things wrong with it, if you’re asking me. There are many such passages in the Pentateuch, homosexuality is punishable by death isn’t it? (Leviticus 20:13) Isn’t that one of the big jokes on HA about “if the Homosexual Libs only knew what the Muslims will do to them” etc, etc. And that is just one example along with the ones you provided. Violating the Sabbath? Punishable by death? Really? Well, there goes the neighborhood in the U.S. since just about all of us have worked on a Sunday at one time or another.
What about Deuteronomy 21:18? Death for your children if they are rebellious? Really? Um….
Numbers 5:19. It’s been said that this is this basis for the Salem witch trials.
I mean, come on. The fact that these are not practiced regularly is not my point. My point, is that I would like to have more knowledge on the matter so I can understand things better in the context Islam.
Well, I think the fact that there is an open call for the extermination of all non-Jews is something that we should all be aware of. This is the basis for Jews feeling entitled to the land they currently occupy.
And just to point out, I am not the one here who “really think you know it all”. This all came about because I asked for an opportunity to learn more. I’ve openly stated that I am certainly NOT a religious scholar by any means. But if it makes you feel better to insult away then have at it!
KMC1 on November 26, 2007 at 12:47 PM
KMC1, intimations of anti-semitism, even if they are out of ignorance, are rarely taken lightly.
RiverCocytus on November 26, 2007 at 12:57 PM
Well, I had respect for you anyway.
Thanks for your support Robert, although I guess I wouldn’t expect you to stand with anyone who is looking to learn from you and asking for your help – IF they are stupid enough to be critical of Judaism.
Although I never actually “Charged” Judaism with anything. I asked some questions and stated some things that are my understandings (whether correct or not is the whole the point). Of course the fact that I did this in the same thread as I pointed out the racism and supremacy rampant in the Catholic Church, is of no actual consequence when it’s far easier to just label me an anti-semite and be done with it. Hmm… isn’t this precisely what The Left is accused of on a daily basis on HA????
KMC1 on November 26, 2007 at 12:58 PM
Also, dissecting Judaism based solely on the Pentateuch and with no regard to the Talmud is erroneous and dangerous. This is why Robert does not only rely on the Koran but also on those who have commented on it and are widely considered authorities on it’s meaning and application.
RiverCocytus on November 26, 2007 at 1:00 PM
Um. Yeaaah. I think I knew that back when I agreed with Robert’s position that the critical study and comparison of Judaism would most likely end his career.
KMC1 on November 26, 2007 at 1:01 PM
Which is precisely why I was asking for his help in the first place…..
KMC1 on November 26, 2007 at 1:01 PM
Just a quick thank you for your well thought out response. It was especially nice to see one devoid of ad-hominem attacks! Will wonders never cease?
KMC1 on November 26, 2007 at 1:05 PM
KMC1
I wasn’t going to do this, but just one thing: I’m afraid to speak out about Judaism because accusations of antisemitism could end my career?
Besides the personally insulting aspect of this, it is arrant, paranoid rubbish. Ever heard of Pat Buchanan? Robert Novak? Walt and Mearsheimer? Jimmy Carter? Somehow accusations of anti-Semitism haven’t hurt them, or others like them, one bit.
Now you want a career ender? Try speaking out about the aspects of Islam that jihadists are using to incite violence and gain recruits among peaceful Muslims. Seen me on the major networks, or even Fox, lately?
Robert Spencer on November 26, 2007 at 1:30 PM
Don’t play innocent.
1. I suggested your misassumptions might be based on such trash, not that you are. Of course, if you feel there’s no difference between the two, suit yourself.
2. To requote from your earlier post:
I’ll let others here easily deduct what your stated intentions are.
Moving right along………..
Yep, it’s the joooooooooooooooooooz fault.
Go right ahead and check out what you like. Most everything, from the Torah to the Talmud to the Jewish Prayer and commentaries on all of them are available in clear English in libraries and at Jewish booksellers. Who’s stopping you? Or Robert? (Hi Robert! When are you visiting Israel again? I would love to have my book copies autographed.)
As you like.
Yes, though again, not enforceable at present. Have you begun checking into the reasons why? Here’s a headstart, though you might have trouble understanding a few terms:
Capital Punishment and Curbing Crime.
That’s just a starting point.
While Judaism has always looked with disgust and disdain at homosexuality, I have already explained that practically speaking, homosexually prance around gayly even in the streets of Jerusalem in this day and age.
So yes, a Jewish religious community will shun a homosexual who flouts the fact. There is not much legal action of any sort that can be taken against a homosexual at present in a Jewish court.
Truly. Again, not today and if you’ve followed the jist of the article I linked to above, the Nation of Israel would have to be on a very high spiritual level to see capital punishment reinstated and then there are difficult prerequisites that would have to be met just to bring the violator to court, let alone to reach a guilty verdict.
Again, if you’ve gotten the article’s message, it is G-d’s desire that we be on a level where there wouldn’t be a single individual Jew capable of commiting a capital crime.
Heads up! The Jewish Sabbath is on Friday night through Saturday. Sunday is a Christian concoction.
And again, how many Jews have you read about lately – or over the last 2000 years – that were killed for violating the Sabbath? When I last counted, it was zero.
No. Not really. Um.
You’ll find the relevant discussion on the complexities of convicting such a child in this article. Again, there are terms within which you may not be familiar with.
I do not speak for Christian occurences.
Well, I’ve given you a few links. I know it’s great to be spoonfed but I don’t have all the time in the world for this. Maybe someone else can take up the slack.
Or you can investigate more seriously on your own. The verse you quoted are the typical ones seen posted all over the web, removed from their accurate historical, legal and technical context, let alone rationale.
Who said that? Extermination of all non-Jews? I didn’t say that. Are you off your rocker?
We have lived on that land for 1000s of years. We were there before the Romans, Christians and Muslims came. And we have been graced with the opportunity to return, albeit with great difficulty. You are witnessing the fullfillment of G-d’s prophecies.
I’ll also let you enjoy a taste of Rabbi Meir Kahane on the subject of your disdain for the desire of my people to live in their homeland.
Shy Guy on November 26, 2007 at 1:43 PM
Shy Guy:
Thanks again. Especially for calling this guy on his claim of the moral high ground after the scurrilous and baseless charges he has made.
I’d love to come back. Get someone to invite me!
Robert Spencer on November 26, 2007 at 2:10 PM
Putting on my thinking cap.
Shy Guy on November 26, 2007 at 2:20 PM
progressoverpeace:
Your post of 10:51 AM. shines like a diamond in a billygoats behind!
Back in the day, when I was full of my youth and the moral relativism that infects so many of us at that age, I was directed to read “The Naked Ape” and “The Human Zoo” by Desmond Morris. This by a high school science teacher for whom I shall forever be in debt. Now, I’m sure some here will object to the secular nature of Mr. Morris’ work but I must say, it had a profound impact on me.
His observation in a nutshell was that people NEED to belong to something bigger than themselves. So obvious and yet so profound.
We all strive to belong to groups that share our beliefs, needs, whatever. More often than not, the tribe imposes it’s belief system on us.
Islam is, as progressoverpeace stated, “based on Tribalism, Shame and Revenge”. Sad but true.
Some tribes are spirtually more advanced than others. That’s just the way it is. I’m thinking of an African community here, sorry I can’t remember the name of this particular tribe. They were a very large group and had a shamanistic belief system. They practiced non-violence and provide sanctuary for others during the Arab, and later European quests for slaves.
I’ll come right out and say it, these folks had a better tribe, culture, whatever you want to call it, going for them and there destruction at the hands of European invaders was one of the greatest crimes of the last century.
There is a dark past out there that must be acknowledged. I would hope that KMC1, while reminding the Judeo-Christians of there faults can at least confront the current destructive path that the Islamic tribes follow today in comparison to their fellow travelers.
dingbat on November 26, 2007 at 3:32 PM
Thanks for the kind words, dingbat.
I only caught Desmond Morris on TV years ago, but liked him a lot.
Islam’s major problem is that it is the formalization of 7th century desert culture. It is very much an anachronism, just ill-suited to the modern world. One sees this very clearly in the simple fact that the islamic calendar is totally lunar, with the insertion of intercalaries being illegal. This calendar would be in conflict with the agrarian life, from its very beginning, which is an interesting point – as Judaism was based on the initial switch from nomadic to agrarian lifestyle, and is reflected in the solar adjustments to the lunar-based Hebrew calendar, Mohammed went backwards to the nomadic culture and the totally lunar calendar. A small point, but very illustrative of what’s going on inside islam and the potential it has for coexisting peacefully. Added to this are the underlying subcultures (arab, persian, ….) and you end up with a pretty serious and intransigent problem.
progressoverpeace on November 26, 2007 at 5:05 PM
dingbat and progressoverpeace have gotten the points down well, as of course, has Robert. The thing I think KMC1 isn’t getting, is that the things you’re pointing to in Judaism (not a Jew here) were very specific, and abrogated a thousand years ago. They no longer apply. In the case of wiping out a local population, it was extremely specific. Whereas the islamic instructions are global, and are followed to this day. There are no instructions in the Torah, Talmud, New Testament, or any of the other writers on said works who proscribe the things that are current in islam. That is why Robert has undertaken the task he has, to instruct us.
bikermailman on November 26, 2007 at 5:14 PM
Robert, you are correct in saying that anti-semitism did not end Pat Buchanon’s career. However, what you insinuate is totally baseless, since I sincerely doubt that you and he are traveling within the same circles very much. Or more precisely, that you and he are deriving your financial support from the same groups of people.
I did not say there was no opportunity to make a career out of being anti-semitical, in fact, I would say that business segment has been on the upswing as of late.
In response to your view on not getting more mainstream newstime, I think it’s fairly safe to say that it is actually a positive reflection on you that you aren’t. You don’t usually present things in sound bites that will get ratings, and many of your positions require thought and time – both of which preclude you from achieving mainstream acceptance. Why I should give you any accolades after the insults you’ve directed at me, I have no idea, but as I said before, I have respect for what works of yours I’ve seen.
KMC1 on November 26, 2007 at 5:14 PM
“My Intentions”?
If you are convinced I am an anti-semite, so be it. I stated facts and nothing more.
No, I haven’t yet.
Oh, OK then. I was all wrong about things then I guess. I mean since the Jewish community you mention has progressed so far along as compared to those darn Muslims. I mean afterall, it’s OK to ostracize a person simply because of their sexual bias and make them an unemployable social pariah. I mean you’ve only had 3500 years to throw off the shackles of Leviticus 20:13 and you’ve come so far in such a short time….
This is a good example of what is happening here in America today actually. In place of physical violence, we see in use the threat of financial ostracism for not falling in line with the PC crowd. This is a clear example of the effects of religious edict affecting our daily lives and being used to control the populus. And the theme of falling back on the perceived moral high ground because physical violence is not employed.
I never said anything was stopping either myself or Robert from research Judaism. I said he would face ostracism for using that research to then critically compare Islam and Judaism. You’re internalising and projecting.
Just to give you an idea of what I was hoping to see Robert begin doing by giving us a context of Islam in comparison to other religions, this is a clear example of what I was looking for. The way I was raised, for anyone to be high on a spiritual level would mean to forgive someone who is deserved of Capital punishment. The more in tune with God’s word you are, the farther away from Capital punishment you would be.
Thanks for that! No wonder I can never buy any bagels on shopping night! LOL! I am kidding! But seriously, didn’t I say I’m not very familiar with Judaism several times now?
Here you go again, saying I said something that I didn’t say. But I wonder if you are man enough to admit that the Judeo-Islam conflict has affected almost every single country on the planet? If you are able to admit that (doubt it) can you also admit that all of you owe it to the world to put your differences aside and try to work together for the betterment of mankind the world over? (doubt it)
You also deny the meaning of Deuteronomy 21:18, yet it specifically says that a rebellious child shall be stoned at the city gates etc. etc. You can nuance the discussion all you want, my original point that the two religions have violent edicts as their basis, and the two are very similar in them is unchanged and unchallenged as yet.
I actually never asked you and would not trust your writings anyway, thank you very much.
For someone who claims to be an Orthodox Jew, you sure do seem to leave out a lot of the little things called facts and details… What about Deuteronomy 20:10? I’m not even a Jew and I’m aware of these things.
Well, at least you are being honest and straightforward about this one thing and I really wish we could trust you to expand on this and go into some detail for the rest of us. This in a nutshell is the problem. You have people such as yourself who are as radical as the people whom we’re being told are the real radicals to be feared. It also give a glimpse of the racism and xenophobia within Judaism, in that you are basing your claim to the lands of Israel because of historical claims to the land from more than 1000 years ago. It’s no different with using bloodlines as criteria for immigration law, and/or for the differing treatment of peoples within Jewish lands.(Deuteronomy 23:19)
Actually, I have never commented on this one way or the other. And there is a valid claim to the ancestral lands which needs to be addressed. However, this is again another example of you hiding behind the anti-semite force field and trying to browbeat me into submission out of fear of reprisal for being labeled such.
KMC1 on November 26, 2007 at 6:24 PM
Robert, could you give me an example of these baseless charges I’ve made?
KMC1 on November 26, 2007 at 6:25 PM
KMC1:
Sure. For one thing, the idea that non-Jews aren’t allowed into synagogues. As a non-Jews who has been in many synagogues, I know from personal experience that this is absolutely false.
More seriously is your contention that there is in Judaism, or in the Torah at least, an “open call for the extermination of all non-Jews.”
Finally, there is your personal imputation, that I am writing about Islam and not about Judaism not because one is used by violent people around the world to justify violence and the other isn’t, but because of an eye toward personal gain. I have many personal faults, assuredly, but if I were after personal gain, I could get it in easier ways than writing about Islamic jihad.
There are others, but that’s enough.
Robert Spencer on November 26, 2007 at 8:12 PM
Robert, that’s silly. I already explained that was something I thought was true, but didn’t know, and even asked for help – which we recieved from Shyguy. I have never been to Synagogue because of this belief I held. I do wish to learn more, and it’s basically impossible in our society to learn critically about Judaism, but this may have just opened a pathway I didn’t think was available to me. It’s not something I even stated relevent to the conversation, rather just something random that was erroneous that is being used as “evidence”.
This is something that is actually stated in the Pentatuech within Deuteronomy 20:10. It’s not something I made up. http://gwt.scripturetext.com/deuteronomy/20.htm
This is completely off the mark. I’m not sure how so many of the things I have commented on have been able to be taken so far out of context and misconstrued, but apparently this is a VERY poor forum for any meaningful discussion. I have stated several times that I have respect for your work, and your presentation abilities. (although truth be told, I’m less than impressed after this thread in your openmindedness, to be frank) I do not in any way, believe that you are attacking Islam only for your personal gain. I believe that you see Islam as a very real threat to civilization globally, and are earnestly working to help educate people to the dangers you perceive. I do believe however, that you are keenly aware of the dangers of “going against the grain” and therefore refuse to put your name behind critical study of other, more dominant, religions. Which really is a shame, because in my opinion you are not seeing the forest for the trees.
Thank you for your personal attention and for your time. I do appreciate it. I’ll bow out and give you the closing comments if you’d like to take the oppty. In any case, thank you again for the recommendation on your book – worst case you’ve made a sale :) so it’s not all bad!
KMC1 on November 26, 2007 at 10:06 PM
I have no interest in continuing off-topic further. I’ll just interject and point out that all of Deuteronomy chapter 20 verses 10-15 are indeed referring to an optional war (versus an obligatory war against the 7 Nations, Amalek or in defense when Israel is attacked).
Now go through the entire Torah, Prophets and Scriptures and the only place you will find such optional wars is by King David and the king (none around for 2500 years) has to get approval from the national body known as the Sanhedrin. None before King David. None after. And no interest in the near past, present and the forseeable future, including prophesized Messianic times to come. Stay tuned.
Shy Guy on November 27, 2007 at 12:15 AM
KMC1:
Other, more dominant religions? You’re serious, I’m sure, but are you aware of how many Muslims there are in the world, and how many Jews? Of how many nations are members of the OIC, and how many Jewish states there are? Are you aware of how many countries are likely to become Islamic in the coming decades, as opposed to how many are likely to become Jewish?
You are clearly serious. But in reality you aren’t.
Robert Spencer on November 27, 2007 at 2:25 AM
Robert, watch us do our magic with Micronesia! ;)
Shy Guy on November 27, 2007 at 4:37 AM
progressoverpeace says:
I don’t want to take this blanket statement at face value (not without further reading anyway), but I have to tell you that I found this very concept of revenge vs repentance in this week’s reading. Consider vs 25-27:
The ‘messenger’ and his fellow believers ultimately won the battle of Hunain and for this, Allah poured out his calm, his peace and his reassurance to them. After reading this, I wondered to myself how winning a battle could bring the peace of God? As you said, our religious traditions base God’s peace to be a result of repentence and forgiveness, but this seems to be winning Allah’s favor as a result of revenge.
I think this is an important distinction. Thanks for pointing it out, ProgressOverPeace. I will keep an eye out for the concept of repentence vs revenge as we continue in our reading.
HeIsSailing on November 27, 2007 at 6:36 AM