Support NeoGAF

[Maninthemirror]

Long Post

By the Founder of the Ahmadiyya Sect in Islam who are only outcast by most muslim leaders for believing there can be subordinate prophets but the Jihad concept is exactly like muslims of today

There is not the least truth in the assertion that it is time for resorting to the sword and gun for spreading the true religion and righteousness. The sword, far from revealing the beauties and excellence of truth, makes them dubious and throws them into background. Those who hold such views are not the friends of Islam but its deadly foes. They have low motives, mean natures, poor spirits, narrow minds, dull brains and short sight. It is they who open the way to an objection against Islam, the validity of which cannot questioned. They hold that Islam needs the sword for their advancement, thus brand its purity and cast a slur upon its holy name. The religion that can easily establish its truth and superiority by sound intellectual arguments, heavenly signs or other reliable testimony, does not need the sword to threaten men and force a confession of its truth from them. Religion is worth the name only so long as it is in consonance with reason. If it fails to satisfy that requisite, if it has to make up for its discomfiture in argument by handling the sword, it needs no other argument for its falsification. The sword it wields cuts its own throat before reaching others.
If it be objected that sword was resorted to by early Islam and hence the legality of Jihad, we say the objection is based upon ignorance of early Islamic circumstances. Islam never allowed the use of the sword for spreading the faith. On the other hand, it strictly prohibits compulsion in matters of faith. It has the plain injunction "There should be no compulsion in religion." Why was the sword taken in hand then? The circumstances under which this measure had been resorted to have nothing to do with the spread of religion; they are connected with the preservation of life. Briefly, they are as follows:

The savage inhabitants of the deserts of Arabia, who could hardly distinguish right from wrong, conceived a hatred towards Islam in its early days and became its bitterest enemies. The reason of this hatred may be easily conceived. When the unity of God and the Islamic truths were preached openly to idolatrous Arabs and convincing arguments against idol worship were impressed upon their minds and they were told how degrading it was for the noblest of God's creatures to bow submission to stones, they found themselves unable to meet the adherents of the new faith upon argumentative ground. This exposure led to a motion in favour of Islam among the more reasonable of them. The ties of relationship were cut asunder, the son parted from his parents and brother from his brother. This exasperated them the more and they saw plainly that if their fathers' false religion was to be saved, excessive measures must be taken to stop the ingress into the new religion. The new converts to Islam were therefore violently persecuted and no efforts were spared to block the way to the new faith. Those acquainted with early Muslim history know full well what barbarous and cruel treatment was meted out to the early converts, and how many were murdered in cold blood. But those harsh measures did not prevent people from the acceptance of truth, for even a superficial glance is enough to convince a man of the reasonableness and purity of Islam as against idolatry. At length when the implacable foes of Islam saw that severe persecution availed but little and that their ancient religion was threatened to be swept away in the current of Muslim reason, they planned the death of the Prophet himself. But their designs were frustrated. Almighty God saved His messenger and took him to Medina. The unbelievers, however, could not rest in their homes so long as they heard that the religion they had persecuted was gaining ground in another place. They pursued the Muslims to their new abode, and nothing but their extirpation could satisfy them. What could Islam do under the circumstances but defend itself? For what fault were Muslims to be mercilessly butchered and not allowed to protect their lives? Why should not the inveterate persecutors have been brought to retribution and just punishment? The Muslim battles were therefore not undertaken for gaining converts but to protect innocent Muslims lives. Can an unbiased judgement accept the conclusion that Islam was unable to prove its reasonableness as against savage Arabs? Can an unprejudiced mind believe that men who had sunk down so low as to worship images and lifeless things and who indulged in every manner of vice, could yet vanquish the noble religion of Islam on intellectual grounds, and that failure in proof led it to resort to the sword for increasing the number of its followers? Those who have advanced such objections against Islam have been guilty of grave injustice, inasmuch as they have concealed the true state of facts.

It is, however, true that the Muslim Maulvis and the Christian missionaries are equally to blame for this unjust charge against Islam. The ignorant Maulvis while pretending to support Islam have by their repeated inculcation, ingrafted the false doctrine of Jihad upon the minds of the unenlightened public who were misled by the fatwas of the Maulvis on the one side and the objections of the Christian Missionaries, whom they took for learned men, on the other. The doctrine of Jihad being thus supported by the evidence of two opposing witnesses, its validity could not be questioned by the masses. Had the Missionaries taken a different course and with true honesty declared that the fatwas of the Maulvis were based on ignorance of the early Islamic history, and that the circumstances which then rendered an appeal to arms necessary for Muslims, did not exist any more, the idea of Jihad would long have been eradicated from the face of the earth. But they never looked to the consequences and a misdirected zeal for their own religion cast a veil over their judgements in grasping the truth.

It must also be stated here that permission for self-defence and murdering the enemies of Islam was not given to the Muslims until the Arabs had, on account of their excessive oppressions and outrages and innocent bloodshed, rendered themselves culpable and liable to be punished with death. But a clemency was even then shown to such of them as embraced Islam. The unity of religion established a relation of brotherhood and all past wrongs were forgotten. It is here that some opponents of Islam have stumbled and from this they draw the conclusion that the new religion was forced upon the unbelievers. In fact, the case is just the reverse of what the objectors have thought. There is no compulsion here; it was a favour to those who had rendered themselves liable to death. It is apparently absurd to take this conditional mitigation of just punishment for compulsion. They deserved to be murdered, not because they did not believe in the mission of the Prophet, but because they had murdered many an innocent soul. The extreme penalty of the law was upon them, mercy of the Gracious God gave them another chance of averting this merited capital punishment. He knew that during the long years of opposition the Islamic truths had been brought home to them and they well understood the futility of idol-worship, therefore His mercy offered them an opportunity even after the sentence was justly pronounced against them, for imploring His pardon and the forgiveness of their sins. This clearly shows that it was not the object of Islam to put any unbeliever merely as such to death, but that it was willing to forgive even when the criminal was found deserving of death.

Islam had to grapple with other difficulties. Religious prejudice was so strong at the time that if a member of any tribe adopted the faith of Islam, he was either put to death or threatened with it, and persecution was so severe that life seemed a burden to him. Islam had therefore to face the difficulty of establishing freedom of religious exercise and for this noble object it had to undertake wars.

The early wars of Islam fall under either of the above headings and it never took the sword for its own propagation or for any other purpose. Attempts were made to blot out its very existence and therefore its life. It did not take up arms of its own accord but was compelled to do so. It had to defend itself and repel the dangerous foe. Later on, when its true principle were forgotten, the doctrine was read in a different light and ignorance looked with pride upon a hateful course of life. But the fault can in no way be attributed to Islam. The source from which it flows is pure and undefiled. That this doctrine has been identified with Islamic teachings by shallow-brained zealots who do not care for the life of man even so much as man should care for the life of a sparrow, cannot be questioned. But the innocent blood that has been split in the past does not satisfy them. They have yet a bloody Mahdi in store for the world and would like to exhibit the ugliest picture of Islam before all nations, that all people may know that Islam has always had to resort for its propagation to compulsion and the sword, and that it has not particle of truth in it to gain its conquest over hearts. It seems as if the holders of these views are not satisfied with the humiliation and decadence with Islam has already suffered, but must bring it still lower and subject it to yet more disgrace. These men are a reproach to Islam. But God now wills that Islam should not be branded with reproaches and remain under a cloud any more. It is already so distressing to find that its opponents who have not taken the trouble to investigate matters for themselves, have it impressed upon their minds that Islam has from its very beginning been employing the sword to add to its numbers.

It is high time that all these base charges should be cleared from the face of Islam. If the Maulvis unite to root out the evil from the midst of the Muhammadans, they shall have done a lasting good to, and conferred a blessing upon their co-religionists. Such an exposition of the doctrines of Islam will further reveal the excellence and beauties of that religion to the general public, and the aversion which its opponents have conceived on account of misconception shall be turned into admiration. The clouds of dust being cleared, they shall then be able to get their light from that source of light. It is evident that no one can approach a bloody murderer. Every one fears him, women and children tremble at his sight, and he looks like a mad man. An opponent of an alien religion cannot even pass a night with him let he should choose to be a Ghazi at the cost of his life. Such events daily occur among the ignorant frontier people, and a single bloody deed is deemed sufficient to entitle the murderer to paradise and its manifold blessings. It is shame for Muhammadans that alien races cannot safely live as their neighbours. They cannot trust them for a single moment and hardly expect any good in times of need. They do not deem themselves save among them and shrink at the hidden belief of Ghazism.

An instance of this occurred lately here in Qadian. On the 20th of November last a European came here. Just at that time a number of my followers has assembled together and the conversation was upon a religious subject. The traveller stood apart from the assembly and was addressed in polite words. It appeared that he was apprehensive. He stated that he had seen many Muhammadans who had committed atrocious deeds of murder against Christians. He mentioned several specific instance in which such cruelty had been shown. It was then explained to him that this, the Ahmadiyya sect of Islam, abhorred such doctrines and hated their adherents such doctrines and hated their adherents. It had set before itself the noble object of uprooting this evil. Upon this he felt satisfied and stayed here for one night.

There is a lesson in this story for the pro-Jihad Maulvis. The growth of such horrible doctrines among the Muslims, has done lasting injury to the cause of Islam and created an abhorrence for it in the hearts of other nations. They have no confidence in their sympathy so long as the dangerous doctrine os Jihad finds favour with them. They cannot form a favourable opinion except of such of them as do not lead strictly religious lives and are not very scrupulous about their religious beliefs. For all these misunderstanding none but the Muslims themselves are responsible. The blame of depriving a whole world of the recognition of Islamic truths lie at the door of the Maulvis who taught doctrine repulsive to the nature of man. How could the religion be from God, whose teachings needed the flash of the sword to get an entrance into the human heart? Such considerations were enough to keep back people from the acceptance of truth. The true religion is that which on account of its inherent property and power and its convincing arguments is more powerful than the keenest sword, not that which depends upon steel for its existence.

Now onto the Religious explanation beyond from the Book:

Critics/Extremists: Islam tells Muslims to fight non-believers
“And fight them until there is no persecution, and religion is freely professed for Allah. But if they desist, then remember that no hostility is allowed except against the aggressors.”
— Surah Al-Baqarah 194
This verse refers to the time of when this verse was revealed when Islam was in its infancy and Muslims were fighting were their lives. The fight them is only a defensive reaction to an aggressive action and it also refers to defending yourself with the pen and not just defend yourself physically. It also clearly states UNTIL there is no persecution whereby the defending should stop and good relations should continue and be established the moment aggression against you stops. This is reiterated again when it says if those attacking you verbally or physically stop attacking you, any Muslim should never become the aggressor. This is proven also if you expand the context using the verse before this.
“And fight in the cause of Allah against those who fight against you, but do not transgress. Surely, Allah loves not the transgressors”
— Surah Al-Baqarah 191
The ultimate goal thus is to attain peace and never be the aggressor. If everyone avoids being transgressions, there would never be war.



Now lets discuss how some critics of Islam purposely manipulate the sequence of the Quranic verses to create the false impression that Islam promotes Murder of non-believers. Take the verse below:
“And kill them wherever you meet them and drive them out from where they have driven you out; for persecution is worse than killing. And fight them not in, and near, the Sacred Mosque until they fight you therein. But if they fight you, then fight them: such is the requital for the disbelievers.”
— Surah Al-Baqarah 192
The word Fitnah in this verse does not believe a person's basic disbelief. it refers to persecution in the form of forcing a person to disbelieve by oppressing people or forcing people to change their view about their faith. Quran here mentions that forcing a view against their belief is worse than the aggressor killing the oppressed as it is akin to persecution and torture. This also proves the impression that Quran is against forced change or removal of a belief of a person against his or her will. by singling out this verse the critics of Islam try (and fail) to create the impression that Quran is saying disbelief (single tense) is worse than killing.



Here is the sequence of verses from Surah Al-Baqarah



verse 191 says fight those who fight against you but dont be aggressors. clearly stating a fight should ONLY be defensive

verse 192 continues from 191 and says fight them because their persecution is worse than killing and then it repeats the message of 191 again by saying if they fight you, then fight them.

verse 193 continues and says if they stop fighting you then God is merciful, this is a hint that you should lay your weapons down at that point

verse 194 continues and says:
“And fight them until there is no persecution, and religion is freely professed for Allah. But if they desist, then remember that no hostility is allowed except against the aggressors.”
— Surah Al-Baqarah 194
Notice the Quran says fight them until there is no persecution and religion is FREELY professed for God which is a tie in to the fact that any religion can only be FREELY practiced if there is no persecution against it. and then it repeats the peaceful message again, that if they stop persecuting you or fighting against you, that NO hostility is allowed against anyone except those who are aggressors against your free right to practice your faith.

And then verse 195 continues and says
“The violation of a Sacred Month should be retaliated in the Sacred Month; and for all sacred things there is the law of retaliation. So, whoso transgresses against you, punish him for his transgression to the extent to which he has transgressed against you. And fear Allah and know that Allah is with those who fear Him.”
— Surah Al Baqarah 195
Clearly stating that if someone tries to persecute you, do not exceed the bounds of the limits of retaliation which means if a person mocks you or ridicules you or takes the Quran away from you, No Muslim has the right to physically assault him as it clearly says, punish him for his transgression TO THE EXTENT to which he has transgressed against you. If someone writes against you, you defend your faith by writing defense of your faith against the aggressors.

Another verse the critics and extremists prove that Islam tells Muslims to fight and kill disbelievers as a blanket statement is the following verse
“They wish that you should disbelieve as they have disbelieved, so that you may become all alike. Take not, therefore, friends from among them, until they emigrate in the way of Allah. And if they turn away, then seize them and kill them wherever you find them; and take no friend nor helper from among them”
— Surah Al-Nisa 90
however if you read the very next verse...
“Except those who are connected with a people between whom and you there is a pact, or those who come to you, while their hearts shrink from fighting you or fighting their own people. And if Allah had so pleased, He would have given them power over you, then they would have surely fought you. So, if they keep aloof from you and fight you not, and make you an offer of peace, then remember that Allah has allowed you no way of aggression against them.”
— Surah Al-Nisa 91
Yet another proof is provided that Muslims are not allowed to be aggressive against any party of people who want peace.


Critics/Extremists: Islam says the punishment for Apostasy is death

Let us look at what the Holy Quran says:
“Admonish, therefore, for thou art but an admonisher;
Thou hast no authority to compel them.
But whoever turns away and disbelieves,
Allah will punish him with the greatest punishment (Hell)
Unto Us surely is their return,
Then, surely, it is for Us to call them to account.”
— Surah Al-Ghashiya 22-27
Does this suggest that anyone who disbelieves after believing will go to hell? That is not entirely the case. Here is how this is explained by the Quran:
“Those who believe, then disbelieve, then again believe, then disbelieve, and then increase in disbelief, Allah will never forgive them nor will He guide them to the way.”
— Surah Al-Nisa 138
“Whoso disbelieves in Allah after he has believed — save him who is forced thereto while his heart finds peace in the faith — but such as open their breasts to disbelief, on them is Allah’s wrath; and they shall have a severe punishment.”
— Surah Al-Nahl 107
The message to Muslims is that the punishment of Apostasy is not be applied by man, but by God himself. Here is what the Quran says in this respect:
“We know best what they say; and thou hast not been appointed to compel them in any way. So admonish, by means of the Qur’an, him who fears My warning.”
— Surah Al-Qaf 46
“And as for those who take for themselves protectors beside Him, Allah watches over them; and thou art not a guardian over them.”
— Surah Al-Shura 7
“But if they turn away, We have not sent thee as a guardian over them. Thy duty is only to convey the Message. And truly when We cause man to taste of mercy from Us, he rejoices therein. But if an evil befalls them because of what their hands have sent forth, then lo! man is ungrateful.”
— Surah Al-Shura 49
“Say, ‘Obey Allah, and obey the Messenger.’ But if you turn away, then upon him is his burden, and upon you is your burden. And if you obey him, you will be rightly guided. And the messenger is not responsible but for the plain delivery of the Message.”
— Surah Al-Nur 55
“And say, ‘It is the truth from your Lord; wherefore let him who will, believe, and let him who will, disbelieve.’ Verily, We have prepared for the wrongdoers a fire whose flaming canopy shall enclose them. And if they cry for help, they will be helped with water like molten lead which will burn the faces. How dreadful the drink, and how evil is the Fire as a resting place!”
— Surah Al-Kahf 30
“But if they turn away, then thou art responsible only for the plain delivery of the Message.”
— Surah Al-Nahl 83
These are just the few of the many examples proving that anyone who disbelieves is doing it on their own detriment in the eyes of God but the purpose for Muslims is only to deliver the message of God. One of the biggest and clearest verses of Man only following Islam and God being the punisher (not Man) is in the following verse
“ And whether We make thee see the fulfilment of some of the things with which We threaten them or whether We make thee die, it makes little difference, for on thee lies only the delivery of the Message, and on Us the reckoning.”
— Surah Al-Ra'd 41
At this point the question you ask yourself, If Quran is this clear about how to treat apostates, where is the criticism coming from. The extremists who defy Allah, by choosing to follow suspect hadith over the word of God are the ones who set the example incorrectly. Ask yourself the question looking at it logically, from a Muslim perspective, Quran is the word of God and authentic Ahadith are a collection of words and actions of the Holy Prophet (saw), which takes precedent. The primary source of the incorrect tradition from Ahadith is explained here by Hadhrat Mirza Tahir Ahmad Khalifatul Masih IV in his book "Murder in the name of Allah":

http://www.alislam.org/library/books/mna/chapter_7.html

An Authentic ahadith is that which does not contradict the Quran especially considering that Ahadith were compiled 200-300 after the death of the Holy Prophet (saw)

Here is a Powerpoint of how to distinguish between Authentic Ahadeeth and those which might be suspect

http://www.alislam.org/holyprophet/Authenticity-of-Hadith.pptx