Tweet
It’s time to get your facts right instead of listening to whatever is being broadcasted on TV.
First, let’s start with a brief definition for Jihad. Jihad is the daily struggle in life, unlike the meaning we are used to read/ hear. If you earn your living, obey your parents, defend your country or if you do any good deed, then you will be considered a Mojahid (from Jihad).
Actions of some ignorant Muslims don’t necessarily reflect the real teachings of Islam because everyone is responsible for his or her own actions. However, many people especially in the west have dedicated themselves to attack Islam and Muslims everywhere through variety of ways, picturing Islam as a source of evil and Muslims as terrorists and oppressors.
When a non-Muslim commits a crime they will blame the individual himself, but when a Muslim commits the same crime, it will be Islam the one to be blamed!
One of the most misunderstood aspects of Islam is it’s position on fighting. This comes both from a widespread, general ignorance of Islam and a tendency to view the violent behavior of groups and individuals with only nominal ties to Islam as representative of Islam. For Muslims, the Qur’an contains God’s own words and is not the work of inspired men. It is therefore, the ultimate authority which defines the beliefs and practices of Islam.
In fact, Islam had defined rules and boundaries for warriors and those who defend their countries and lands against any kind of occupation or war, such as: not to kill a child, a woman, an old man and even not to cut a tree.
The actions of Taliban in Afghanistan and all over the world are results for misinterpreting the real teachings and values that Islam promotes.
By killing, bombing and kidnapping people they gave Islam a bad name and helped the anti-Islamic media to back their nonsense statements about Islam.
Islam has never ordered Muslims to kill those who don’t believe nor to threaten their lives. Killing and murdering innocents is considered a crime in Islam.
A careful examination of the Quran yields a different view. I’ll quote some verses from the holly Quran that Condemn killing innocents:
"Fight in the cause of God those who fight you, but do not transgress limits; for God loveth not transgressors. (The Noble Quran, 2:190)"
"On that account: We ordained for the Children of Israel that if any one slew a person – unless it be for murder or for spreading mischief in the land – it would be as if he slew the whole people: and if any one saved a life, it would be as if he saved the life of the whole people. Then although there came to them Our apostles with clear signs, yet, even after that, many of them continued to commit excesses in the land. (The Noble Quran, 5:32)"
"Those who invoke not, with God, any other god, nor slay such life as God has made sacred except for just cause, nor commit fornication; – and any that does this (not only) meets punishment. (But) the Penalty on the Day Of Judgment will be doubled To him, and he will dwell Therein in ignominy. (The Noble Quran, 25:68-69)"
"But if the enemy incline towards peace, do thou (also) incline towards peace, and trust in God: for He is One that heareth and knoweth (all things). (The Noble Quran, 8:61)"
Any act of violence doesn’t represent Islam in any way, not that there aren’t Muslims who act like that, but because it’s not caused by Islam. The majority of Muslims are rather peaceful people. If they weren’t then why aren’t all Muslims torturing and murdering people?
In conclusion, judging a religion based on some barbaric actions done by people who claim to follow that religion, is nonsense as well. One should do some research instead of reading biased books, having a biased viewpoint, relying on the biased media because this won’t get us anywhere!
Samar H.
QU
7 Comments
Up front, I have to say I have little use for Islam. However, I have little use for Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism, or the Flying Spaghetti Monster.
That said, good article. I used to know someone who was (is) Muslim, and we had some very interesting talks on what that meant, and I’m constantly impressed with the difference between her demeanor and how she explained her beliefs, and the pundit/press/ignoratti prattle.
Let’s not forget how culture, science, and peace flourished and everyone prospered under Islamic rule in Europe before the Christians and other barbarians took over.
“if any one slew a person – unless it be for murder or for spreading mischief in the land”
Freedom to kill someone for “spreading mischief?” Based on the definition here:
Main Entry:
Function:
noun
Etymology:
Middle English meschief, from Anglo-French, misfortune, hardship, from Old French meschever to come out badly, mes- + chief head, end — more at chief
Date:
14th century
1: a specific injury or damage attributed to a particular agent
2: a cause or source of harm, evil, or irritation ; especially : a person who causes mischief
3 a: action that annoys or irritates
I can’t help but wonder what the author’s intended meaning really was. Mischief is a 14th century word coming into usage well after the Quran was written. Surely, the author didn’t mean it was okay to kill a person if they were generally annoying or irritating? What was meant then? Translation is one of the difficulties here, but absent that, the meaning of the word(s) in the original language may be unclear especially as these were commonly used more than a thousand years ago.
Sorry the information about the word “mischief” came from Merriam Webster Online.
thanks for your thoughtful comment!
sorry but I think that you got confused.
The verse means that unless the enemy or whoever is attacking you is trying to murder or to spread mischief in the land, you are not allowed to kill or attack. Because killing one soul is equivalent to killing the whole mankind and is considered a sin.
hope things got clearer now! thanks for your question
I think the problem remains with the word “mischief”. In English a “mischievous child” may be one that is a pest, asking silly questions, or pulling harmless pranks (mischief). In fact, the lighter concept- of making a practical joke- is the more common usage in English today.
I think in the past the term was more serious. Perhaps it meant (I hazard a guess) “actions that might create a situation where war or killing might arise”. One could thus spread rumors about another that might sow hate and anger…and that might require an attack.
I’d point out that at the time Mohammed (pbuh) “received” the Koran clan killings and religious warfare were rampant. The Koran instructed the people to end this, to bring disputes before judges, under the law…and not to take the law under ones own hands. Yes, war (and killing) was possible, but it was not supposed to be undertaken without judicial deliberation. And this was to be undertaken by those outside of the conflict…not direct participants in the dispute.
you are right and as many have noticed, if a word is interpreted in a wrong way this can change the whole meaning!!!
thanks for the clarification, cinnamonape.