Untimely Reflection on the Sickness of the Soul

Mobilizing white poor working class for racist (post-Jim Crow segregation), Fascist (Nazi), and xenophobic (Trump) causes is an old practice. Does this 6 minutes of Martin Luther King's Montgomery speech not remind you of Trump's anti-immigrant arguments--and winning the presidency?:

"Our whole campaign in Alabama has been centered around the right to vote. In focusing the attention of the nation and the world today on the flagrant denial of the right to vote, we are exposing the very origin, the root cause, of racial segregation in the Southland. Racial segregation as a way of life did not come about as a natural result of hatred between the races immediately after the Civil War. There were no laws segregating the races then. And as the noted historian, C. Vann Woodward, in his book, The Strange Career of Jim Crow, clearly points out, the segregation of the races was really a political stratagem employed by the emerging Bourbon interests in the South to keep the southern masses divided and southern labor the cheapest in the land. You see, it was a simple thing to keep the poor white masses working for near-starvation wages in the years that followed the Civil War. Why, if the poor white plantation or mill worker became dissatisfied with his low wages, the plantation or mill owner would merely threaten to fire him and hire former Negro slaves and pay him even less. Thus, the southern wage level was kept almost unbearably low.

Toward the end of the Reconstruction era, something very significant happened. (Listen to him) That is what was known as the Populist Movement. The leaders of this movement began awakening the poor white masses and the former Negro slaves to the fact that they were being fleeced by the emerging Bourbon interests. Not only that, but they began uniting the Negro and white masses into a voting bloc that threatened to drive the Bourbon interests from the command posts of political power in the South.

To meet this threat, the southern aristocracy began immediately to engineer this development of a segregated society. I want you to follow me through here because this is very important to see the roots of racism and the denial of the right to vote. Through their control of mass media, they revised the doctrine of white supremacy. They saturated the thinking of the poor white masses with it, thus clouding their minds to the real issue involved in the Populist Movement. They then directed the placement on the books of the South of laws that made it a crime for Negroes and whites to come together as equals at any level. And that did it. That crippled and eventually destroyed the Populist Movement of the nineteenth century.

If it may be said of the slavery era that the white man took the world and gave the Negro Jesus, then it may be said of the Reconstruction era that the southern aristocracy took the world and gave the poor white man Jim Crow. He gave him Jim Crow. And when his wrinkled stomach cried out for the food that his empty pockets could not provide, he ate Jim Crow, a psychological bird that told him that no matter how bad off he was, at least he was a white man, better than the black man. And he ate Jim Crow. And when his undernourished children cried out for the necessities that his low wages could not provide, he showed them the Jim Crow signs on the buses and in the stores, on the streets and in the public buildings. And his children, too, learned to feed upon Jim Crow, their last outpost of psychological oblivion."

https://soundcloud.com/mipdo/rare-mlk-jr-on-how-the-races

Those white working class, who voted for Trump and some who didn't, are poisoned by a history of some of the most destructive American "values" and "dream":   unbridled capitalism, transformation of the Gospel of the poor to the Gospel of the rich, 

the adoration of wealth, usury, and Trumpian extravagant, 

a deep racial institutionalized hatred, 

devaluation of all values, 

drunkenness, 

explosion of private life, 

sexual debauchery and abuse, 

misogyny and gender confusion, 

the ethical collapse of Gospel of Prosperity 
and secular nihilism, hedonism and humanism.  

This is the sickness of our societal soul. 

It is strange to me.  I now notice that my life journey was from confusion and cloud to painstakingly taking steps to know myself, from narcissism and false image, sweeping things under the rug, and to escape the truth about myself, to a kind of enthusiasm, painful enthusiasm to see myself, to diagnose the sickness of my soul.  Because life nailed it down in my soul fully, tortuously, torturously, completely, irrevocably, undoubtedly, that my image is fictitious, it is a vain glory, it is a seed to be cracked open to grow, a cocoon to be torn apart to fly out of it to freedom, the freedom from the self: the self is at the same time the sickness and the healer.  

I felt I was under a spell, a strange spell, the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, the sickness that I swallowed in the garden of Eden, is this sense of self-consciousness which seeks pleasure and glorification, complacency and power, fame and adoration, the child in us never grows old, we just learn to cover it up with serious talk and sophisticated gestures, while killing its innocence. 

I awakened to the fact that I was under a spell.  It is a breach inside the self, to detach oneself from total immersion in a lie, a delusion, an illusion.  It is like a spark of recognition for an insane person to realize for a moment that s/he is mad, s/he is schizophrenic, s/he is manic-depressive, with constant endless justification and reasoning that s/he is OK and all her or his delusions and clanging make sense and are real.  It is like a sudden awakening out of anosognosia, from a spell of addictive self-satisfaction. 

Before that awakening, I couldn’t honestly give ears to a critique about my weak points.  We all need to feel good relatively about ourselves to function somehow.  But this feeling good about oneself can also completely closes one off to the sickness of one’s soul.  Only life nailed it down in my soul fully, tortuously, torturously, completely, irrevocably, undoubtedly, that we are trapped in a collective stupidity and madness to overlook the only way we can find our way out of this maze: to drop the cloak of self and to see the sickness of our soul, face to face, without escape or manipulation, without fashioning and ornamentation—to the cure of God-consciousness, that I am nobody, nothing, a dying limited speck of dust.   

All my glory and attributes, the beauty of mind or body, is just a fleeting bubble of fictitious self-significance to endure this false consciousness, this awakening to my self-consciousness after eating the fruit of the tree of good and evil, to feel good about myself somehow as I know I am nested with death.  And I have come so far from my origin and source of existence that I don’t remember anymore why God did not accept my sacrifice and instead accepted Abel’s.  I have fallen into centuries of oblivion to feel satisfaction in devouring the world for my petty survival—as survival of genes is the only meaning I can hold onto, and my greatness is the number of airplanes, skyscrapers, and ivory Trump towers that I can own.  I have lost my connection to my source so deeply that I don’t remember what I killed Abel for.

Why did I kill Abel?  For he reminded me constantly of the sickness of my soul, that God is less pleased with me than him.  Since then I have done everything I could to forget my soul: I blamed God and asked for absolute equality between everyone, the murderer and the victim, while I raised a system of exclusion just to fill this damn void inside my soul, this deep loss that I am not loved, not taking even one step to see the sickness of my own soul, why am I not loved?  I sought power and money, houses and castles, names and honors, towers and casinos, I drew dividing lines between black and white, between Native-Americans and Americans, between immigrants and Americans, between women and men, because I wanted, begged, cried for, day and night, the absolute equality of good and evil, of meritorious and ignominious, because I can’t stand the sickness of my soul.

Because I don’t have that strength of soul to bury my tainted self once for all and see the base and disgraceful void inside my soul so that to cure myself to God-consciousness.  I have lost it.  I killed Abel.  All I want is to forget.  I want to forget that I am not applaudable and commendable, that I am not admirable and praiseworthy.  I hate myself and conceal it in overdoing everything, I become the Trump tower.  I escape the fact that I am contemptible and deplorable, unethical and unsavory.

    

I look deeply into this sight for which I have been whining all my life, to be accepted, to be lauded, to be admirable, I see this little narcissus who can’t stop scolding the whole world because God didn’t accept his gift and can’t stop this face keeping and look straight into the dry well of his soul and acknowledges its sickness. 

I want to highlight this again to make my point clearer: why did Cain kill Abel?  He killed Abel because he couldn’t see the sickness of his soul, his sacrifice was not a real sacrifice, it was not a sacrifice of his “self”, it was to have an admirable and laudable self in the eyes of God without having the merit for it.  This is important, the self which wants to be admirable and applaudable in the eyes of people (as God is forgotten now) cannot look into its sickness of the soul, which is this very desire to be applaudable—without knowing that the only way to pass the bridge to God, to God-consciousness, is to look into the sickness of one’s soul and get dissolved in the love for beloved without asking to be applaudable, but realizing that the only praiseworthy being is God.  God shall accept this sacrifice when I overcome the sickness of my soul: the self.

This is the same about social sickness.  I am not frustrated or angry for the election of Trump.  I am glad to look into the sickness of our society, because life nailed it down in my soul fully, tortuously, torturously, completely, irrevocably, undoubtedly that the only way to go forward is to look straight forward into the dark hole of societal soul.

Trump’s election shows Gospel of Prosperity, the worship of money, to praise billionaires and to see them of being capable to hold the highest office in the country.  Trump’s election shows that America has lost its soul to usury system of greed and needs the hatred of strangers to scaffold its self.  A self which holds itself together by a language of “we” vs. “them”, a societal self that can’t look into its own sickness, which is nothing but this desire to have a “we-self” vs. “them”. 

Now different sources exclaim that it is the white working class who chose Trump, because democrats couldn’t recognize and address their loss and organize them.  But this is again not looking into the sickness of our societal soul.  Democratic party is a corporate party and Clinton is incapable of mobilizing people to vote, because in the depth of their experience people know that Democratic party is a crippled child of corporations.  The white working class is poisoned by a history of American values and dream: a transformation of Gospel of the poor to a Gospel of the rich, the adoration of wealth, usury, and Trumpian extravagant, a deep racial institutionalized hatred, devaluation of all values, drunkenness, explosion of private life, sexual abuse, misogyny, gender confusion, the glorification of queen beauties.  We are poisoned by the ethical collapse of Gospel of Prosperity and secular nihilism, hedonism, and humanism.  This is the sickness of our societal soul.   

Guideline for The Quran Beyond Fragmentation

These are some suggestions for your comments to change it for better.

 We hold that while God guides us through scriptures, God is ineffable and we can’t identify God with anything in the world: persons (Jesus and Prophets) and scriptures (Torah, Bibles, and the Quran).

 We believe that we should go back to the Quran BEFORE sectarianism and factions.

“Hold fast to God’s rope all together; do not split into factions. Remember God’s favor to you: you were enemies and then God brought your hearts together and you became brothers by God’s grace; you were about to fall into a pit of Fire and God saved you from it– in this way God makes God’s revelations clear to you so that you may be rightly guided. Be a community that calls for what is good, urges what is right, and forbids what is wrong: those who do this are the successful ones. Do not be like those who, after they have been given clear revelation, split into factions and fall into disputes: a terrible punishment awaits such people.” (3:103-5)

 We go back to the Quran without prioritizing the Sharia law, the Sunnah (narrations of what the Prophet did), and the Hadith (the sayings of the Prophet).

 With respect and deference, we critically evaluate all religions (including the Quran) and learn from all religions, cultures, philosophies, and sciences, based on these fundamental propositions of the Quran:

“Do not follow blindly what you do not know to be true: ears, eyes, and heart, you will be questioned about all these.” (17:36)

 We seek justice and love, and not hatred. So fundamentally we refrain from and reject any hateful language about anyone, even disbelievers and unjust people.

 Based on these fundamental verses of the Quran:
“We have assigned a law and a path to each of you. If God had so willed, He would have made you one community, but He wanted to test you through that which He has given you, so race to do good: you will all return to God and He will make clear to you the matters you differed about. 49 So [Prophet] judge between them according to what God has sent down.” (5:48)

We believe:

The dilemma of religious institutions and rituals such as church, synagogue, mosque, and temples is that the very medium through which God is recollected and praised becomes a veil to a refreshing experience of God. We are inclined to a reflex reaction to throw the baby out with the bathwater. But this will end up to the desert of nihilism and forgetfulness of God again. We can’t invent God or change religious institutions by destruction based on self-righteousness or our secular rational reasoning. Jesus and Muhammad transformed Judaism by “completion”, not “rejection” and by religious rational reasoning, rituals, and divinely inspired soul connection.

The multiplicity of religious institutions will not and cannot be reduced to one mega unitary institution. What is the most feasible and desirable (in the spirit of completion, not rejection) is that each religion will be unified within its domain by opening up to each other. Rituals of prayer and temples are respected and revered. Nonetheless, all religions see and seek the unity, the overlapping, and mutual learning, against parochialism and being closed off, by rejecting the politics of identity and a congealed self.

We are stuck in a mental-spiritual cramp: to level off all the differences to one. This is exactly, one may say, what will deprive us from the completion of the experience of God in the richness of differences that are connected to the same source, or as the old story goes, perceive the same elephant in the room. This opens us up to listen to the other, rather than righteous indignation to destroy the other. And this is the foundation of love, isn’t it?

A Brief Reflection on the Story of the Fall and Ascent in the Quran

“Children of Adam, We have given you garments to cover your nakedness and as adornment for you; the garment of God-consciousness is the best of all garments– this is one of God’s signs, so that people may take heed.” (7:26)

The Story of Fall in the Quran

“We established you [people] on the earth and provided you with a means of livelihood there––small thanks you give!  We created you, We gave you shape, and then We said to the angels, ‘Bow down before Adam,’ and they did. But not Iblis: he was not one of those who bowed down. 12 God said, ‘What prevented you from bowing down as I commanded you?’ and he said, ‘I am better than him: You created me from fire and him from clay.’  God said, ‘Get down from here! This is no place for your arrogance. Get out! You are contemptible!’ but Iblis said, ‘Give me respite until the Day people are raised from the dead,’ and God replied, ‘You have respite.’  And then Iblis said, ‘Because You have put me in the wrong, I will lie in wait for them all on Your straight path: I will come at them– from their front and their back, from their right and their left– and You will find that most of them are ungrateful.’  God said, ‘Get out! You are disgraced and banished! I swear I shall fill Hell with you and all who follow you! 19 But you and your wife, Adam, live in the Garden. 

[God said] But you and your wife, Adam, live in the Garden. Both of you eat whatever you like, but do not go near this tree or you will become wrongdoers.’  Satan whispered to them so as to expose their nakedness, which had been hidden from them: he said, ‘Your Lord only forbade you this tree to prevent you becoming angels or immortals,’ and he swore to them, ‘I am giving you sincere advice’– he lured them with lies. Their nakedness became exposed to them when they had eaten from the tree: they began to put together leaves from the Garden to cover themselves. Their Lord called to them, ‘Did I not forbid you to approach that tree? Did I not warn you that Satan was your sworn enemy?’ They replied, ‘Our Lord, we have wronged our souls: if You do not forgive us and have mercy, we shall be lost.’ He said, ‘All of you get out! You are each other’s enemies.  On earth, you will have a place to stay and livelihood– for a time.’  He said, ‘There you will live; there you will die; from there you will be brought out.’  Children of Adam, We have given you garments to cover your nakedness and as adornment for you; the garment of God-consciousness is the best of all garments– this is one of God’s signs, so that people may take heed.  Children of Adam, do not let Satan seduce you, as he did your parents, causing them to leave the Garden, stripping them of their garments [innocence or God-consciousness] to expose their nakedness to them: he and his forces can see you from where you cannot see them: We have made evil ones allies to those who do not believe.” (7:10-27)

The Simile of Garment for Body and Soul

In the Bible, Genesis 3-23, the story of creation almost concludes the same as the Quran.  In the Bible, God doesn’t say to Adam and Eve that you will become “wrongdoers”, but God forbids them to eat from “the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat from it you will certainly die.” (Genesis: 2:17).  And Satan seduces them to eat from the tree.  In Bible, Serpent says: “You will not certainly die, for God knows that when you eat from it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.” (3:4) In the Quran, Iblis says: ‘Your Lord only forbade you this tree to prevent you becoming angels or immortals’.

In both Bible and Quran, being aware of their nakedness is the sign of knowing good and evil.  In the Quran, God tells them you will become “wrongdoers” if you eat from the forbidden tree.  This is a very interesting point: you will become aware of the desires of body and also the struggle for purification.  No animal knows it is naked; human beings are exceptional in having garments on.  In our time, there are nudist movements who think by taking off their cloth and overcoming the shame of nudity they can liberate themselves.  The Quran highlights the fact that this is the seduction of Iblis to lose your shame and objectify your body. 

Something happened after eating the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil.  We obtained a sense of “self” and “freedom of the will” to see two different possibilities: to be graceless or graceful.  So, a path of evolution was set for us that, unlike Darwinian evolution, it is not only about “survival” but for achieving virtues and “God-consciousness” (taghva).  The Fall is the story of realizing the attachment and detachment from the body and coming to self-consciousness.  This self has to find the balance between good and evil and to choose: to be immersed in the pleasures of the body shamelessly (attachment) or in balance purify the body and soul in God-consciousness (detachment).

And a medium for this purification is “proper shame” that we attained after the Fall. The Fall and the experience of shame indicate both opening our eyes to a self (freedom of the will) and that “proper shame” is itself a way to purify the self, to become righteous and one in body and soul, to refrain from obscenities and indecencies. I call it coincidentia oppositorum: the very emotion of shame that was a symptom of the Fall is the medium of Ascent, keeping the garments of grace on us. Good and evil are separate but excess can turn good to evil. So, for example, shamelessness and toxic shame (excess) both trap the self in the body, but proper shame hinders our soul from being tainted by obscenities.  

The Quran plays with the word “garment” as a symbol of God-consciousness and grace.

“We have given you garments to cover your nakedness and as adornment for you; the garment of God-consciousness is the best of all garments– this is one of God’s signs, so that people may take heed.

Again, before the Fall, Adam and Eve had garment of innocence and were naked.  After having the forbidden fruit, they feel ashamed and seek a garment.  After the Fall, they must live on the earth and Iblis tries to seduce children of Adam to take off their garments and become naked.  But this time, this becoming naked is not going back to the God-consciousness and innocence of Garden of Eden but to swing from good to evil—to follow one’s desires and objectification of the body and losing shame.  When there was no shame there was also no knowledge of good and evil.  When they gained the seed of knowledge, they experienced shame.  Now if they lose their shame after eating the fruit of knowledge of good and evil and become naked, which means living in lust and objectification of the body, they will lose their virtues and become graceless.

Look at the world now! In the West, losing the garment of grace: hedonism, shamelessness, gracelessness, and objectification of the body (especially for women) is a serious social issue. In the West, we see gender confusion and obscenity. In the East, losing the garment of grace occurs through totalitarianism, corruption, and hypocrisy. It seems to me that God could foresee the future, that how humanity, especially in the West, will fall into the trap of sexual liberation, nudity, and obscenity. So, in the Quran God forewarns us about nudity and gender confusion and calls for securing the garment of virtue for men and women.

Almost immediately after the story of the Fall, the Quran continues:

“Yet when [these people] do something disgraceful, they say, ‘We found our forefathers doing this,’ and, ‘God has commanded us to do this.’ Say [Prophet], ‘God does not command disgraceful deeds. How can you say about God things that you do not know [to be true]?’  Say, ‘My Lord commands righteousness. Direct your worship straight to Him wherever you pray; call on Him; devote your religion entirely to Him. Just as He first created you, so you will come back [to life] again.’  Some He has guided and some are doomed to stray: they have taken evil ones rather than God as their masters, thinking that they are rightly guided.  Children of Adam, dress well whenever you are at worship, and eat and drink [as We have permitted] but do not be extravagant: God does not like extravagant people.  Say [Prophet], ‘Who has forbidden the adornment and the nourishment God has provided for His servants?’ Say, ‘They are [allowed] for those who believe during the life of this world: they will be theirs alone on the Day of Resurrection.’ This is how We make Our revelation clear for those who understand. (7:28-32)   

A Prelude to Reflections on War and Violence in the Quran

“Will they not think about this Quran? If it had been from anyone other than God, they would have found much inconsistency in it.” (4:82)

“190 Fight in God’s cause against those who fight you, but do not overstep the limits: [The Arabic command “la ta tadu” is so general that commentators have agreed that it includes prohibition of starting hostilities, fighting non-combatants, disproportionate response to aggression, etc.].  God does not love those who overstep the limits.  191 Kill them wherever you encounter them, [The Muslims were concerned as to whether it was permitted to retaliate when attacked within the sacred precincts in Mecca when on pilgrimage. They are here given permission to fight back wherever they encounter their attackers, in the precinct or outside it.] and drive them out from where they drove you out, for persecution is more serious than killing. [‘Persecuting you unlawfully is worse than you killing them in the precincts in self-defense.’] Do not fight them at the Sacred Mosque unless they fight you there. If they do fight you, kill them– this is what such disbelievers deserve– but if they stop, then God is most forgiving and merciful.  Fight them until there is no more persecution, and Worship [ Worship at the sacred mosque. See 8: 39 below, 2: 191 above.] is devoted to God. If they cease hostilities, there can be no [further] hostility, except towards aggressors.  A sacred month for a sacred month: violation of sanctity [calls for] fair retribution. So, if anyone commits aggression against you, attack him as he attacked you, but be mindful of God, and know that He is with those who are mindful of Him.  Spend in God’s cause: do not contribute to your destruction with your own hands, [If they are not prepared to pay for what it takes to defend themselves, then they will bring ruin on themselves. The verse is also understood generally to outlaw suicide and other forms of self-harm.] but do good, for God loves those who do good.” (2:190-195)

In this reflection, I will briefly elaborate on the way the Quran discusses and legitimizes war and violence.  First, I will show that most of the exaggerations and Islamophobia are from a distortion of reality, concealing deeper roots of the problems in the Middle East and the unofficial terrorism of Imperialist and  colonialist powers.  I will allow Chomsky speaks on these issues in this part.  Second, I will review the phenomenon of ISIS and similar extremists and again I will allow Chomsky to show how they have emerged and what kind of strategies they employ.  Third, the major part of this reflection is reading the Quran without fragmenting it to show the stance of scripture on war and violence.  

The Hypocrisy of the Powerful

There is a tremendous propaganda in social media against Islam as the religion of war and violence.  The media cover up the fact about the aggression of imperialists and colonization of the West—the world wars and invasion of Iraq, Afghanistan, and the support of occupation in Palestine and so many atrocities all around the world.  Let's listen to Chomsky on The History and Hypocrisy of the War on Terror:  

I usually ask my students “what if Iraq takes over U.S. and overturns the government and put a puppet government in its place.  Would you not fight for freedom from every 4^th of July to the next one?”  Most of them say, “yes, we will.”  “What if Iraq's invasive government,” I continue, “declares that those who fight us in the U.S. are terrorists and we who invaded them are ‘civilized’”.  And they find it hilarious.  Chomsky puts it best:

  

"There are simple moral guidelines, which are almost uniformly rejected. The most obvious is the principle of universality, the foundation of any moral code that can be taken seriously: what is right for me is right for you; what is wrong for you is wrong for me. There are lessons of history, which can be debated. The tools of logic should be uncontroversial."

https://chomsky.info/200711__/

I usually also ask my students to listen to or read Chomsky’s “Distorted Morality" (article: https://chomsky.info/200202__02/ ) to get a sense of subversion of truth, which starts with these theses: "The thesis is that we are all total hypocrites on any issue relating to terrorism. Now, let me clarify the notion "we." By "we," I mean people like us -- people who have enough high degree of privilege, of training, resources, access to information -- for whom it is pretty easy to find out the truth about things if we want to. If we decide that that is our vocation, and in the case in question, you don't really have to dig very deep, it's all right on the surface. So when I say "we," I mean that category. And I definitely mean to include myself in "we" because I have never proposed that our leaders be subjected to the kinds of punishment that I have recommended for enemies. So that is hypocrisy. So if there are people who escape it I really don't know them and have not come across them. It's a very powerful culture. It's hard to escape its grasp. So that's thesis number one, we are all total hypocrites, in the sense of the gospels, on the matter of terrorism. The second thesis is stronger, namely, that the first thesis is so obvious that it takes real effort to miss it. In fact, I should go home right now because it is obvious. Nevertheless, let me continue and say why I think both theses are correct."

On the other hand, it is obvious that the way ISIS and other extremists are fighting for the cause of freedom is excessive and self-destructive and smears the name of Islam and Muslims with cruelty and violence.  But the response to this brutality, which is indeed a ramification of the brutality of U.S. invasion, is demonizing Islam itself and injecting more fuel to the fire of war and atrocities.  Let's see what Chomsky says about ISIS: 

Noam Chomsky: To Deal with ISIS, U.S. Should Own Up to Chaos of Iraq War & Other Radicalizing Acts

However, this unbridled violence has nothing to do with Islam and simply Islam is being used to recruit for the anger and fury against U.S. domination in the region.  ISIS is brutally killing ordinary people of the West and even all Shia and other Sunnis such as Al-Qaeda, Hamas, and other minorities, not only political activists but also all their people, as enemies and kill innocent people indiscriminately.  In an Interview Chomsky was asked:

"C.J. Polychroniou: What is ISIS’s aim, when targeting innocent civilians, such as the attack on the seaside town of Nice in France in which 84 people were killed?

And Chomsky responds: As I mentioned, we should, I think, be cautious about the claims and charges of ISIS initiative, or even involvement. But when they are involved in such atrocities, the strategy is clear enough. Careful and expert analysts of ISIS and violent insurgencies (Scott Atran, William Polk and others) generally tend to take ISIS at its word. Sometimes they cite the “playbook” in which the core strategy used by ISIS is laid out, written a decade ago by the Mesopotamian wing of the al-Qaeda affiliate that morphed into ISIS. Here are the first two axioms (quoting an article by Atran):

[Axiom 1:] Hit soft targets: ‘Diversify and widen the vexation strikes against the Crusader-Zionist enemy in every place in the Islamic world, and even outside of it if possible, so as to disperse the efforts of the alliance of the enemy and thus drain it to the greatest extent possible.’

[Axiom 2:] Strike when potential victims have their guard down to maximise fear in general populations and drain their economies: ‘If a tourist resort that the Crusaders patronise… is hit, all of the tourist resorts in all of the states of the world will have to be secured by the work of additional forces, which are double the ordinary amount, and a huge increase in spending.’

And the strategy has been quite successful, both in spreading terrorism and imposing great costs on the “Crusaders” with slight expenditure."

(Global Struggles for Dominance: Noam Chomsky on ISIS, NATO and Russia
Noam Chomsky interviewed by C.J. Polychroniou
Truthout, August 17, 2016https://chomsky.info/20160817/)

Noam Chomsky: US is world's biggest terrorist

War and Violence in the Quran

But obviously these axioms have nothing to do with Islam.  The first endeavor for freedom might be attended with the preparation of the soul by peaceful means.  Educating masses and peaceful movements in so many cases are more productive than rushing to war and violence.  My objective in this reflection is to go to the scripture itself and show that these brutal and hateful strategies have nothing to do with the Quran.

The Prophet Muhammad and his followers conquer the Mecca without violence and destruction of the city.  For the first 13 years of preaching Islam, the Prophet and his followers did not engage in any warfare; rather, their main mode of resistance against the Meccans—who actively persecuted them—was non-violent.

Iran’s Islamic Revolution against Shah’s regime in 1979 and Arab Spring movement were non-violent movements.  Arab Spring (2010-2013) started from Tunisia and spread to Egypt, Libya, Yemen, and Syria, were mostly peaceful mass demonstrations that overturned their dictator leaders—except for Syria which has become complicated due to global interests in the region.  The Quran never promotes senseless killing for victory and conquer or retaliation, and always asks for good will and reconciliation.  The civil war between Shia and Sunni Muslims in the Middle East is an abomination to Islam.  The Quran advises believers to treat each one courteously, peacefully, and extends it to all human beings at the end of this passage:

“If two groups of the believers fight, you [believers] should try to reconcile them; if one of them is [clearly] oppressing the other, fight the oppressors until they submit to God’s command, then make a just and even-handed reconciliation between the two of them: God loves those who are even-handed.  The believers are brothers, so make peace between your two brothers and be mindful of God, so that you may be given mercy.  Believers, no one group of men should jeer at another, who may after all be better than them; no one group of women should jeer at another, who may after all be better than them; do not speak ill of one another; do not use offensive nicknames for one another. How bad it is to be called a mischief-maker after accepting faith! Those who do not repent of this behavior are evildoers.  Believers, avoid making too many assumptions– some assumptions are sinful– and do not spy on one another or speak ill of people behind their backs: would any of you like to eat the flesh of your dead brother? No, you would hate it. So be mindful of God: God is ever relenting, most merciful.  People, We created you all from a single man and a single woman, and made you into races and tribes so that you should recognize one another. In God’s eyes, the most honored of you are the ones most mindful of Him: God is all knowing, all aware.” (49:9-13)

The Quran clearly delineates the boundaries of war.  It bars us from killing innocents amass:

“So [Prophet] fight in God’s way. You are accountable only for yourself. Urge the believers on. God may well curb the power of the disbelievers, for He is stronger in might and more terrible in punishment.  Whoever speaks for a good cause will share in its benefits and whoever speaks for a bad cause will share in its burden: God controls everything.  But [even in battle] when you [believers] are offered a greeting, respond with a better one, or at least return it [4:94 ‘So, you who believe, be careful when you go to fight in God’s way, and do not say to someone who offers you a greeting of peace, ‘You are not a believer,’ out of desire for the chance gains of this life– God has plenty of gains for you. You yourself were in the same position [once], but God was gracious to you, so be careful: God is fully aware of what you do.’] God keeps account of everything.  He is God: there is no god but Him. He will gather you all together on the Day of Resurrection, about which there is no doubt. Whose word can be truer than God’s? (4:84-87)

“[Prophet], tell them the truth about the story of Adam’s two sons: each of them offered a sacrifice, and it was accepted from one and not the other. One said, ‘I will kill you,’ but the other said, ‘God only accepts the sacrifice of those who are mindful of Him. 28 If you raise your hand to kill me, I will not raise mine to kill you. I fear God, the Lord of all worlds, 29 and I would rather you were burdened with my sins as well as yours and became an inhabitant of the Fire: such is the evildoers’ reward.’ 30 But his soul prompted him to kill his brother: he killed him and became one of the losers. 31 God sent a raven to scratch up the ground and show him how to cover his brother’s corpse and he said, ‘Woe is me! Could I not have been like this raven and covered up my brother’s body?’ He became remorseful. 32 On account of [his deed], We decreed to the Children of Israel that if anyone kills a person– unless in retribution for murder or spreading corruption in the land– it is as if he kills all mankind, while if any saves a life it is as if he saves the lives of all mankind. Our messengers came to them with clear signs, but many of them continued to commit excesses in the land. 33Those who wage war against God and His Messenger and strive to spread corruption in the land should be punished by death, crucifixion, the amputation of an alternate hand and foot,a or banishment from the land: a disgrace for them in this world, and then a terrible punishment in the Hereafter, unless they repent before you overpower them– in that case bear in mind that God is forgiving and merciful.” (5:27-34)

I intentionally quote passages before and after “if anyone kills a person– unless in retribution for murder or spreading corruption in the land– it is as if he kills all mankind, while if any saves a life it is as if he saves the lives of all mankind” because I wish also to show that the Quran doesn’t accept aggression, spreading corruption in the land, and waging war and the punishment for these aggressions are severe. 

“Why should you not fight in God’s cause and for those oppressed men, women, and children who cry out, ‘Lord, rescue us from this town whose people are oppressors! By Your grace, give us a protector and give us a helper!’?  The believers fight for God’s cause, while those who reject faith fight for an unjust cause. [This is a translation of the term “taghut”, which is variously interpreted to refer to idols, a specific tyrant, an

oracle, or an opponent of the Prophet.] Fight the allies of Satan: Satan’s strategies are truly weak.” (4:75-6)

The Quran warns against glorification of violence.  It forbids us from excess and cruelty.  Everywhere in the Quran, war is a response to aggression and for self-defense and everywhere it declares to stop war if the aggressors and persecutors stop theirs.  The Quran never ever promotes aggressive wars for conquer and rejects excess and cruelty repeatedly:     

“[Believers], fight them until there is no more persecution, and all worship [At the Sacred House; see 2: 191–3 above, and 2: 17] is devoted to God alone: if they desist, then God sees all that they do, but if they pay no heed, be sure that God is your protector, the best protector and the best helper. (8:39-40)

Some extremists and Islamophobics read the above passage as “fight everyone aggressively and invade countries until everyone on this planet worship God”.  Well, this is obviously against the Quran that states:

“There is no compulsion in religion: true guidance has become distinct from error, so whoever rejects false gods and believes in God has grasped the firmest hand-hold, one that will never break. God is all hearing and all knowing.” (2:256)

And the above verses are about war against persecution and the fact that Muslims were attacked while worshipping at the Sacred House. 

In another passage, the Quran urges the Prophet to instruct hypocrites:

“Do you [Prophet] not see those who claim to believe in what has been sent down to you, and in what was sent down before you, yet still want to turn to unjust tyrants [Taghut] for judgement, although they have been ordered to reject them?  Satan wants to lead them far astray.  When they are told, ‘Turn to God’s revelations and the Messenger [for judgement],’ you see the hypocrites turn right away from you [Prophet].  If disaster strikes them because of what they themselves have done, then they will come to you, swearing by God, ‘We only wanted to do good and achieve harmony.’  God knows well what is in the hearts of these people, so ignore what they say, instruct them, and speak to them about themselves using penetrating words.” (4:60-3)

But then God makes it clear that after all instructions and negotiations, if hypocrites turn against the Prophet and his followers violently, killing them in self-defense is permitted:

“[Believers], why are you divided in two about the hypocrites, when God Himself has rejected them because of what they have done? Do you want to guide those God has left to stray? If God leaves anyone to stray, you [Prophet] will never find the way for him.  They would dearly like you to reject faith, as they themselves have done, to be like them.  So, do not take them as allies until they migrate [to Medina] for God’s cause. If they turn [on you], [That ‘turn with aggression’ is the intended meaning is clear from the context.] then seize and kill them wherever you encounter them. [see 2:191 above] Take none of them as an ally or supporter.  But as for those who seek refuge with people with whom you have a treaty, or who come over to you because their hearts shrink from fighting against you or against their own people, God could have given them power over you, and they would have fought you. So, if they withdraw and do not fight you, and offer you peace, then God gives you no way against them.  You will find others who wish to be safe from you, and from their own people, but whenever they are back in a situation where they are tempted [to fight you], they succumb to it. So, if they neither withdraw, nor offer you peace, nor restrain themselves from fighting you, seize and kill them wherever you encounter them: We give you clear authority against such people. (4:88-91).

These are clear verses which legitimizes war against aggression and repeatedly emphasize that if aggressors stop fighting “God gives you no way against them.” 

To finish this reflection, I will quote chapter 5 of Abdel Haleem's Understanding The Quran: Themes and Style

From “Understanding The Quran: Themes and Style” by Abdel Haleem

https://thequranseeker.files.wordpress.com/2013/04/understanding-quran-themes-and-style-by-abdel-haleem.pdf

War and Peace in the Qur’an

The Sources of Islamic Law

As explained in Chapter 1, The Qur’an is the supreme authority in Islam and the primary source of Islamic Law, including the laws regulating war and peace. The second source is the ˙adith, the traditions of the Prophet Muhammad’s acts and deeds, which can be used to confirm, explain or elaborate Qur’anic teachings, but may not contradict the Qur’an, since they derive their authority from the Qur’an itself. Together these form the basis for all other sources of Islamic law, such as ijma‘ (consensus of Muslim scholars on an opinion regarding any given subject) and qiyas (reasoning by analogy). These and others are merely methods to reach decisions based on the texts or the spirit of the Qur’an and ˙adith. The Qur’an and ˙adith are thus the only binding sources of Islamic law. Again, nothing is acceptable if it contradicts the text or the spirit of these two sources. Any opinions arrived at by individual scholars or schools of Islamic law, including the recognised four Sunni schools, are no more than opinions. The founders of these schools never laid exclusive claim to the truth, or invited people to follow them rather than any other scholars. Western writers often take the views of this or that classical or modern Muslim writer as ‘the Islamic view’, presumably on the basis of assumptions drawn from the Christian tradition, where the views of people like St Augustine or St Thomas Aquinas are often cited as authorities. In Islam, however, for any view of any scholar to gain credibility, it must demonstrate its textual basis in the Qur’an and authentic ˙adith, and its derivation from a sound linguistic understanding of these texts.

Ijtihad – exerting one’s reason to reach judgements on the basis of these two sources – is the mechanism by which Muslims find solutions for the ever-changing and evolving life around them. The ‘closing of the door of ijtihad’ is a myth propagated by many Western scholars, some of whom imagine that ‘the door’ still remains closed and that Muslims have nothing to fall back on except the decisions of the Schools of Law and scholars of the classical period. In fact, scholars in present-day Muslim countries reach their own decisions on laws governing all sorts of new situations, using the same methodology based on the Qur’an and ˙adith and the principles derived from them, without feeling necessarily bound by the conclusions of any former school of law. In the Qur’an and ˙adith, the fundamental sources of Islamic teachings on war and peace are to be found.

Normal Relations

The Islamic relationship between individuals and nations is one of peace.  War is a contingency that becomes necessary at certain times and under certain conditions. Muslims learn from the Qur’an that God’s objective in creating the human race in different communities was that they should relate to each other peacefully (49:13).

The objective of forming the family unit is to foster affection and mercy, and that of creating a baby in its mother’s womb is to form bonds of blood and marriage between people: It is He who created the human being from fluid, making relationships of blood and marriage. 25:54

Sowing enmity and hatred amongst people is the work of Satan:

Satan wishes to sow enmity and hatred between you with intoxicants and gambling. 5:91

Division into warring factions is viewed as a punishment that God brings on people who revert to polytheism after He has delivered them from distress: … He is able to divide you into discordant factions and make you taste the might of each other … 6:65

War is hateful (2:216), and the changing of fear into a sense of safety is one of the rewards for those who believe and do good deeds (24:55). That God has given them the sanctuary of Mecca is a blessing for which its people should be thankful (29:67). Paradise is the Land of Peace – Dar al-Salam– (5:127).

Justifications and Conditions for War

War may become necessary only to stop evil from triumphing in a way that would corrupt the earth (2:251). For Muslims to participate in war there must be valid justifications, and strict conditions must be fulfilled. A thorough survey of the relevant verses of the Qur’an shows that it is consistent throughout with regard to these rulings on the justification of war, and its

conduct, termination and consequences.

War in Islam as regulated by the Qur’an and ˙adith has been subject to many distortions by Western scholars and even by some Muslim writers.  These are due either to misconceptions about terminology or – above all –using quotations taken out of context.2 Nowhere in the Qur’an is changing people’s religion given as a cause for waging war. The Qur’an gives a clear instruction that there is no compulsion in religion (2:256). It states that people will remain different (11:118), they will always have different religions and ways and this is an unalterable fact (5:48). God tells the Prophet that most people will not believe ‘even if you are eager that they should’ (12:103).3

All the battles that took place during the Prophet’s lifetime, under the guidance of the Qur’an and the Prophet, have been surveyed and shown to have been waged only in self-defence or to pre-empt an imminent attack.  For more than ten years in Mecca, Muslims were persecuted, but before permission was given to fight they were instructed to restrain themselves (4:77) and endure with patience and fortitude: Pardon and forgive until God gives his command. 2:109; see also 29:59; 16:42

After the Muslims were forced out of their homes and their town, and those who remained behind were subjected to even more abuse, God gave His permission to fight:

Permission is given to those who fight because they have been wronged, and God is indeed able to give them victory; those who have been driven from their homes unjustly only because they said, ‘Our Lord is God’ – for had it not been for God’s repelling some men by means of others, monasteries, churches, synagogues and mosques, in which the name of God is much mentioned, would certainly have been destroyed. Verily God helps those that help Him – lo! God is Strong, Almighty – those who, if they are given power in the land, establish worship and pay the poor-due and enjoin what is good and forbid iniquity. 22:39–41

Here, war is seen as justifiable and necessary to defend people’s right to their own beliefs, and once the believers have been given victory they should not become triumphant or arrogant or have a sense of being a superpower, because the promise of help given above and the rewards are for those who do not seek to exalt themselves on earth or spread corruption (28:83).

Righteous Intention

Righteous intention is an essential condition. When fighting takes place, it should be fi sabil illah – in the way of God – as is often repeated in the Qur’an. His way is prescribed in the Qur’an as the way of truth and justice, including all the teaching it gives on the justifications and the conditions for the conduct of war and peace. The Prophet was asked about those who fight for the booty, and those who fight out of self-aggrandisement or to be seen as a hero. He said that none of these was in the way of God. The one who fights in the way of God is he who fights so that the word of God is uppermost (˙adith: Bukhari).

This expression of the word of God being ‘uppermost’ was misunderstood by some to mean that Islam should gain political power over other religions. However, if we use the principle that different parts of the Qur’an interpret each other’, we find (9:40) that by simply concealing the Prophet in the cave from his trackers, after he had narrowly escaped an attempt to murder him, God made His word ‘uppermost’, and the word of the wrongdoers ‘lowered’. This could not be described as gaining military victory or political power.

Another term which is misunderstood and misrepresented is jihad. This does not mean ‘Holy War’. ‘Holy War’ does not exist as a term in Arabic, and its translation into Arabic sounds quite alien. The term which is specifically used in the Qur’an for fighting is qital. Jihad can be by argumentation (25:52), financial help or actual fighting. Jihad is always described in the Qur’an as fi sabil illah. On returning from a military campaign, the Prophet said to his followers: ‘We have returned from the minor jihad to the major jihad – the struggle of the individual with his own self.’

Jihad as an Obligation

When there is a just cause for jihad, which must have a righteous intention, it then becomes an obligation. It becomes an obligation for defending religious freedom (22:39–41), for self-defence (2:190) and defending those who are oppressed: men, women and children who cry for help (4:75). It is the duty of the Muslims to help the oppressed, except against a people with whom the Muslims have a treaty (8:72). These are the only valid justifications for war we find in the Qur’an. Even when war becomes necessary, we find that there is no ‘conscriptionM’ in the Qur’an. The ProphetM is instructed only to ‘urge on the believers’ (4:64). The Qur’an – and the ˙adith at greater length – urge on the Muslim fighters (those who are defending themselves or the oppressed) in the strongest way: by showing the justice of their cause, the bad conduct of the enemy, and promising great rewards in the afterlife for those who are prepared to sacrifice their lives and property in such a good cause.5

Who Is To Be Fought? Discrimination and Proportionality

In this regard, we must discuss two verses in the Qur’an which are normally quoted by those most eager to criticize Qur’anic teachings on war: 2:191 (‘slay them wherever you find them’) and verse 9:5, labelled the ‘Sword Verse’. Both verses have been subjected to decontextualisation, misinterpretation and misrepresentation. The first verse comes in a passage that defines clearly who is to be fought:

Fight in the way of God those who fight against you, but do not transgress. God does not love the transgressor. 2:190

‘Those who fight against you’ means actual fighters – civilians are protected.

The Prophet and his successors, when they sent out an army, gave clear instructions not to attack civilians – women, old people, religious people engaged in their worship – nor destroy crops or animals.  Discrimination and proportionality should be strictly observed. Only the combatants are to be fought, and no more harm should be caused to them than they have caused (2:194). Thus wars and weapons of destruction that destroy civilians and their towns are ruled out by the Qur’an and the word and deed of the Prophet, these being the only binding authority in Islamic law. The prohibition is regularly reinforced by, ‘Do not transgress, God does not love the transgressor’. Transgression has been interpreted by Qur’anic exegetes as meaning, ‘initiation of fighting, fighting those with whom a treaty has been concluded, surprising the enemy without first inviting them to make peace, destroying crops or killing those who should be protected’ (Bay{awi’s commentary on Q. 2:190).  The orders are always couched in restraining language, with much repetition of warnings, such as ‘do not transgress’ and ‘God does not love the transgressors’ and ‘He loves those who are conscious of Him’. These are instructions given to people who, from the beginning, should have the intention of acting ‘in the way of God’. Linguistically we notice that the verses in this passage always restrict actions in a legalistic way, which appeals strongly to Muslims’ conscience. In six verses (2:190–5) we find four prohibitions (do not), six restrictions: two ‘until’, two ‘if’, two ‘who attack you’, as well as such cautions as ‘in the way of God’, ‘be conscious of God’, ‘God does not like aggressors’, ‘God is with those who are conscious of Him’, ‘with those who do good deeds’ and ‘God is Forgiving, Merciful.’ It should be noted that the Qur’an, in treating the theme of war, as with many other themes, regularly gives the reasons and justifications for any action it demands.

Verse 2:191 begins:

Slay them where you find them and expel them from where they expelled you; persecution [fitna] is worse than killing.

‘Slay them wherever you find them,’ has been made the title of an article on war in Islam.6 In this article ‘them’ is removed from its context, where it refers back to ‘those who attack you’ in the preceding verse. ‘Wherever you find them’ is similarly misunderstood: the Muslims were anxious

that if their enemies attacked them in Mecca (which is a sanctuary) and they retaliated, they would be breaking the law. Thus the Qur’an simply gave the Muslims permission to fight those enemies, whether outside or inside Mecca, and assured them that the persecution that had been committed by the unbelievers against them for believing in God was more sinful than the Muslims killing those who attacked them, wherever they were.  Finally, it must be pointed out that the whole passage (2:190–5) comes in the context of fighting those who bar Muslims from reaching the Sacred Mosque at Mecca to perform the pilgrimage. This is clear from v.189 before

and verse 196 after the passage. In the same way, the verse giving the first permission to fight occurs in the Qur’an, also in the context of barring Muslims from reaching the Mosque to perform the pilgrimage (22:25–41).

The Sword Verse

We must also comment on another verse much referred to but notoriously misinterpreted and taken out of context – that which became labelled as the ‘Sword Verse’:

Then, when the sacred months have passed, slay the idolators wherever you find them,

take them and besiege them and prepare for them every ambush. 9:5

The hostility and ‘bitter enmity’ of the polytheists and their fitna (persecution) (2:193; 8:39) of the Muslims grew so great that the unbelievers were determined to convert the Muslims back to paganism or finish them off.

They would persist in fighting you until they turn you back from your religion, if they

could. 2:217

It was these hardened polytheists in Arabia, who would accept nothing other than the expulsion of the Muslims or their reversion to paganism, and who repeatedly broke their treaties, that the Muslims were ordered to treat in the same way – to fight them or expel them.  Even with such an enemy Muslims were not simply ordered to pounce on them and reciprocate by breaking the treaty themselves; instead, an ultimatum was issued, giving the enemy notice, that after the four sacred months mentioned in 9:5 above, the Muslims would wage war on them. The main clause of the sentence ‘kill the polytheists’ is singled out by some Western scholars to represent the Islamic attitude to war; even some Muslims take this view and allege that this verse abrogated other verses on war.  This is pure fantasy, isolating and decontextualising a small part of a sentence.  The full picture is given in 9:1–15, which gives many reasons for the order to fight such polytheists. They continuously broke their agreements and aided others against the Muslims, they started hostilities against the Muslims, barred others from becoming Muslims, expelled Muslims from the Holy Mosque and even from their own homes. At least eight times the passage mentions their misdeeds against the Muslims. Consistent with restrictions on war elsewhere in the Qur’an, the immediate context of this ‘Sword Verse’ exempts such polytheists as do not break their agreements and who keep the peace with the Muslims (9:7). It orders that those enemies seeking safe conduct should be protected and delivered to the place of safety they seek (9:6). The whole of this context to v.5, with all its restrictions, is ignored by those who simply isolate one part of a sentence to build their theory of war in Islam on what is termed ‘The Sword Verse’ even when the word ‘sword’ does not occur anywhere in the Qur’an.

Cessation of Hostilities

Once the hostility of the enemy ceases, the Muslims must stop fighting (2:193; 8:39):

And if they incline to peace, do so and put your trust in God. Even if they intend to

deceive you, remember that God is sufficient for you. 8:61–2

When the war is over, the Qur’an and ˙adith give instructions as to the treatment of prisoners of war and the new relationship with the non-Muslims. War is certainly not seen as a means in Islam of converting other people from their religions. The often-quoted division of the world into dar al-˙arb and dar al-Islam is seen nowhere in the Qur’an or ˙adith, the only authoritative sources of Islam. The scholars who used these expressions were talking about the warring enemies in countries surrounding the Muslim lands. Even for such scholars there was not a dichotomy but a trichotomy, with a third division, dar al-˚ul˙, the lands with which the Muslims had treaty obligations. The Qur’an and ˙adith talk about the different situations that exist between a Muslim state and a neighbouring warring enemy. They mention a state of defensive war, within the prescriptions specified above, the state of peace treaty for a limited or unlimited period, the state of truce, and the state where a member of a hostile camp can come into a Muslim land for special purposes under safe conduct.7

Treaties

The Prophet and his companions did make treaties, such as that of Oudaybiyya in the sixth year of the hijra and the one made by ‘Umar with the people of Jerusalem.8 Faithfulness to a treaty is a most serious obligation which the Qur’an and ˙adith incessantly emphasise:

Believers, fulfil your bonds. 5:1

Keep the agreements of God when you have made them and do not break your oaths after you have made them with God as your bond … 16:91

Covenants should not be broken because one community feels stronger than another. 16:92

Breaking treaties puts the culprit into a state lower than animals (8:55). As stated above, even defending a Muslim minority is not allowed when there is a treaty with the camp they are in.

Prisoners of War

There is nothing in the Qur’an or ˙adith to prevent Muslims from following the present international humanitarian conventions on war or prisoners of war. There is nothing in the Qur’an to say that prisoners of war must be held captive, but as this was the practice of the time and there was no international body to oversee exchanges of prisoners, the Qur’an deals with the subject. There are only two cases where it mentions their treatment: O Prophet! Tell the captives you have, ‘If God knows goodness in your heart He will give you better rewards than have been taken from you and forgive you. He is forgiving, merciful.’ And if they intend to be treacherous to you, they have been treacherous to God in the past and He has put them into your hands. 8:70–1

When you have fully overcome the enemy in the battle, then tighten their bonds, but thereafter set them free either by an act of grace or against ransom.  47:4

Grace is suggested first, before ransom. Even when some were not set free, for one reason or another, they were, according to the Qur’an and ˙adith, to be treated in a most humane way (Q.76:8–9; 9:60; 2:177). In the Bible, where it mentions fighting, we find a different picture in the treatment administered to conquered peoples, for example:

When you march up to attack a city, make its people an offer of peace. If they accept and open their gates, all the people in it shall be subject to forced labour and shall work for you. If they refuse to make peace with you in battle, lay siege to that city. When the Lord your God delivers it into your hand, put to the sword all the men in it. As for the women, the children, the livestock and everything else in the city, you may take these as plunder for yourselves. And you may use the plunder the Lord your God gives you from your enemies. This is how you are to treat all the cities that are at a distance from you and do not belong to the nations nearby. However, in the cities of the nations the Lord your God is giving you as an

inheritance, do not leave alive anything that breathes. Completely destroy them –the Hittites, Amorites, Canaanites, Perizzites, Hivites, and Jebusites – as the Lord your God has commanded you. Otherwise they will teach you to follow all the detestable things they do in worshipping their gods, and you will sin against the Lord your God.  deuteronomy 20:10–189

Resumption of Peaceful Relations

We have already seen in the Qur’an 22:41 that God promises to help those who, when He has established them in a land after war, ‘ … establish worship and pay the poor-due and enjoin what is good and forbid iniquity’.  In this spirit, when the Muslim army was victorious over the enemy, any of the defeated people who wished to remain in the land could do so under a guarantee of protection for their life, religion and freedom, and if they wished to leave they could do so with safe conduct. If they chose to stay among the Muslims, they could become members of the Muslim community. If they wished to continue in their faith they had the right to do so and were offered security. The only obligation on them then was to pay jizya, a tax exempting the person from military service and from paying zakat, which the Muslims have to pay – a tax considerably heavier than the jizya. Neither had the option of refusing to pay, but in return the non-Muslims were given the protection of the state. Jizya was not a poll-tax, and it was not charged on the old, or poor people, women or children.10

Humanitarian Intervention

Humanitarian intervention is allowed, even advocated in the Qur’an, under the category of defending the oppressed. However, it must be done within the restrictions specified in the Qur’an, as we have shown above. In intervening, it is quite permissible to co-operate with non Muslims, under the proviso:

Co-operate in what is good and pious and do not co-operate in what is sinful and aggression. 5:2

International Co-operation

In the sphere of war and peace, there is nothing in the Qur’an or ˙adith which should cause Muslims to feel unable to sign and act according to the modern international conventions, and there is much in the Qur’an and ˙adith from which modern international law can benefit. The Prophet Muhammad remembered an alliance he witnessed that was contracted between some chiefs of Mecca before his call to prophethood to protect the poor and weak against oppression and said: I have witnessed in the house of Ibn Jud’an an alliance which I would not exchange for a herd of red camels, and if it were to be called for now that Islam is here, I would respond readily.11  There is nothing in Islam that prevents Muslims from having peaceful, amicable and good relations with other nations when they read and hear regularly the Qur’anic injunction, referring to members of other faiths:

God does not forbid you from being kind and equitable to those who have neither made war on you on account of your religion nor driven you from your homes. God loves those who are equitable. 60:8

This includes participation in international peace-making and peace-keeping efforts. The rule of arbitration in violent disputes between groups of

Muslims is given in the Qur’an:

If two parties of the believers take up arms against one another, make peace between them.

If either of them commits aggression against the other, fight against the aggressors until

they submit to God’s judgement. When they submit, make peace between them in equity

and justice. God loves those who act in justice. 49:9

This could, in agreement with rules of Islamic jurisprudence, be applied more generally to disputes within the international community. For this reason, Muslims should, and do, participate in the arbitration of disputes by international bodies such as the United Nations.  Modern international organisations and easy travel should make it easier for different people, in accordance with the teachings of the Qur’an, to ‘get to know one another’, ‘co-operate in what is good’ and live in peace.

The Qur’an affirms:

There is no virtue in much of their counsels: only in his who enjoins charity, kindness and peace among people … 4:114