h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Entry: Is Islam a religion of destruction? - A898293
Author: Muzaakboy - Better than the right thing is one who does it. - U208494

I have got rid of all the spelling mistakes and first person reference I think.

Any suggestions or contributions?

Adib

This is a very good entry. I am no scholar of Islam, but what I know of Islam from personal experience having lived in the Middle East (Bahrain & Oman) it has the ring of truth about it.

Muzaakboy, you make a good ambassador for Islam. Keep it up.

Donald
A Nazarene

Looking good.

Two minor points:

1. In five years time some people might not remember exactly which one of Osama's attacks on America you are referring to. Maybe you could be a bit more explicit, in a footnote perhaps? Or leave Osama out, speak in more general terms and add Osama in parenthesis - like this: "(e.g. Osama's attack on 11.9.2001)"

2. In your Entry you write: "The preconception here is the belief that Islam was spread by the sword and believes in violence." Two things here: There is the preconception that Islam believes in violence. But that it was spread by the sword is a fact. I agree, though, that this is "a complete contradiction with the name of the religion [itself]." Maybe a re-phrasing like this would be more logic: "Because Islam was often spread along with military domination (e.g. the spread of the Ottoman Empire?) there is the preconception that Islam believes in violence." I think that the two things are not connected, but explain why people think, or thought, that Islam comes together with violence.

Good luck,

HELL

Hi Hell, hmmm that sounds strange.

I agree with your first point, but I don't with the second.
here are a few reasons why:

It is a common complaint among some nonadherents -Muslims that Islam would not have millions of all over the world, if it had not been spread by the use of forcemake it . The following points will clear, that far from being spread by the sword, it was the inherent force of truth, reason and logic that was responsible for the rapid spread of Islam.

1. Sometimes force has to be used to maintain peace.

Each and every human being in this world is not in favour of maintaining peace and harmony. There are many, who would disrupt it for their own vested interests. Sometimes force has to be used to maintain peace. It is precisely for this reason that we have the police who use force against criminals and anti-social elements to maintain peace in the country. Islam promotes peace. At the same time, Islam exhorts it followers to fight where there is oppression. The fight against oppression may, at times, require the use of force. In Islam force can only be used to promote peace and justice.

2. Opinion of historian De Lacy O’Leary.

The best reply to the misconception that Islam was spread by the sword is given by the noted historian De Lacy O’Leary in the book "Islam at the cross road" (Page 8):

"History makes it clear however, that the legend of fanatical Muslims sweeping through the world and forcing Islam at the point of the sword upon conquered races is one of the most fantastically absurd myth that historians have ever repeated."

3. Muslims ruled Spain for 800 years.

Muslims ruled Spain for about 800 years. The Muslims in Spain never used the sword to force the people to convert. Later the Christian Crusaders came to Spain and wiped out the Muslims. There was not a single Muslim in Spain who could openly give the adhan, that is the call for prayers.

4. 14 million Arabs are Coptic Christians.

Muslims were the lords of Arabia for 1400 years. For a few years the British ruled, and for a few years the French ruled. Overall, the Muslims ruled Arabia for 1400 years. Yet today, there are 14 million Arabs who are Coptic Christians i.e. Christians since generations. If the Muslims had used the sword there would not have been a single Arab who would have remained a Christian.

5. More than 80% non-Muslims in India.

The Muslims ruled India for about a thousand years. If they wanted, they had the power of converting each and every non-Muslim of India to Islam. Today more than 80% of the population of India are non-Muslims. All these non-Muslim Indians are bearing witness today that Islam was not spread by the sword.

6. Indonesia and Malaysia.

Indonesia is a country that has the maximum number of Muslims in the world. The majority of people in Malaysia are Muslims. May one ask, "Which Muslim army went to Indonesia and Malaysia?"

7. East Coast of Africa.

Similarly, Islam has spread rapidly on the East Coast of Africa. One may again ask, if Islam was spread by the sword, "Which Muslim army went to the East Coast of Africa?"

8. Thomas Carlyle.

The famous historian, Thomas Carlyle, in his book "Heroes and Hero worship", refers to this misconception about the spread of Islam: "The sword indeed, but where will you get your sword? Every new opinion, at its starting is precisely in a minority of one. In one man’s head alone. There it dwells as yet. One man alone of the whole world believes it, there is one man against all men. That he takes a sword and try to propagate with that, will do little for him. You must get your sword! On the whole, a thing will propagate itself as it can."

9. No compulsion in religion.

With which sword was Islam spread? Even if Muslims had it they could not use it to spread Islam because the Qur’an says in the following verse:

"Let there be no compulsion in religion:Truth stands out clear from error"[Al-Qur’an 2:256]

10. Sword of the Intellect.

It is the sword of intellect. The sword that conquers the hearts and minds of people. The Qur’an says in Surah Nahl, chapter 16 verse 125:

"Invite (all) to the way of thy Lord with wisdom and beautiful preaching; and argue with them in ways that are best and most gracious." [Al-Qur’an 16:125]

11. Increase in the world religions from 1934 to 1984.

An article in Reader’s Digest ‘Almanac’, year book 1986, gave the statistics of the increase of percentage of the major religions of the world in half a century from 1934 to 1984. This article also appeared in ‘The Plain Truth’ magazine. At the top was Islam, which increased by 235%, and Christianity had increased only by 47%. May one ask, which war took place in this century which converted millions of people to Islam?

12. Islam is the fastest growing religion in America and Europe.

Today the fastest growing religion in America is Islam. The fastest growing religion in Europe is Islam. Which sword is forcing people in the West to accept Islam in such large numbers?

13. Dr. Joseph Adam Pearson.

Dr. Joseph Adam Pearson rightly says, "People who worry that nuclear weaponry will one day fall in the hands of the Arabs, fail to realize that the Islamic bomb has been dropped already, it fell the day MUHAMMAD (pbuh) was born".

Though I do agree that some rulers at some periods of time where a bit heavy handed.

adib

Hello Muzaakboy...

Maybe I was not clear enough, sorry: The misconception (that Islam and violence go together) is a CONSEQUENCE of the muslim military domination, and NOT a consequence of a misinterpretation of the religion. For example: Indians in Brazil could say the same about the Christians. Military domination of the Portuguese (Christians), lead to the conversion of Indians to catholicism - Catholicism spread by the sword. There were no (direct) penalties for Indians that did not convert. Also, the Portuguese were not a horde of religious fanatics forcing Indians to convert to catholicism (they wanted gold). The military influence in both cases (muslim and catholic) is a lot more subtle.

There is some justification in saying 'The military domination of (Spain, India etc..) by Muslims, *facilitated* the spread of Islam' - It is easy to go from that to the *misconception*, that 'The GOAL of the military domination of (Spain, India etc..) by muslims was to spread Islam'

BTW, Your own words in the posting above may lead to misinterpretations:

"Islam promotes peace."[...]"In Islam force can only be used to promote peace and justice." This is *exactly* the kind of wording that leads to misinterpretations.

Next topic:

You (or the historian you cite) make a good point: "History makes it clear however, that the legend of fanatical Muslims sweeping through the world and forcing Islam at the point of the sword upon conquered races is one of the most fantastically absurd myth that historians have ever repeated." True. It's not fanatic Muslim hordes inposing Islam on others. The pressure was a lot more subtle (as I pointed out above), and certainly not a direct consequence of the teachings of Islam, but a consequence that the ruling people (including military rule) were Muslim.

Sorry if I was not clear in my posting,

HELL

Ok I think I know what you mean, I will also try to chnage mt point in the entry so it is clearer.

Adib

How's this coming along?

Yep its finished, unless some one has anything else to add.

Hello Muzaakboy,

It's been some time, eh?

I took another read through your Entry, and came up with some new stuff to nag you...

First I think we agree this is a long thorough Entry, right? Not that there is anything wrong with long Entries - in fact, I tend to like long Entries. However, I think you would reach more people, if your Entry was a little more succint. I think that such an Entry, dedicated to clearing up a dangerous prejudice deserves a broad readership.

So I was wondering if some bits could be fleshed out a bit. For example: Your Entry has the title "Is Islam a religion of destruction?"

In that sense, do we need to understand how benevolent and protecting Islam is towards women, that it gives women the right to own money etc.? I mean in the context of terrorist attacks and so forth? I think that this chapter could be reduced to a minimum, after all - IIRC - you have another Entry devoted to 'Islam and Women'. I am not sure if this particular chapter fits the rest of the Entry (about Fatwa, Jihad, War, Violence). I think that starting the chapters with "Islam and violence" would be better than starting with 'Islam and Women'. I think you could remove the Entire 'Islam and Women' part, BTW, but that's just my opinion.

I could go on with comments like these, Muzaakboy, For example, I think that the many quotes from the Quran overloads the Entry a bit and makes it a bit difficult to read. However, I don't want to nag you too much at once. Just think about it...

HELL

Salaam,

I can remove the women section as there is an entry on that as you pointed out. This happended to have been written before that entry.

as for the qoutes from the Qur'an and the Ahadith, well I'm one of those people who when talking about Islam always backs up. I used to get people many years ago say, oh your just saying that etc, but if I provide qoutes they can then go and look for them selves in the Qur'an and see that I'm speaking the truth.

adib

Well, footnote them then, or provide an external link (possibly along with the original arabic text? I'm sure the entire Quran is available online somewhere)... The interested reader might check out there. I am not saying you should remove ALL quotations, but some seem redundant to me. Maybe the 'external link solution' would even be better, since - as you pointed out elsewhere - the translation is not the original.

The point is, that I think the Entry is difficult to follow with all the quotations. That could scare off readers.

H

I was delighted to find this post. Well done!
Personally I liked the quotes, it is always better to be given the Words of The Prophet and then be able to interpret them for oneself.

Although the post is long and with all spiritual texts quoted abundantly a little heavy to get through - I wondered if it mightn't be prudent to note the lineage of The Prophet and how He is a decendant of one of the wives of Abraham - thus part of the fulfillment of the old testament prophecy of Abraham being "The father of many nations". I find that many westerners are not aware that the Holy Quran contains both the Old and New Testaments as taught by The Prophet (May the Blessings of God be upon Him).

It might also be interesting to note the environment and tone of the people to whom The Prophet appeared. The waring and barbaric tribes of that time (the pagans) were capable of such despicable acts and would simply cut off the heads of a neighbouring tribe and steal the women and children. Christians ask, if He taught of the life of Christ - how come He did not also teach of "turning the other cheek". Quite practically in the time and place of His revelation, it was a dire nescessity to protect ones family from harm - or die. Taking up arms was not an option, but a dire need.

Is it also true that the Suni and Shiate (spelling?) sects of Islam have different views on Jihad?

Thank you for this, it was a well thought out and most informative post.


Kosh

Salaam

thanks I will work on it next week.

Adib

Any chance to work on this yet?


Mikey

sorry not yet, I get about one hour a day on the internet, and so I'm trying to juggle many things at once till I get a new computer.

I will ge on it as soon as I can.

Adib

Ok I have started to make changes. so if you spot any thing you think will help make it easier to understand just let me know, thanks.

adib

I caught a viewing of a series called The Grid the other night on DSTV. It made me so mad because almost every follower of Islam in there is a terrorist of some kind. This is the stuff that reaches all over the world and creates bigotry and misunderstandings. To me it just felt like Hollywood stepping up to the plate to help their governement justify their oil-grabbing atrocities.

It makes me very sad that an industry with so much power over public perception can be so irresponsible.

Sorry, this was way off the topic of your submission here but I hope that entries like yours will help to counter this other ugliness.

Keep passing open windows

Kosh

Actually I agree with you completely, the tv series today all seem to depict muslims as the three B's. That is either rich Billioneir oil barons, Bombers of some kind, or belly dancers. Even disney films have been labeling Muslims and Arabs with bad steryotipes.

I'll have to write an article on the effects of Arab and Muslim steryotipes at some point.

Adib

You do that! I'd love to read that. If Hollywood were anywhere but American, Americans would all be loud, abraisive and semi-ignorant bullies or snake-oil con-artist types. I guess labelling is the nature of the human being, but then again - Hollywood did the same thing to the Russians and the Chineese during the cold war. All Russians were grunting balck-hat-wearing badies and all Chineese people were small ignorant victim-types or gang members. - The spawn of ignorance and predjudice!

be well

Kosh

Don't forget the Germans and Japanese, i.e The Red peril etc.

This sort of thing has existed for a very long time, and will probabley always will unless people are made aware of the changes it makes in peoples perceptions and views etc.

Actually steryeotyping of Islam and Muslims first came to England at the time of the crusades.

The issue really is that it is no longer excepterble to steryotype some groups such as Jews ets but it is still ok to do it to other groups such as Muslim's which is where this indiference is bred and is why it should be stoppped for all groups.

Adib