torsdag den 24. december 2009

Lidt jihad læsning til juleferien

Dette er oprindeligt givet som en kommentar på Snaphanen, i posten om Hedegaards i nogle øjne infame Islamofobi og det urimelige "had" der næres mod Islam og er altså et forsøg på at forklare, hvorfor Islam har et problem, ikke vi.

Jeg supplerer her det oprindelige indlæg, med lidt flere autentiske original kilder fra blandt hadith samlingerne - here we go:

Jørgen Olesen anklager personerne her for, at aldrig havde læst koranen. Ligeledes trækkes mistanken om had frem op til flere gange.

Hvorfor antager man at de to udsagn er sande? Jeg, for at nævne en, har både læst koranen og en masse andet fra Islams hovedkilder og om Islam. Jeg hader ikke Islam, jeg frygter dens konsekvenser for fremtiden.

Jørgen Olesen er enten selv uvidende om Islam, eller så forsøger han at profitere på andres uvidenhed.

Da det for så mange åbenbart er svært at tolke islamkritik, som andet end uberettiget had. Så er dette en passende lejlighed, til at skitsere kort, hvorfor så mange mennesker i verden har et problem med Islam.

Jørgen Olesen påstår citat:

"Dette vers er vendt til de perioder i profetens liv hvor mange ikke.muslimer, udførte angrebskrig mod profeten og hans folk."

VI taler altså om de to klassikere i apologetisk vildledning - profeten forsvarede kun sig selv mod andre som angreb ham og det hele er taget ude af kontekst.

Det første er slet ikke tilfældet, Muhammad blev hurtigt så mægtig, at kun Mekkanerne turde forsøge at angribe ham, efter han havde provokeret dem ved at røve en del af deres karavaner og andet godt.

Hvis man vil læse mere om det, blandt andet om hvordan han angreb, fik dræbt eller fordrevet flere jødiske stammer, så kan man læse min minibiografi om muhammad - Men kort sagt Jihad var sjældent selvforsvar, hverken under muhammads tid, eller efter:


Så tager vi konteksten, dette er delvist sandt om konteksten i sura 4, dog med det i mente, at profetens ord og gerning tjener som eksempel for alle folk til alle tider:

33.21
YUSUFALI: Ye have indeed in the Messenger of Allah a beautiful pattern (of conduct) for any one whose hope is in Allah and the Final Day, and who engages much in the Praise of Allah.
PICKTHAL: Verily in the messenger of Allah ye have a good example for him who looketh unto Allah and the Last Day, and remembereth Allah much.
SHAKIR: Certainly you have in the Messenger of Allah an excellent exemplar for him who hopes in Allah and the latter day and remembers Allah much.

Men det afleder også fra hvad konteksten senere blev.

Tager vi sura 9 i koranen, så er konteksten der, at muhammad HAVDE besejret mekkanerne og havde dermed besejret sine oprindelige fjender. Han havde i den sidste fase sin største hær nogensinde og ingen reelle trusler mod sig, som han overvejede hvilken erobringsretning han skulle tage med - han døde før han kom ud over den arabiske halvø. Men hans efterfølgere fortsatte i hans fodspor og førte siden 1100 års jihad, hvor de kun 100 år efter muhammads død havde taget 2/3 dele af den kristne verden - 1100 år! indtil Islam blev for svag til den slags, hvilket ikke skal forveksles med at islamisterne har mistet hensigten om at fortsætte, læs eventuelt kommentarerne her

På det her område, er der millioner og atter millioner af afhuggede hoveder man skal fortælle at koranen er blevet fortolket ude af kontekst.

Det er den heller ikke. For i Sura 9 er der vers 5, som også kaldes sværdets vers. Det vers fjernede trylleslag vores ret til at have andet valg som vantro, end at konvertere til Islam, eller blive slået ihjel. Det med at vi kunne leve som dhimmis, vantro underordnet muslimsk styre, oven i og betale Jizya, (særskat) kom faktisk først til som senere forordning.

Tager man en af de mest populære Tafsirs til koranen, Ibn Kathirs, det vil sige den mange muslimer læser, før de går ud og binder os blår i øjnene med at islam betyder fred, og snakker om kontekst, (Jeg tvivler dog på at mange muslimer læser meget andet end koranen, og fatwaer fra deres udvalgte Iman - de kan altså selv tro på løgnen oprigtigt ) Så "Sværdets vers", som lyder følgende:

"(5. So when the Sacred Months have passed, then fight the Mushrikin wherever you find them, and capture them and besiege them, and lie in wait for them in each and every ambush. But if they repent and perform the Salah, and give the Zakah, then leave their way free. Verily, Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful.)"

Så skal det også tolkes i "kontekst" og det bliver det også - her Ibn Kathirs fortolkning, altså en af de mest populære tafsirs:

"(I have been commanded to fight the people until they testify that there is no deity worthy of worship except Allah and that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah, establish the prayer and pay the Zakah.) This honorable Ayah (9:5) was called the Ayah of the Sword, about which Ad-Dahhak bin Muzahim said, "It abrogated every agreement of peace between the Prophet and any idolator, every treaty, and every term.'' Al-`Awfi said that Ibn `Abbas commented: "No idolator had any more treaty or promise of safety ever since Surah Bara'ah was revealed. The four months, in addition to, all peace treaties conducted before Bara'ah was revealed and announced had ended by the tenth of the month of Rabi` Al-Akhir.''

Altså kort sagt, her bliver det fastslået, at muhammad var kommanderet til at føre krig mod alle vantro, indtil de bliver muslimer og verset annullerer alle tidligere vers omkring forholdet til vantro, det annullerer ALLE fredstraktater som der var.
Siden har man kun regnet med midlertidige våbenhviler, hvilket er en del af forklaringen på - hvorfor foreksempel Hamas kun vil indgå en sådan.

Tager vi en af Islamisternes favorit kommentatorer, nemlig Mawdudi fra hans tafsir. Så fortæller han rent ud om sura 9s, eller niende kapitel i koranen, overordnede "KONTEKST":

"If we keep in view the preceding background, we can easily find out the problems that were confronting the Community at that time. They were:

1.

to make the whole of Arabia a perfect Dar-ul-Islam,
2.

to extend the influence of Islam to the adjoining countries,
3.

to crush the mischiefs of the hypocrites, and
4.

to prepare the Muslims for Jihad against the non- Muslim world."

...

#

"In order to enable the Muslims to extend the influence of Islam outside Arabia, they were enjoined to crush with sword the non- Muslim powers and to force them to accept the sovereignty of the Islamic State. As the great Roman and Iranian Empires were the biggest hindrances in the way, a conflict with them was inevitable. The object of Jihad was not to coerce them to accept Islam they were free to accept or not to accept it-but to prevent them from thrusting forcibly their deviations upon others and the coming generations. The Muslims were enjoined to tolerate their misguidance only to the extent that they might have the freedom to remain misguided, if they chose to be so, provided that they paid Jizyah (v. 29) as a sign of their subjugation to the Islamic State."

...

"In order to prepare the Muslims for Jihad against the whole non-Muslim world, it was necessary to cure them even of that slight weakness of faith from which they were still suffering. For there could be no greater internal danger to the Islamic Community than the weakness of faith, especially where it was going to engage itself single-handed in a' conflict with the whole non-Muslim world. That is why those people who had lagged behind in the Campaign to Tabuk or had shown the least negligence were severely taken to task, and were considered as hypocrites if they had no plausible excuse for not fulfilling that obligation. Moreover, a clear declaration was made that in future the sole criterion of a Muslim's faith shall be the exertions he makes for the uplift of the Word of Allah and the role he plays in the conflict between Islam and kufr. Therefore, if anyone will show any hesitation in sacrificing his life, money, time and energies, his faith shall not be regarded as genuine. (vv. 81-96).

...

"In this portion the Muslims have been urged to fight in the Way of Allah with the mushrik Arabs, the Jews and the Christians, who were duly warned of the consequences of their mischievous and inimical behavior. 13 - 37 (vers numre altså 9,13-9,37)

In this discourse, the Muslims have been told clearly and explicitly that they will inherit the rewards promised by Allah only if they take active part in the conflict with kufr, for that is the criterion which distinguishes true Muslims from hypocrites. Therefore true Muslims should take active part in Jihad, without minding dangers, obstacles, difficulties, temptations and the like. 38 - 72"


Altså det er hverken had, eller fobi. Islam har begået Jihad og dræbt vantro, som var de værdiløst kvæg i århundreder og gør det den dag i dag, på TRODS af at den militære styrke reelt mangler, hvilket jeg i hvert fald finder ubetryggende, eftersom magtbalancen sagtens kunne tilte tilbage i deres favør på langt sigt, givet at de føder mange børn. Det gør vi ikke.
Lande som Pakistan, Afghanistan, Israel/Palæstina er lande hvor magtbalancen afprøves dagligt og hvor nye strategier udvikles, hvor det afprøves med hvor stor succes, en lille flok "muhajedins" kan kæmpe mod verdens største militærmagt, eller Israel.

Jørgen Olesen bør ikke have lov til at spille på uvidenheden, eller slippe afsted med den og alle bør selv studere Islam, for det er en faktor som bliver stærkere i verden i fremtiden.
Jeg ved godt, at de fleste muslimer ikke ønsker krig og jihad, men de er omvendt bange for at tage et opgør med Islamisterne og hvis man nærlæser Mawdudis konklusion på sura 9, som deles af islamisterne, så vil de også få slynget begrebet "hyklere" tilbage i hovedet, når de forsøger at forklare islamisterne at de hellere vil leve og lade leve og ikke ønsker krig.
De har kort sagt ikke sura 9 bag sig, eller haditherne om Jihad og dens betydning og vigtighed, om martyriets fordele og overhøjhed.

Det er absurd at tale om kontekst i denne her sammenhæng, dette er en diskussion man må tage med islamisterne, for det er dem som ønsker fortsat Jihad og set i forhold til koranen og traditionen, ikke uden grundlag der i.

Hvis Islamister ikke dræbte titusinder af mennesker årligt, ledte til konflikt og konfrontation i utallige lande, drømte om islams verdensherredømme og udøvede Jihad, mishandlede kvinder og dræbte vantro som var de værdiløse væsener.
Så ville vi kort sagt ikke sidde her og skrive på en blog, i hvert fald ikke om religion, eller Islam.
Hvis Islam virkelig var religion som alle andre, ville den blive behandlet som de andre religioner, delvis værdsat, delvist betragtet som overtro, delvis ignoreret, delvis læst nysgerrigt om.
Jeg har læst hovedværker fra alle religioner i verden, men islam er en kategori for sig - den blander politisk totalitarisme, militant stræben efterherredømme med almindelige religiøse elementer som bøn, leveregler, osv.

Jeg har intet mod at mennesker tror på og beder til gud, holder sig regler for levevis. Det er ikke så simpelt, som at vi nærer et ubevidst ønske om at finde et eller andet at hade.

Men Islam er en trussel i kraft af sit manglende konsekvente opgør med Jihad, og den universielle stræben efter Islams dominans. Det opgør bliver svært at foretage, da begge disse elementer kommer fra profetens mund og gerning og han ofte udtalte meget eksplicit vigitgheden af at ofre sig for Allahs sag, som martyr i militant Jihad, såvel som at hele verdenen tilhører Allah og hans profet.

Enkelte eksempler fra Hadithsamlingerne:

"Volume 5, Book 59, Number 436: Bukhari
Narrated Sulaiman bin Surd:
When the clans were driven away, I heard the Prophet saying, "From now onwards we will go to attack them (i.e. the infidels) and they will not come to attack us, but we will go to them."

Bukhari Volume 4, Book 52, Number 42:
Narrated Ibn 'Abbas:
Allah's Apostle said, "There is no Hijra (i.e. migration) (from Mecca to Medina) after the Conquest (of Mecca), but Jihad and good intention remain; and if you are called (by the Muslim ruler) for fighting, go forth immediately.

Bukhari Volume 4, Book 52, Number 53:
Narrated Anas bin Malik:
The Prophet said, "Nobody who dies and finds good from Allah (in the Hereafter) would wish to come back to this world even if he were given the whole world and whatever is in it, except the martyr who, on seeing the superiority of martyrdom, would like to come back to the world and get killed again (in Allah's Cause)."


Bukhari Volume 2, Book 26, Number 594:

Narrated Abu Huraira:
The Prophet was asked, "Which is the best deed?" He said, "To believe in Allah and His Apostle." He was then asked, "Which is the next (in goodness)?" He said, "To participate in Jihad in Allah's Cause." He was then asked, "Which is the next?" He said, "To perform Hajj-Mabrur.

Bukhari Volume 4, Book 53, Number 392:

Narrated Abu Huraira:

While we were in the Mosque, the Prophet came out and said, "Let us go to the Jews" We went out till we reached Bait-ul-Midras. He said to them, "If you embrace Islam, you will be safe. You should know that the earth belongs to Allah and His Apostle, and I want to expel you from this land. So, if anyone amongst you owns some property, he is permitted to sell it, otherwise you should know that the Earth belongs to Allah and His Apostle."



Sahih Muslim, 217: "Verily Allah has prescribed proficiency in all things. Thus if you kill, KILL WELL, & if you slaughter, SLAUGHTER WELL. Let each one of you sharpen his blade."

Muslim Book 031, Number 6174:

Abu Dharr reported Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: You would soon conquer Egypt and that is a land which is known (as the land of al-qirat). So when you conquer it, treat its inhabitants well. For there lies upon you the responsibility because of blood-tie or relationship of marriage (with them). And when you see two persons falling into dispute amongst themselves for the space of a brick, than get out of that. He (Abu Dharr) said: I saw Abd al-Rahman b. Shurahbil b. Hasana and his brother Rabi'a disputing with one another for the space of a brick. So I left that (land).

Muslim Book 041, Number 6930:

Nafi' b. Utba reported: We were with Allah's Messenger…
You will attack Arabia and Allah will enable you to conquer it, then you would attack Persia and He would make you to Conquer it. Then you would attack Rome and AllgLh will enable you to conquer it, then you would attack the Dajjal and Allah will enable you to conquer him. Nafi' said: Jabir, we thought that the Dajjal would appear after Rome (Syrian territory) would be conquered.


Bukhari Volume 4, Book 52, Number 44:
Narrated Abu Huraira:
A man came to Allah's Apostle and said, "Instruct me as to such a deed as equals Jihad (in reward)." He replied, "I do not find such a deed." Then he added, "Can you, while the Muslim fighter is in the battle-field, enter your mosque to perform prayers without cease and fast and never break your fast?" The man said, "But who can do that?" Abu- Huraira added, "The Mujahid (i.e. Muslim fighter) is rewarded even for the footsteps of his horse while it wanders bout (for grazing) tied in a long rope."

Bukhari Volume 4, Book 52, Number 50:
Narrated Anas bin Malik:
The Prophet said, "A single endeavor (of fighting) in Allah's Cause in the forenoon or in the afternoon is better than the world and whatever is in it."

Bukhari Volume 4, Book 52, Number 73:
Narrated 'Abdullah bin Abi Aufa:
Allah's Apostle said, "Know that Paradise is under the shades of swords."

Bukhari Volume 4, Book 52, Number 88:
Narrated Anas:
The Emigrants and the Ansar started digging the trench around Medina carrying the earth on their backs and saying, "We are those who have given a pledge of allegiance to Muhammad that we will I carry on Jihad as long as we live." The Prophet kept on replying, "O Allah, there is no good except the good of the Hereafter; so confer Your Blessings on the Ansar and the Emigrants."

(Denne her er jo ekstra interessant, eftersom den foregår omkring battle of the trench, altså en af muhammads få defensive krige - men som de siger, har de allerede lovet at føre JIHAD til den dag de dør, på det tidspunkt)

Bukhari Volume 4, Book 52, Number 187:
Narrated 'Abdullah bin Abbas:
Allah's Apostle wrote a letter to Caesar saying, "If you reject Islam, you will be responsible for the sins of the peasants (i.e. your people)."

(Ikke ligefrem konfliktsky, eller fredssøgende - vel?)

Jeg kunne blive ved, men læs selv videre, relevante links findes i min minibiografi om Muhammad.

Eftersom vi anklages for at ikke have sat os ordentlig ind i Islam og nære uberettiget had, var det måske på sin plads, at sætte sig ordentligt ind i baggrunden for at vi er noget betænksomme ved Islam og ikke nære et uberettiget had, eller foragt, eller en mistanke mod os!

0 kommentarer: