Reference in the koran, please?

[specious_reasons]

I have just recently started to read the Koran. Since I have not read that far into it, I haven't found the places where it specifically tells Muslims to kill all infidels.

Could someone kindly point me to these passages?

 

[Genghis Pwn]

Lol, it starts on page one.

 

[aerocontrols]

I have just recently started to read the Koran. Since I have not read that far into it, I haven't found the places where it specifically tells Muslims to kill all infidels.

Could someone kindly point me to these passages?

Sura 9, Verse 5 is the one most commonly cited:

[9.5] So when the sacred months have passed away, then slay the idolaters wherever you find them, and take them captives and besiege them and lie in wait for them in every ambush, then if they repent and keep up prayer and pay the poor-rate, leave their way free to them; surely Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.

also:

[9.29] Fight those who do not believe in Allah, nor in the latter day, nor do they prohibit what Allah and His Apostle have prohibited, nor follow the religion of truth, out of those who have been given the Book, until they pay the tax in acknowledgment of superiority and they are in a state of subjection.

Looking in the Koran for the worst of the incitements to violence that fundamentalist Islamicists regard as religious duty is a waste of time. Far better to look in the Sunnah, the customs and teachings if Sunni Islam. The best comparison I could make is

Koran:Sunnah::Bible:Catechism

I don't know of any english translations of the Sunnah, but I've seen some stuff (quotes from and interpretations of the Sunnah) on Islamicist message boards that are pretty severe.

MattJ

 

[specious_reasons]

Lol, it starts on page one.

Sorry, didn't see it, quotes? Specific references, please?

added:

Here: anyone can even cite passages and link to it.

http://www.hti.umich.edu/k/koran/browse.html

...This is the first one I found on the net, you can pick your favorite site for specific references.

 

[aerocontrols]

Lol, it starts on page one.

Page 1 of the Koran:

The Opening
In the name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful.

[1.1] All praise is due to Allah, the Lord of the Worlds.
[1.2] The Beneficent, the Merciful.
[1.3] Master of the Day of Judgment.
[1.4] Thee do we serve and Thee do we beseech for help.
[1.5] Keep us on the right path.
[1.6] The path of those upon whom Thou hast bestowed favors. Not (the path) of those upon whom Thy wrath is brought down, nor of those who go astray.

 

[specious_reasons]

Sura 9, Verse 5 is the one most commonly cited:

Looking in the Koran for the worst of the incitements to violence that fundamentalist Islamicists regard as religious duty is a waste of time. Far better to look in the Sunnah, the customs and teachings if Sunni Islam. The best comparison I could make is

Koran:Sunnah::Bible:Catechism

I don't know of any english translations of the Sunnah, but I've seen some stuff (quotes from and interpretations of the Sunnah) on Islamicist message boards that are pretty severe.

MattJ

Thanks! I'll venture to look that quote up in more detail, I don't think I've reached it yet, been only spendng a few minutes a day on it.

One quick thing:

9.29] Fight those who do not believe in Allah, nor in the latter day, nor do they prohibit what Allah and His Apostle have prohibited, nor follow the religion of truth, out of those who have been given the Book, until they pay the tax in acknowledgment of superiority and they are in a state of subjection.

The people of the Book are Jews, Christians and Muslims, as is spelled out near the beginning of the Koran. "Those who do not believe in Allah" are the idol-worshippers of the region. So, if anything, it's inciting violence towards pagans., not Jews and Christians, as it is commonly claimed.

The claim has been made, much like Genghis Pwn here, that the Koran is this hate filled book inciting violence towards non-believers. Not the Sunnah. I think this argument is made from ignorance and prejudice. I'd like the people making this claim to show otherwise.

When I started reading the Koran, my first thought was, "This sucks!" But still, it's pretty tame in it's rhetoric, I haven't seen anything that is a clear incitment of violence.

 

[aerocontrols]

The people of the Book are Jews, Christians and Muslims, as is spelled out near the beginning of the Koran. "Those who do not believe in Allah" are the idol-worshippers of the region. So, if anything, it's inciting violence towards pagans., not Jews and Christians, as it is commonly claimed.

That's not how I read it. Let's parse, perhaps I'm doing it incorrectly:

Fight those who do not believe in Allah

Fight those who do not believe in the latter day

Fight those who do not prohibit what Allah and His Apostle have prohibited

Fight those who do not follow the religion of truth, out of those who have been given the Book,

Isn't the last sentence specifically saying fight Christians and Jews? They are the two groups 'out of those who have been given the book' who do not follow Islam, aren't they?

until they pay the tax in acknowledgment of superiority and they are in a state of subjection.

It seems clear to me. If they (Christians and Jews) will not submit to Islam or submit to Islamic rule and pay the Jizzah, then fight and kill them.

When I started reading the Koran, my first thought was, "This sucks!" But still, it's pretty tame in it's rhetoric, I haven't seen anything that is a clear incitment of violence.

I find that translations vary widely. The link is to 3 versions of of the same text, Sura 38, verse 44, which is commonly cited as the place in the Koran where wife-beating is approved of. My copy of the Koran I have at home is a translation by Rodwell (it may be the copy that you have) that says

And we said, "Take thy rod in hand, and strike[1] with it, nor break thine oath." Verily, he was patient!

The footnote [1] says:

Thy wife;--on whom he (Job, from the Old Testament of the Bible. Job ii 9) had sworn that he would inflict an hundred blows, because she had absented himself from him when in need of her assistance, or for her words. The oath was kept, we are told, by his giving her one blow with a rod of a hundred stalks.

Mohammad's message here is that Job kept his vow to beat his wife in response to her words recorded in Job ii 9: His wife said to him, "Are you still holding on to your integrity? Curse God and die!"

(I studied this particular portion of the Koran fairly in-depth a while back during a discussion at another MB.)

My point is, the tameness or not of the rhetoric depends a lot on who translated your version, unless you're reading it in the Arabic. There are also implications that may be difficult to recognize. (Would you upon your reading recognize that Job = Ayyub?)

I tried to read Rodwell's translation, and quit halfway through. I also thought it sucked.

MattJ

 

[aerocontrols]

Also

idolators or pagans etc... is (it seems from what I've read elsewhere) most literally translated as "those who join God (Allah) with other gods" with many Fundy Muslims interpret as not just pagans, but also Christians, who (falsely) join Allah with Jesus and the Holy Spirit.

All of this is academic to me as an atheist. I'm listed first off:

Fight those who do not believe in Allah

Lucky for me, I can fight back.

MattJ

 

[aerocontrols]

Perhaps the 3 translation page can help us with Sura 9:29:

YUSUFALI: Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.

PICKTHAL: Fight against such of those who have been given the Scripture as believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, and forbid not that which Allah hath forbidden by His messenger, and follow not the Religion of Truth, until they pay the tribute readily, being brought low.

SHAKIR: Fight those who do not believe in Allah, nor in the latter day, nor do they prohibit what Allah and His Messenger have prohibited, nor follow the religion of truth, out of those who have been given the Book, until they pay the tax in acknowledgment of superiority and they are in a state of subjection.

What do you think? Yusufali is pretty explicit in his translation.

MattJ

 

[JAR]

Actually, I have heard from people that the Islamic Fundamentalists practice a religion which is a corruption of Islam. That's what the president and many Muslims tell us. According to President Bush, Islam is a peaceful religion.

 

[aerocontrols]

Actually, I have heard from people that the Islamic Fundamentalists practice a religion which is a corruption of Islam. That's what the president and many Muslims tell us. According to President Bush, Islam is a peaceful religion.

No True Scotsman.

Who decides which version is corruption and which is true? Obviously, secular Islamic leaders and President Bush see a benefit in convincing the world and especially Muslims that fundamentalism is a corruption. I also see that benefit, and I hope that Islam becomes as secular as Christianity, for instance.

MattJ

 

[a_unique_person]

No True Scotsman.

Who decides which version is corruption and which is true? Obviously, secular Islamic leaders and President Bush see a benefit in convincing the world and especially Muslims that fundamentalism is a corruption. I also see that benefit, and I hope that Islam becomes as secular as Christianity, for instance.

MattJ

We have a family friend who is a muslim. He is so meek and timid it is embarrasing.

We can just as easily put the argument forward for Christianity or Judaism. Or point out the absurdities of those religions too.

Personally, I am glad I am not a xian any more, and just as glad that I am not muslim or jewish. However, I don't see that concentrating on the faults of islam gets us anywhere. I can find just as many problems in the old testament, or the waffle from paul, which was the actual basis for christianity, as distinct from what jesus supposedly taught.

What are we to make of a religion in which there is only one god, but he only has an interest one race, for example? Or Josjua rampaging through the land, or the mass suicide of Masada?

Paul the apostle converted what at first appears to be a similar approach to life that the buddha proclaimed, into a mystical cult. The crusades, for example, demonstrated that the anyone, from any faith, if they want to, can justify any war.

What is important is to hope for the rationality and reason of people to triumph over the insanity of religion that has been twisted to place the importance of faith over human suffering. You can find plenty of examples of such behaviour all over the world. No need to stop at the absurdities of islam.

 

[DrBenway]

So, how do the mellow Muslims reconcile the contradiction between these ideas:

1. The Qu'ran is the literal word of Allah
2. The Qu'ran teaches that Muslims ought to either subjugate non- believers or kill them.
3. Muslims ought not subjugate or kill non-believers.

One view I've read might be termed "the expediency argument." Essentially, if the consequences resulting from efforts to subjugate or kill non-believers would cause more harm than good to most Muslims in the world, then the commandment does not have to be fulfilled, presently.

This argument fails to comfort me, as it leaves open the door for action in the future.

Another view: The Qu'ran is not the literal word of Allah. It's this view that I'd like to see become more prevalent in the Muslim world. If anyone can find examples in support of this view, from respected Muslim leaders today, I'd love to read them.

So I wonder, Matt and AUP, how do your Muslim friends reconcile this apparent contradiction?

 

[Mike B.]

The Muslims I have spoken to when pressed will say that they want the shiarra as law everywhere eventually. This is the scary part.

Remember an shiarra court recently sentenced a 21 year old to death in Pakistan for questioning the "prophet" Muhammad's belief about drinking alchol.

As far as religion goes, to each his own, I don't really care. However, I do not want to see the supreme law based on some religious law from the dark ages.

There are Suffi Muslims which believe in Allah, but also believe that the Shiarra is uneccessary. Of course for this they are considered the worst apostates by the fundamentalists.

 

[DrBenway]

There are Sufi Muslims which believe in Allah, but also believe that the Shiarra is uneccessary.

I'm a fan of the sufis. Unfortunately, they make up only a small percentage of world Islam (approx. 3%; maybe more if you count some of the more liberal Muslim groups in Indonesia).

 

[specious_reasons]

[...]
So I wonder, Matt and AUP, how do your Muslim friends reconcile this apparent contradiction?

The Muslims I know weasel their way out of the interpretations that you give. Usually, even though it's not specifically mentioned, they proclaim that all war and fighting should be in self defense. Therefore, the commandment to kill is to kill people who have already made the commitment to kill you.

So far, we have one example. Of which, I'm not entirely sure how it is to be interpreted. Is this it?

 

[Baker]

The Muslims I know weasel their way out of the interpretations that you give. Usually, even though it's not specifically mentioned, they proclaim that all war and fighting should be in self defense. Therefore, the commandment to kill is to kill people who have already made the commitment to kill you.

So far, we have one example. Of which, I'm not entirely sure how it is to be interpreted. Is this it?

There are many different translations so it's hard to tell which one is more accurate.
These are some of the verses dealing with killing the unbelievers.

002.191
YUSUFALI: And slay them wherever ye catch them, and turn them out from where they have Turned you out; for tumult and oppression are worse than slaughter; but fight them not at the Sacred Mosque, unless they (first) fight you there; but if they fight you, slay them. Such is the reward of those who suppress faith.

PICKTHAL: And slay them wherever ye find them, and drive them out of the places whence they drove you out, for persecution is worse than slaughter. And fight not with them at the Inviolable Place of Worship until they first attack you there, but if they attack you (there) then slay them. Such is the reward of disbelievers.

SHAKIR: And kill them wherever you find them, and drive them out from whence they drove you out, and persecution is severer than slaughter, and do not fight with them at the Sacred Mosque until they fight with you in it, but if they do fight you, then slay them; such is the recompense of the unbelievers.

http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/002.qmt.html#002.191

008.065
YUSUFALI: O Prophet! rouse the Believers to the fight. If there are twenty amongst you, patient and persevering, they will vanquish two hundred: if a hundred, they will vanquish a thousand of the Unbelievers: for these are a people without understanding.

PICKTHAL: O Prophet! Exhort the believers to fight. If there be of you twenty steadfast they shall overcome two hundred, and if there be of you a hundred (steadfast) they shall overcome a thousand of those who disbelieve, because they (the disbelievers) are a folk without intelligence.

SHAKIR: O Prophet! urge the believers to war; if there are twenty patient ones of you they shall overcome two hundred, and if there are a hundred of you they shall overcome a thousand of those who disbelieve, because they are a people who do not understand.
http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/008.qmt.html#008.065

047.004
YUSUFALI: Therefore, when ye meet the Unbelievers (in fight), smite at their necks; At length, when ye have thoroughly subdued them, bind a bond firmly (on them): thereafter (is the time for) either generosity or ransom: Until the war lays down its burdens. Thus (are ye commanded): but if it had been Allah's Will, He could certainly have exacted retribution from them (Himself); but (He lets you fight) in order to test you, some with others. But those who are slain in the Way of Allah,- He will never let their deeds be lost.

PICKTHAL: Now when ye meet in battle those who disbelieve, then it is smiting of the necks until, when ye have routed them, then making fast of bonds; and afterward either grace or ransom till the war lay down its burdens. That (is the ordinance). And if Allah willed He could have punished them (without you) but (thus it is ordained) that He may try some of you by means of others. And those who are slain in the way of Allah, He rendereth not their actions vain.

SHAKIR: So when you meet in battle those who disbelieve, then smite the necks until when you have overcome them, then make (them) prisoners, and afterwards either set them free as a favor or let them ransom (themselves) until the war terminates. That (shall be so); and if Allah had pleased He would certainly have exacted what is due from them, but that He may try some of you by means of others; and (as for) those who are slain in the way of Allah, He will by no means allow their deeds to perish.

http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/047.qmt.html#047.004

 

[Bjorn]

So, how do the mellow Muslims reconcile the contradiction between these ideas:

1. The Qu'ran is the literal word of Allah
2. The Qu'ran teaches that Muslims ought to either subjugate non- believers or kill them.
3. Muslims ought not subjugate or kill non-believers.

Couldn't one just as well ask:

How do the Christians reconcile the contradiction between these ideas:

1. The Bible is the literal word of God
2. The Bible teaches that Christians ought to either subjugate non-believers or kill them.
3. Christians ought not subjugate or kill non-believers

Obviously, we (most of us) know that in general, Christians don't believe or follow everything written in the Bible. Just as most muslims are not following everything written in the Quran.

 

[a_unique_person]

So I wonder, Matt and AUP, how do your Muslim friends reconcile this apparent contradiction?

The same way xians and jews do, they just ignore or rationalise away the parts that they don't agree with.

 

[Baker]

Couldn't one just as well ask:

How do the Christians reconcile the contradiction between these ideas:

1. The Bible is the literal word of God
2. The Bible teaches that Christians ought to either subjugate non-believers or kill them.
3. Christians ought not subjugate or kill non-believers

Obviously, we (most of us) know that in general, Christians don't believe or follow everything written in the Bible. Just as most muslims are not following everything written in the Quran.

Most?
I would argue this belief the word Islam it self means total submission to Allah.
The verses you that tell Christians ought to kill non-believers are all in the Old Testament.
As their belief go’s the New Testament was written to change the old.