KHUTAB V: 2. OUT OF CONTEXT

2. OUT OF CONTEXT

          About three years ago, in 2009, I was invited by Community Relations Commission for a Multicultural NSW to review the draft of a book intended to be “a resource for Islamic Special Religious Education in Australian Schools”. The book would be entitled My Religion, Our Country, written by Dr. Mark Weston. Among the objectives of this book are: to provide an authoritative guide for teaching about Islam in an Australian context; to link general civics education in schools with instruction from the main sources of Islamic teachings, i.e., the Qur’ān and the Sunnah, as well as legal opinions of leading Muslim scholars, past and present; and to assist educators in preparing young Muslim students to live a life of faith and citizenship.

          In this book the author selected ten issues to be discussed according to Australian laws and the teachings of Islam on these issues based on the Qur’ān and the Sunnah. They are: 1. freedom of the individual, 2. freedom of speech, 3. freedom of religion, 4.freedom of association, 5. parliamentary democracy, 6. equality under the law, 7. equality of men and women, 8. equality of opportunity, 9. peacefulness, and 10. tolerance, respect and empathy for others. By comparing these Australian and Islamic laws compatibility (or incompatibility) could be found. If the Qur’ānic verses or hadiths are quoted out of context, then incompatibility would be found.

          Since the writer was most probably a non-Muslim, before meeting him in Sydney, I would like to warn him of the danger of quoting the Qur’ānic verses and hadiths out of context. So, I sent him an e-mail containing the following imaginary conversation with the topic “Out of Context”

          - A woman wants to remind her son to do his homework. She cited to him the following proverb: “Never put off to tomorrow what you can do today.” Her son asked her: “Then can I eat the whole cake now?”

          - A Muslim and a Christian boy are having this imaginary conversation.

M .: “We cannot be friends anymore.”

C. :  “Why?”

M. : “Because the Koran said that  Muslims are  not allowed to make friends with  Jews and Christians.” (Q. 5:51). [The word awliyā’ has many meanings, including “friends”, but in this verse it means “protectors”]

C. :  “How could that be? But we Christians are not allowed to defend ourselves”

M. :  “How could that be?”

C.  : “Because Jesus said that if someone slaps your cheek, give him also the other cheek”. (Luke, 6:30)

M. :  “This is the opposite of what the Koran said.”

C. : “What does the Koran say?”

M. : “It orders Muslims to fight non-Muslims until they surrender.” (Q. 8:39) [This verse was revealed to fight the idolaters back, until there is no more fitnah, namely, no Muslim is persecuted by them so that they abandon their religion].

C. :  “But the Bible says that Jesus came to this world not to bring peace but a sword, to make a man rebel against his father, and a daughter against her mother.” (Matt. 10:34-35)

M. :  “It is also said that the Koran orders the Muslims to kill the pagans wherever they find them.” (Q. 9:5) [This verse was revealed when the hostility between the Muslims and the idolaters of Makkah has already occurred. It only stopped temporarily during the Sacred months: Dhul Qi‘dah, Dhul Ḥijjah, Muharram, and Rajab. So, when these months have passed, the war continued and fighting the idolaters wherever they found them]

C.  : “The same with Joshua when he was ordered by God to kill everybody.” (Joshua 10:40)

M. :  “The Koran said that there is no compulsion in religion, but    many believe that Islam was spread by force.” (Q. 2:256)

C. :   “In Christianity St. Paul said in his Epistles that he used  any means to get followers, even by means of hypocrisy and cheating.” (1 Corinthians 9:19-22; 2 Corinthians 12:16)

This is a friendly conversation. Now, if we reverse the conversation with aggressive attitude, the conversation would be like this:

C. : “Hey, Muslim, your Koran told you not to make friends with us.”

M. : “Hey, Christian, Jesus said in your Bible that if I slap your face, you should not retaliate, but give the other cheek.”

C. :  “Your religion is so dangerous to human beings, as your Koran orders you to eliminate us. It is a terrorist religion.”

M.:   “It is Jesus who is a trouble-maker. He did not come to bring peace, but trouble.”   [A Muslim would never say that, as Jesus was one of the five fully-determined messengers of Allah; the other four are: Noah, Abraham, Moses, and Muhammad].

C. :   “Your Koran orders you to kill the pagan wherever they found them”

M.   “Your Bible said that God ordered Joshua to kill everybody.

C. :    “Your Koran said there is not compulsion in religion, but people said that Islam spreads through force”.

M.    “Your Bible said that Paul used any means to convert people to Christianity. That is why we cannot trust you”

          Many of Qur’ānic verses and hadiths are quoted out of context, so that they are replaced with the relevant ones. Topics which need further explanation are put in appendices, such as appendix 4, as follows:

DEMOCRACY AND SHŪRĀ (MUTUAL

CONSULTATION) IN ISLAM

-  Shūrā (mutual consultation) is “participation with others in making a decision that concerns them.”

- After Prophet Muhammad s.a.w., revelation stopped, and there was no longer direct access to God’s will, and therefore no one has the legitimacy or authority to claim a pope (priest-like) status in the Muslim community: no theocracy in Islamic political system.

 - Like the injunction of praying the injunction of shūrā was also revealed in the Makkan (Meccan) surah (chapter) as an individual duty upon Muslims. Therefore, every individual has to consult each other: in his family life, community and the government. It is to be applied not only in legislative body, but also in it executive and judicial bodies.

- Some Muslims, including Sayyid Abul A‘la Maududi (أبو الأعلى المودودي) and Muhammad al-Khaṭīb say that democracy is incompatible with Islam because of the difference in the concept of sovereignty: to God according to Islam (and human beings are merely executors of His Will), and to people according to secular Western democracy. Among their arguments: (a) Democracy makes religion separated from the state, whereas in Islam religion is everything in the lives of Muslims. (b) Shūrā is a part of Islamic system of government, and has nothing to do with democracy which is a man-made system of government. (c) The source of Islam is divine (revelation), whereas the source of democracy is human.

- Others say that Islam and democracy are not only compatible, but their association is inevitable, because Islamic political system is based on shūrā. Among the areas of compatibility between the two are:

(a) There are only about 200 verses in the Qur’ān dealing with laws, mostly on protecting family, women, and the community. Islam does not provide detailed practicalities as they keep changing to fit time, place and human circumstances. Therefore it leaves an open and wide space for exercising ijtihād (independent judgment in a legal question, based upon the interpretation and application of the Qur’ān and the Sunnah of the Prophet) to find out what is best for the community.

(b) Islam and democracy promote freedom and social justice and many other values

(c) Elected members of the shūrā Council of the Prophet consisted of seven people from the Muhajirin (emigrants) and seven from the Ansar (people of Madinah) similar to the present day parliamentary democracy where members are elected representing their respective parties. Among cotemporary scholars who are the exponents of this view are Dr. Fathi Osman (فتحي عثمان), and Shaikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi (يوسف القرضاوي) .

 - Islamic political system in general and democracy in particular has to be bound by laws, principles and spirits of the shariah. It has to maintain its objectives:  to establish justice and to protect religion (the last resort is engaging in fighting), lives, properties, honour, progenies, and minds (by prohibiting alcohol, etc) of people.

 - Muslims who say that democracy is incompatible with Islam use the term shūrā; others called it “Islamic democracy”.

          Another example is the appendix 2, entitled “The background of hostility between the Prophet and his followers on one side, and the Makkan idolaters and the Jews of Madinah on the other” as follows:

- When the Prophet arrived at Madina in 623 C.E. he made the constitution of Madinah (Charter of Madinah) containing 52 articles. Among them, the co-existence between Muslims and followers of other religions, especially Judaism and polytheism and freedom of practicing their religions. They would defend together the city against the attack of the enemy from outside.

- However, when Madinah was attacked in the battle of Uhud, the Jews did not want to take part in defending the city, except Mukhyriq of Banī Tha‘labah who told them: “O fellow Jews, you have to assist Muhammad.”  They made an excuse and said: “It is a Sabbath day.”  He said, “Assisting Muhammad does not disgrace the Sabbath day.” He said that if he died in the battlefield he would leave his wealth to Muhammad’s disposal. When the Prophet heard of his death in the battlefield, he said: “Mukhayriq is the best of the Jews.”

- Like the Jews of Madinah who violated the constitution of Madinah, the Makkan idolaters expelled the Muslims from Makkah and violated the Treaty of Hudaybiyyah signed in 6 AH. between them and the Prophet. 

          In conclusion, the hostility between Prophet Muhammad s.a.w. and his followers on one side and his enemies on the other was the result of their breaking their treaty. (CIVIC, 15.02.13)