Author: quranperspective

Allah says in 17:85 “You have been given only a little knowledge”. The scripture is supposed to be a “clarification of everything” (16:89), but I presume that “everything” relates probably to one aspect of religion that Allah wants us to know about.

Why would Allah, who knows everything from the past and the future, would create human beings (and Jinns) that would prove to be untrustworthy, who would rebel, and that He would destroy in Noah’s lifetime. He has given an interim to mankind that will come to an end at a time of His choosing, and He has given us some indications (not totally clear, we must admit) as to when that would occur. We can only think that is part of His warning system to the believers, as the time of the end will come as a complete surprise to the unbelievers.

The whole story could have to do with what Allah calls a “Feud in the High Society” (38:69). The only other mention in Quran of “High Society” is in 37:8, and it is about something in the sky or heaven. Whether that “feud” refers to the disobedience and rebellion of Satan following the creation of the humans is  a matter of debate.

We have so little knowledge, and we have so little power. We do not know or even choose to be born. All we know is that we are on this planet, that we will live for a certain period of time, and that we will die. The reality of the “soul”

Why were we created? Allah says “I did not create the humans and the Jinns except to worship Me” (51:56). Our understanding, as human beings, of the meaning and reason for that worship might differ from Allah’s meaning and reason. It is done more likely that on the day we will meet Allah for our judgement, what we have done will be proven to us, and we will not be able to say that we did not know. In fact, Allah says in 7:172 that “He took from the children of Adam their progeny from their backs (loins)” most likely to instill in them the knowledge of their origins, and that they will not be able to plead ignorance. We are His servants, and all we should do is obey.

We usually do not know either when, how, or where we will die. Even after we die, we do not know where we will go. Allah’s judgement will determine if we are worthy of an eternity of bliss in Heaven, or if we are destined for a eternity of suffering. We do not even know if Heaven and Hell are as described in the scriptures, or if the descriptions are just allegorical. We will know only when we will get there.

All we know is that we should be building our lives according to the blue-print Allah (or as He is also known Yahweh, or God the Father) has traced for us, and place our trust in Him and His decisions.

Given the situation in the world today, some thinkers have advanced the theory of a “clash of civilizations”. It is a fact that the gap between the quickening “liberalisation” of the Western cultures, as well as the attitude of the Western world regarding its position in the world are creating an adverse reaction and hardening of conservatism in many countries and religious groups, particularly within Islam.

Many scholars attribute both the increased relaxation or removal of the religious and moral guard-rails and the resurgence of conservative attitudes as a realization of the prophecies portending the time of the end, when mankind is nearing the expiration of the time it has been given before the cataclysmic events described in the scriptures.

If the main conflict within Islam came into the open during Ali’s caliphate, it started even earlier when, during the “collection” and copying of Quran under Othman, Ali complained about additional text being added to Allah’s word.

The fact that three out of the four “Rightly-guided caliphs” were assassinated is a telling fact about the violence prevailing in the early times of Islam, despite the fact that it is a religion calling for a peaceful resolution of conflicts.

• Abu Bakr, the first caliph, led the Moslem community from 632 to 634, the only one to die a natural death at the age of 63, the same as the prophet Mohammed.
• Omar Ibn Al-Khattab was the second caliph, from 634 to 644. He was assassinated by a Persian slave.
• Othman Ibn A’ffan was caliph from 644 to 656. During the second half of his caliphate, which was marred by much dissatisfaction and accusations of nepotism and “abnormal” enrichment, a rebellion started, asking for his abdication, which he refused to do. He was assassinated in his house by Moslems.
• Ali held the caliphate for five years (656 to 661), and was assassinated while praying in a mosque by Ibn El-Muljim (who was supposedly dispatched by the Kharijites to kill him). So, the two last caliphs were killed by Moslems. What were the roles played by politics and by religion in the assassinations remain debatable. It seems undeniable that the association of Aisha, the youngest widow of the prophet Mohammed, with the forces opposing Ali precipitated his downfall, and contributed to the splitting of the Moslem community into the “shia” (by its full name the “shia of Ali”, or the “supporters of Ali”, and what has come to be known by the “sunnis” (those who follow “sunnat an-nabi”, or “the way of the prophet”).

The events that followed the murder of Ali, then the decimation of his and the prophet’s family (most of all the murder of Husain, one of Ali’s sons) created a situation of enmity which endures until today. Two major –and differing- views of how the word of Allah should be applied, who should be the guardian of the religion entrusted to Moslems, and who should hold the reins of power in the Moslem community have been setting brother against brother, both standing in disregard of Allah’s commandments to be together in defense of religion and the way of Allah, and to leave up to Him the fate of those who disbelieve. Allah is the ultimate judge, and His word is the standard of Moslems’ conduct, but both groups want to settle Allah’s own business, and their differences, here and now.

————————————-

La Grande Division Islamique

(The Early Expression)

A fairly large part of the turmoil happening today in the world occurs with the participation of Moslems as one of the parties to the conflict. Although they were rarely the original aggressors, and still seldom are, the projection of their involvement looms huge, and the responsibility and the blame that are attributed to them are out of proportion with their actions. Why is this?

What is radicalism? The definition has seen a substantial amount of fluctuation in the past few decades. Radicalism is considered to be the fact of holding extreme views.

Jihadism, a misnomer, is perceived nowadays as the act of pushing the struggle to the point of taking up arms, and being active in the propagation of extremist views and participation in violent activities in the defense of Islam.

Radical Moslems are, and always have been, a small minority. Islamic radicalism was born soon in the Moslem era, with the “Khawarej”, or Kharijites, who dissented with Ali, the prophet Mohammed’s cousin and son-in-law. Ali became the fourth caliph after the assassination of the third caliph, Othman Ibn A’ffan. Muawiyah Ibn Abi Sufyan, who was placed by his uncle Othman as governor of Syria, put a claim on the leadership. To avoid shedding the blood of Moslems, Ali had accepted to settle by arbitrage the challenge to his position as caliph. The Khawarej (the ones who put themselves out), objected to that and considered Ali’s soft approach as a rejection of Allah’s will and the recommendation of the prophet.

The reason for their withdrawal was their attachment to the principle of the legality of the leadership of the Moslem community. Allah, in Quran, did not set a procedure for selecting who should be leading the Moslem community, nor did He make a provision for the separation of the spiritual and temporal authorities. The caliph (successor), therefore, is at the same time the head of the state and the religious “imam” or leader. The legitimacy of the leadership is a situation that has been encountered since the death of the prophet Mohammed, when, in the absence of Ali, who has been, according to some traditions, designated by the prophet in Ghadir Khom as a successor, Abu Bakr and Omar “preserved” the continuation of the leadership in the prophet’s tribe, Qoreish, contrarily to the principle of merit system that Quran seems to support.

The system that Allah has established unites both authorities in one person, and He says that “the noblest among you is the most pious” (49:13). The rare mentions Allah made of human authority among Moslems are found in verses 4:59 and 4:83.

26:151. “Protect yourselves from Allah, and obey me”. The “me” applies to all those who are sent by Allah (in this case Salah), but only in what conforms to Allah’s commandments.

42:38 “Their affairs are the object of consultation among themselves”.

Radicalism is meant to be the outward expression of the believers’ position and actions towards a leadership that has strayed from Allah’s system and should be made to reverse certain decisions, or towards an unjust situation that needs to be corrected.

————————————–

Le Radicalisme Islamique

Une assez large part des difficultes dans le monde d’aujourd’hui surviennent avec la participation de Musulmans comme l’une des parties au conflit. Bien qu’ils etaient tres rarement les agresseurs originaux, et qu’ils le sont encore, la projection de leur implication occupe une place enorme, et la responsabilite et le blame qui leur sont attributes sont hors de proportion avec leurs actions. Pourquoi en est-il ainsi?

Qu’est ce que le radicalisme? La definition a vu une quantiye substantielle de fluctuation au cours des dernieres decennies. Le “radicalisme” est considere comme etant le fait d’avoir des vues extremes.

“Le Jihadisme”, un autre mal nomme, est percu aujourd’hui comme le fait de pousser le concept original de “lutte”au point de prendre les armes, et d’etre actif dans la propagation d’opinions et la participation dans des activites extremistes dans la defense de l’Islam.

Les Musulmans “radicaux” sont, et ont toujours ete, une tres faible minorite. Le radicalisme islamique est ne tot dans l’ere Musulmane, avec les “Khaouarej” ou “Kharijites, qui ont disagree avec Ali, le cousin et beau-fils du prophete Mohammed. Ali etait devenu le 4eme calife après l’assassinat du troisieme calife, Othman Ibn A’ffan. Muawiyah Ibn Abi Sufyan, qui avait ete place par son oncle Othman comme gouverneur de Syrie, a revendique la position. Pour eviter de voir verse le sang de Musulmans, Ali a accepte de voir regler par arbitrage le defi a son poste de calife. Les “Kawarej” (ceux qui optent  de se retirer), ont objecte a cela, et ont considere la nposition paisible d’Ali comme une rejection de la volonte d’Allah et de la recommendation du prophete.

A la base de leur retrait etait leur attachement au principe de la legalite des dirigeants de la communaute Musulmane. Allah, dans le Coran, n’a pas indique de procedure pour choisir qui devrait etre a la tete de la communaute Musulmane, et n’a pas non plus indique de de provision pour la separation des pouvoirs spiritual et temporel. Le calife (qui veut dire successeur), est donc en meme temps a la tete de l’Etat et l’ “imam”, comme chef religieux. La legitimite des dirigeants est une situation qui a ete rencontree a la mort du prophete Mohammed alors que, en l’absence d’Ali – qui a ete, selon certaines traditions, designe par le prohete a Ghadir Khom comme etant son successeur-, Abu Bake et Omar ont “conserve” la direction de la communaute Musulmane dans la tribu du prophete, Qoreish, contrairement au principe de merite que le Coran semble soutenir.

Le systeme qu’Allah a etabli reunite les deux pouvoirs dans la meme personne, et Allah dit  que “le plus noble d’entre vous est le plus pieux” (49:13). les rare mentions qu’Allah a faites de l’autorite humaine chez les Musulmans se trouvent aux versets 4:59 et 4:83.

26:151. “Protegez-vous d’Allah, et obeissez moi”. Le “moi” s’applique a tous ceux les envoys d’Allah (dans ce cas Salah), mais seulement en ce qui est conforme aux commandments d’Allah.

Allah promeut la democratie. 42:38 “Leur affaires sont l’objet de consultation entre eux”.

Le radicalisme est concu comme etant l’expression externe de la position et des actions des croyants envers une direction qui a devie du systeme d’Allah, et qui devrait retracter certaines decisions, ou envers une situation injuste qui a besoin d’etre corrigee.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The Westerners are very clever, and very opportunistic. They realized fast enough how it is best and easiest to control the destinies and allegiance of other countries and people. In a world that is divided and changing, direct colonialism is no longer seen as a viable alternative. It is much easier in today’s geopolitics, to control a country by controlling its leaders, and enable those leaders to control their own population.

The more propensity for corruption a leader has, the easier it is to control his people and his country’s resources without any military involvement or occupation. Maintaining someone in power even against his people’s will, helping him subdue them by crushing their rights, bribing his way to tax heavens around the globe, and looking away or even helping him rob his country and his people are a more effective way to secure the “friendly” attitude of a nation, particularly in this time of “apparent” protection for peoples’ and countries’ rights. “Apparent”, because when we look at how the United Nations organization works, besides few trivial elements, the majority of its activity is to secure the interests of the West.

It is quite hard for most developing (third world) countries to get their development programs on the road without the help of one or more developed countries, and it is not sure those countries do it in a benevolent or disinterested way.

And so, the largest majority of the Moslems countries are, in one way or another, through their leaders, and against the will of their people, under a western control. That is, a non-Moslem one, and obviously, in Allah’s eyes, a possible religious enemy of Islam.

Allah is very clear. Moslems are not to feel enmity towards other people who did not aggress them. But if some people or countries are attacking Islam and Moslems, then they are to be considered enemies of Allah, of Islam, and of Moslems. And if Moslem leaders are oppressing their own citizens to side with the West, then they are not really Moslems.

Through the propagation of their influence and lifestyle to other parts of the world, the Westerners are affecting other societies. If there were only a part of the communities affected  which are adopting that lifestyle, and would respect the position kept by the rest of the Moslem community, the accommodation would not be this hard. People do not live in a closed environment, and whatever one does affects the others, most often through acceptance, emulation, or adverse reaction. You have only to repeat an action a certain number of times before it becomes normalized. The humans get desensitized easily and rapidly even to the most abhorrent of acts.

——————————-

Les Alliances Maléfiques (malsaines)

Les occidentaux sont bien rusés, et bien opportunistes. Ils ont assez rapidement réalisé comment il était préférable, et aussi plus facile, de contrôler les destinées et l’allégeance des autres pays et de leur peuples. Dans un monde qui etait divise et changeant, le colonialisme direct n’etait plus considere comme etant une alternative viable.  Il est beaucoup plus facile, dans la geopolitique actuelle, de controller un pays par controller ses dirigeants, et de faire a leur tour ces dirigeants controler leur propre population.

Le plus de propension un dirigent a pour la corruption, le plus facile il est pour les institutions et gouvernements occidentaux de controler son people et les ressources de son pays sans avoir a recourir a une intervention militaire ou a une occupation territoriale. Maintenir quelqu’un au pouvoir, meme contre la volonte de son people, l’aider a dompter sa population par ecraser leurs droits, soudoyer sa voie a des abris fiscaux a travers le monde, ou detourner les yeux ou meme l’aider a voler et demunir son pays et son people sont des moyens plus efficacies d’ “assurer” l’attitude amicale d’une nation, particulierement en cette periode de protection “en apparence” des droits des peoples et des pays. “En apparence”, parce que quand on examine comment l’Organisation des nations Unies fonctionne, a part quelques elements triviaux, la majeure partie de ses activites est de proteger les interets de l’Occident.

Il est bien difficile pour la plupart des pays en voie de developpement (tiers monde) de metre leurs programmes de developpement en marche sans l’aide d;un ou de plusieurs pays developpes, et il n’est pas certain que ces pays le feraient de facon benevole ou desinteressee.

Er ainsi, la plus grande majorite des pays Musulmans sont, d’une maniere ou d’une autre, a travers leurs dirigeants, et contre l’agrement de leur populations, sous controle occidental. Autrement dit, une entite non-Musulmane, et evidemment, dans les yeux d’Allah, un ennemi possible de l’Islam en religion.

Allah est tres clair.Les Musulmans ne doivent pas sentir d’inimitie envers d’autres qui ne les ont pas attaques. Mais si certaines personnes ou certains pays attquent l’Islam ou les Musulmans, alors ils devraient etre consideres comme ennemis d’Allah, de l’Islam, et des Musulmans. Et si des dirigeants Musulmans oppriment leurs propres citoyens pour se ranger du cote de l’Occident, alors ils ne sont pas vraiement Musulmans.

Par le biais de la propageation de leur influence et de leur mode de vie dans d’autres parties du monde, les Occidentaux affectent d’autres societies. S’il n’y’avait qu’une partie des communautes affectees qui adopteraient ce mode de vie, et respecteraient la position gardee par le reste de la communaute Musulmane, une accommodation ne serait pas si difficile. Les gens ne vivent pas en vase clos, et quoi qu’on fass influe sur d’autres, le plus souvent par acceptation, emulation, ou reaction adverse. On n’a qu’a repeater une action un certain nombre de fois avant qu’elle ne devienne la norme. Les etres humains sont desensibilises facilement et rapidement meme aux actes les plus odieux.

 

 

 

The Napoleonic invasion of Egypt made the Moslems realise the gap between their own situation and how Europe progressed. Their search for the answers to their decline led them to look at their religion. A glaring discrepancy is apparent between what Allah promised Moslems, and what life in the Moslem world seemed at the time. The glory of the past, when Moslems led the world, was only a distant memory. Moslems attributed that to having distanced themselves from religion. The 20^th century saw attempts to close that gap, through a return to a more pure religious stance, or through nationalism, or modernization.

The West’s attacks on Islam and Moslems nowadays take more insidious forms. Rather than an offending military presence, the economic one is cleaner, less obvious, and less dangerous. Even when it comes to military intervention, through media and public opinion manipulation, and manipulation of the UN, some Western countries get a basically free hand to act in Moslem countries with impunity. Although they claim their attachment to democratic principles and to transparency towards their own people, their agendas and purposes, when later revealed, hide many surprises.

The creation of the state of Israel, the Palestinian situation, the Iranian Shah and revolution, the Iran-Iraq war, the two Gulf wars, Afghanistan, Al-Qaeda, Isis, and so on, all are in a large part the responsibility of the Western countries, which, through smoke and mirrors, were made to appear different from what they really are, and made the Moslems bear the dunce hat for them.

And there are the intellectual attacks. In the past few decades, there seems to be a new “crusade” going on, this time through books and other media. The way Moslems and Islam are portrayed, and the views of some writers on the topic leave deep marks, and there are many of those writers these days, even if their knowledge of the topic is quite superficial.

Freedom is an absolute necessity to man, and yet, absolute freedom is something of the mind. We forget so easily that our freedom stops where someone else’s freedom starts, and that insulting someone’s beliefs or god or religion is still an insult, and that it is considerate and better to refrain from it. We have only one planet to live in, and we can choose whether to live amicably in mutual respect and dignity, or settle for enmity and conflict. We have to accept that the others also can have what we want for ourselves, and that if we choose to insult them, that they should get the right to respond in kind, if they so choose. It is a two-way street, and no one has the right to choose the weapons.

The principle of human rights can be stretched only this much before it turns into an offensive tool. It is much wiser, more responsible, and more courteous to have some consideration towards what surrounds us, from nature, to the environment, to other humans. With today’s propagation of information and news, and the word being so connected, whatever happens anywhere affects others elsewhere. The more “liberalization” occurs in the West, the more turmoil it generates in cultures that go by different principles.

Moslems are under attacks not only by the West, but by the “liberal” forces inside the Moslem community who see the western lifestyle as an attractive one, and attempt to apply it within the Moslem community itself, without discrimination and consideration for the “spiritual” environment they live in. And this is the most dangerous aspect of all, because it undermines the Moslem society from the inside.

————————————————————————–

Assauts sur l”islam (et les Musulmans)

(la Periode recente)

L’invasion Napoleonienne de l’Egypte a fait les Musulmans realiser l’ecart entre leur propre situation et la facon dont l’Europe a progresse. Leur quete pour les raisons de leur decadence les a conduit a examiner leur religion. Une contradiction flagrante se trouvait entre ce qu’Allah a promis aux Musulmans et ce que la vie dans le monde Islamique semblait etre en ce temps-la. La gloire du passé, lorsque les Musulmans etaient a la tete du monde, n’etait plus qu’un lointain souvenir. Certains Musulmans ont attribute le declin au fait qu’ils s’etaient eloignes de la religion. Le 19eme et 20eme siècles ont vu plusieurs tentatives pour combler cette lacune, exprimees sous forme d’un appel au retour a une attitude religieuse plus pure, au nationalisme, ou a la modernisation.

Les attaques de l’Occident sur l’Islam et les Musulmans prennent aujourd’hui des forms plus insidieuses. Plutot qu’une presence militaire offensive, la “presence” economique est plus propre, moins evidente, et moins dangereuse. Meme quand il s’agit d’une intervention militaire, a travers la manipulation des medias d’information, et la manipulation de l’Organisation des Nations Unies, certains pays occidentaux sont fondamentalement libres d’agir dans les pays Musulmans, en toute impunite.Bien qu’ils affirment leur attachement aux principes de democratie et de transparence a l’egard de leurs propres populations, leurs plans et leurs objectifs, quand ils viennent eventuellement au jour plus tard, cachent pas mal de surprises.

La creation de l’etat d’Israel, le probleme Palestinien, le shah et la revolution Iranienne, la guerre entre l’Iran et l’Irak, les deux guerres du Golfe, l’Afghanistan, Al-Qaeda, Daesh, and so on, sont tous, dans une large mesure, des evenements dont les pays occidentaux sont responsables, et qui ont ete fait paraitre different de ce qu’ils etaient reellement, avec les Musulmans comme dindond de la farce.

Et puis, il y’a les attaques intellectuelles. Dans les dernieres decennies, il semble qu’il y’ait une nouvelle croisade en cours, cette fois sous forme de livres et autres medias. La maniere dont les  Musulmans et l’Islam sont depeints, et les vues de certains auteurs sur le sujet, laissent des marques profondes, et il y’a beaucoup de ces ecrivains ces temps-ci, meme si leur connaissance de l’Islam est tout-a-fait superficielle.

La liberte est d’une necessite absolue pour l’etre humain, et pourtant, la liberte absolue est simplement une creation mentale. Nous oublions si facilement que notre liberte s’arrete la ou celle d’un autre commence, et qu’insulter les croyances ou le dieu ou la religion de quelqu’un d’autre est toujours une insulte, et qu’il est bien intentionne et meilleur de s’en abstenir. Nous avons une seule planete sur laquelle on vit, et on peut choisir d’y vivre amicalement, dans la dignite et le respect mutuels, ou de choisir l’inimitie et le conflit. Nous devons accepter le fait que les autres aussi peuvent avoir ce que nous voulons our nous-memes, et que si nous choisissons de les insulter, ils devraient avoir le droit de repondre en nature, s’ils le souhaitent. C’est une voie a double-sens, et personne n’a le monopole sur le choix des armes qu’il peut ou veut utiliser.

Le principe des droits humains peut etre etire seulement a un certain degree avant de tourner en un outil offensif. Il est bien plus sage, plus responsible, et plus courtois d’avoir quelque consideration pour ce qui nous entoure, que ce soit la nature, l’environnement, ou les autres etres humains. Avec la propagation des nouvelles de nos jours, et le monde etant si connecte, n’importe quoi qui arrive n’importe ou affecte les autres ailleurs. Le plus il y’a de “liberalisation” dans l’Occident, le plus il y’a de trouble dans les cultures qui sont gouvernees par des principes differents.

Les Musulmans sont attaques non seulement par l’Occident, mais aussi par les forces “liberales” a l’interieur de la communate Musulmane, qui considerent le mode vie occidental comme attrayant, et essaient de le paratiquer au sein de la comuunate Musulmane meme, sans discrimination et sans consideration pour l’environnement “spirituel” dans lequel ells vivent. Et ceci est l’aspect le plus dangerous de tous, car il sape la communaute Musulmane de l’interieur.

 

 

 

 

The attacks on Islam are not a new phenomenon. They started already during the prophet Mohammed’s life. The opposition was coming then mainly from the pagan Arabs of the Arabian Peninsula, and some of the Jewish tribes living there. The Church at that time seemed to consider Islam as a deviant offshoot of Christianity. But then the Church woke up to Islam’s expansion, and the conflict started earnestly. The first European translations made of Quran were done with the specific purpose of reviling and demonizing Quran, Islam and the prophet Mohammed.

Most Jews and Christians refused to consider -and still do- that Quran is a divinely revealed scripture, coming from the same source theirs did, that the prophet Mohammed is a divinely accredited prophet and messenger, and that Islam is a continuation of the divine message to mankind. They think of it as an infringement on their respective monopoly on God’s favour and blessings.

Many Jews and Christians adopted Islam. For the rest, those who remained within Moslem territory lived relatively in peace, although they had to pay a tax for not contributing to the defense and the financing of the Islamic state and community’s needs (Moslems themselves pay an obligatory contribution, “zakat”, and have to participate in the defense of the Moslem community).

The Moslems’ spreading of the religion, which they looked upon as a major obligation, took them to lands inhabited, among others, by Christians, in the Middle East, North Africa and Southern Europe. The early quick expansion was followed by some kind of relative accommodation for centuries in those areas, bringing culture and knowledge to certain parts of Europe such as Spain.

The Christian religious community took an adversary view, and the middle ages history revolves in large part around the Crusades. Many popes stirred up the European nobility and folks to rise and retake the “holy lands” from “infidel” hands, resulting in all the excesses and atrocities that took place on the part of the Europeans.

The Middle East experienced some relative peace for centuries, besides the “regular” squabbles among princes and emirs of the area, and the two major invasions from outsiders (the Mongols and the Turcs) were absorbed and assimilated into the Moslem nation, to which they gave a new impetus and a new vigor for a while.

While Europe was progressing rapidly, thanks to the knowledge and science brought in by Moslems, and to the riches brought from the Americas and the Far East, the Moslems themselves entered a period of decline and sclerosis that led to their atrphy and demise.

One of the first “modern” manifestations of the resurgence of the attacks on Islamic territory, and defeat of Moslems, came with the invasion of Egypt by Napoleon Bonaparte, in his plan to disrupt the British’s business with the Far East.

Although several centuries saw a give and take in wars and truces and conduct of commerce, the 19^th century saw the veritable domination and occupation of the Moslem territories by the Western countries, except for parts of Arabia and Afghanistan deemed not worthwhile conquering.

———————————————————

Assauts Contre l’Islam (et les Musulmans)

(dans le Passe)

Les attaques contre l’Islam ne sont pas un nouveau phenomene. Ils ont commence déjà pendant la vie du prophete Mohammed. L’opposition provenait alors principalement de la part des Arabes paiens de la Peninsule Arabique et des tribus Juives qui y vivaient. L’Eglise en ce temps-la semblait considerer l’Islam comme une branche deviante de la Chretiente. Mais l’Eglise se reveille apres a l’expansion de l’Islam, et le conflit commenca serieusement. Les premieres traductions Europeennes faites du Coran l’ont eteb dans le but specifique de rabaisser et de diaboliser le Coran, l’Islam, et le prophete Mohammed.

La plupart des Juifs et des Chretiens ont refuse -et le font encore- de considerer ou admettre que le Cora nest une Ecriture Sainte divinement revelee, venant de la meme source leurs Ecritures l’ont fait, que le prophete Mohammed est un prophete et messager divinement accredite, et que l’Islam est la continuation du message divin a l’humanite. Ils en pensent plutot comme une atteinte a leur monopole respectif sur les faveurs et benedictions de Dieu.

Beaucoup de Juifs et de Chretiens adopterent l’Islam. Pour le reste, ceux qui vecurent dans des territoires Musulmans l’ont fait dans une paix relative, bien qu’ils devaient payer une taxe qui compensait pour leur non-contribution a la defense et financement des  besoins de l’etat et de la communaute Islamiques (les Musulmans eux-memes paient une contribution obligatoire, la “zakat”, et doivent participer a la defense de la communaute Musulmane).

La propagation de la religion par les Musulmans, qu’ils consideraient comme une obligation majeure, les menerent a des terres habitués, entre autres, par des Chretiens, au Moyen Orient, l’Afrique du Nord, et le sud de l’Europe. L’expansion rapide du debut fut suivie par une sorte d’accommodation relative durant des siecles dans ces regions, amenant une culture et un savoir a certaines parties de l’Europe telles que l’Espagne.

La communaute religieuse Chretienne prit une vue adversative, et l’histoire du Moyen Age s’articule dans une large part autour des Croisades. Plusieurs papes ont attise la ferveur de la noblesse et de la population Europeennes pour reprendre les “Terres Saintes” de la main des “infidels, resultant dans tous les exces et atrocites qui ont eu lieu de la part des Europeens.

Le Moyen Orient a connu une paix relative pendant plusieurs siecles, si on ne compte pas les querelles “regulieres” entre les princes et les emirs de la region, et les deux invasions majeures de l’exterieur (les Mongols et les Turcs) qui ont ete absorbees et assimilees par la nation Islamique, a laquelle ils ont donne un nouvel elan et une vigueur pendant un certain temps.

Alors que l’Europe progressait rapidement, grace aux connaisances et a la science apportees par les Musulmans et aux richesses provenant des Ameriques et de l’Extreme-Orient, les Musulmans eux-memes sont entres dans une periode de declin et de sclerose qui a mene a leur atrophie et a leur decadence.

L’une des premieres manifestations de l’ere modern de la reprise des attaques sur le territoire Islamique et de la defaite des Musulmans vint avec l’invasion de l’Egypte par Napoleon Bonaparte, qui tentait de perturber le commerce des Anglais avec l’Extreme-Orient.

Bien que plusieurs siecles aient vu bien des changes de fortune entre les Europeens et les Musulmans, avec des guerres, des treves, et de la conduit de commerce, le 19eme siècle a vu la vraie domination et l’occupation des territories Musulmans par les pays occidentaux, a part certaines parts d’Arabie et d’Afghanistan qui ont ete juges comme ne valant pas la peine de conquerir.

Moslems are compelled to take up arms, and to fight, only in limited situations. Only when their God or religion are attacked, or their rights trampled upon are they allowed to fight.

Although it is recommended to a Moslems to forgive others’ infractions, he is also obligated to repel injustice wherever it may be. Evil of any kind should have no right to be, and to suppress it is not only an honorable act, but an obligation under the divine law.  Allah does not want a human being to suffer at the hands of another human being, as He is the only One who is supposed to dispense judgment and inflict suffering. But man being what he is, it did not take him long, starting with Adam and his son Cain, before he twisted and broke Allah’s system, and man’s misdeeds towards others did not stop increasing since.

Most people need to live in society, and when an evil act is committed against a member of a community or against the community itself, there is a call for retribution, either for the deterrent effect, or for restitution, or other. If crimes were committed without some sort of retribution, then iniquity and chaos will run amok within the community, destroys any harmony in it, and makes it unliveable. Safety and security are requirements that represent an absolute need.

Allah indicates in the Old Testament as well as in Quran how to deal with certain types of reprehensible actions, and instituted the Law of Equivalence to limit the reaction to them. Although Allah forbids any human to take any other human’s life (6:151 and 17:33), He allows the family of the victim to decide what to do with the criminal’s life, up to requesting his life in compensation if they want to (17:33), although clemency and forgiveness are recommended.

Turning the other cheek is not an Islamic principle, although forgiveness is recommended as the best alternative. When it comes to oppression and persecution in religion, Moslems are forbidden to practice any (2:256, no coercion in religion, 10:99), but if they themselves or their religion are subjected to attacks, it becomes then an obligation for them to rise against persecution, in defense of Allah and Islam.

Mankind’s history is replete with calls to wage “holy war” against a group or another, most of the times each of two different groups claiming the same war to be holy, causing human suffering, acts of barbarism and the death of tens of thousands of men in the name of a God Who forbids all that. Allah determines what a just cause is, which war is holy, and which group is waging a just and right war, not men. If one group is the attacker or offender, just cause cannot be on its side, and if one group is reacting in self-defense, there is a chance, however slim, that justice might be his.

———————————

Le Principe de Juste Cause

Les Musulmans sont contraints a prendre les armes, et a se battre, seulement dans des situations limitees. Uniquement lorsque leur Dieu ou leur religion sont attaques, ou que leurs droits soient pietines qu’ils sont autorises a se battre.

Bien qu’il soit recommande au Musulman de pardonner aux autres leurs infractions, il est aussi oblige de repousser l’injustice partout ou elle se trouve. Le mal, de quelque sorte qu’il soit, ne devrait pas exister, et le reprimer n’est non seulement un acte honorable, mais aussi une obligation en vertu de la loi divine. Allah ne veut pas qu’un etre humain souffre aux mains d’un autre etre humain, du fait qu’ Il est le seul qui soit cense dispenser des jugements, et de causer des souffrances. Mais l’homme etant ce qu’il est, il ne lui prit pas beaucoup de temps, a commencer par Adam et son fils Cain, avant qu’il ne torde et ne brise le systeme d’Allah, et les mefaits de l’homme envers les autres homes n’ont pas cesse de croitre depuis.

La plupart des gens ont besoin de vivre en societe, et quand un mauvais acte est commis contre un member d’une communaute ou contre la communaute elle-meme, il y’a un besoin et appel a une correction, soit pour l’effet dissuasif, ou restitution, ou protection de la societe, ou autre. Si les crimes et transgressions sont commis sans quelque sorte de rectification soit appliquée, alors iniquite et le chaos se dechaineraient au sein de la communaure, detruiraient toute sorte d’harmonie, et la rendraient invivable. La surete et la securite sont des conditions qui representent une necessite absolue.

Allah indique dans l’Ancien Testament aussi bien que dans le Coran comment faire face a certains types d’actes reprehensible, et a institue Loi d’Equivalence pour limiter la reaction envers ces actes.  Bien qu’Allah interdise a tout etre humain de prendre la vie de n’importe quel autre etre humain (6:151, 17:33), Il permet a la famille de la victim de decider ce qui devrait etre fait avec la vie du criminal, jusqu’a demander sa vie comme indemnisation, s’ils le veulent. (17:33), bien que la clemence et le pardon sont recommandes.

Tourner l’autre joue n’est pas un principe Islamique, bien que pardonner soit recommande comme la meilleure alternative. Quand il s’agit d’oppression et de persecution en matiere de religion, il est interdit aux Musulmans d’en pratiquer aucune (2:256, aucune contrainte en religion, et 10:99), mais s’ils sont eux-memes ou leur religion sont attaques, cela devient une obligation pour eux de se soulever contre la persecution, dans la defense d’Allah et de l’Islam.

L’histoire de l’humanite regorge d’appels a faire la “guerre sainte” contre un groupe ou un autre, la plupart du temps chacun des deux groups revendiquant la saitete de la meme guerre etant de leur cote, et causant des souffrances humaines, et des actes de barbarisme et la mort de dizaines de milliers de personnes au nom d’un Dieu qui interdit tout cela. Allah determines quelle cause est  juste, quelle guerre est sainte, et quell groupe mene une guerre juste et honorable, pas les homes. Si un groupe est  l’agresseur ou a commis l’offense, la cause juste ne peut etre de son cote, et si un groupe reagit en legitime defense, il y’a une chance, quoique minime, que la justice soit sienne.

 

There is more to relations among humans and religions than competing or being in opposition. We have only one planet, and we all have to live on it, and so we have to be accommodating towards each other. There is no divinely inspired religion that incites and pushes its followers to fight and kill the adherents to other faiths. Yet, many of those followers took it upon themselves to push aside their God’s commandments and did exactly what they were told not to do.

There is only one judge, or at least only one whose judgment counts and stands. Quran is replete with verses that tell the prophet to leave the unbelievers alone if they reject him and reject Quran, and if he debates them or argues with them to do it in the best manner (16:125), and that his duty is then just to deliver Allah’s message (3:20, 5:99).

Allah states clearly throughout Quran that “there is no coercion in religion” (2:265), and  10:99 “Will you then force the people so they become believers?”

60:8. Allah does not forbid you, about those who did not fight you in religion and evicted you from your homes, to be kind to them and to treat then justly. Allah loves the just.

60:9. Allah forbids you (only) about those who fought you in religion and evicted you from your homes and helped (others) in expelling you, to ally yourselves with them. Whoever would ally themselves with them, those are themselves transgressors.

If the decide or insist to continue in their own way, then: 73:10 & 11. “Bear patiently with what they are saying, and part company with them in a good way. And leave Me with the unbelievers, who had been given blessings (favors), and give them a little reprieve”.

People are free to believe the way they want, as long as they do not create enmity or fight the Moslems. Then, it should be as Allah said: 73:19. “Indeed, this is a reminder, so let whoever wants take a path to his Lord”, and 74:54 & 55 “Indeed, this is a reminder, whoever wants will then remember it”.

We will all go back to our Lord to be accountable for what we believed in and what we did (2:28, 29:8, 6:164 and many others), then He will be the One to determine who was on the right path, and who was on the wrong. As for spending our lives on this planet, let us all make the best of it, in peace, tolerance, and harmony.

———————————————-

TOLERANCE dans cette VIE

Il y’a plus dans les relations entre humains et religions que la compétition ou d’ être en opposition. Nous avons seulement une planète, et nous avons tous à vivre dessus. Par conséquent, nous devons être accommodants les uns envers les autres. Il n’y’a aucune religion divinement inspirée qui incite et pousse ses adeptes à se battre et à tuer les adeptes d’autres religions. Pourtant, nombreux sont les adeptes  qui ont pris sur eux-mêmes de mettre de côté les commandements de Dieu et ont fait exactement ce qui leur a été dit de ne pas faire.

Il y’a un seul juge, ou du moins un seul dont la décision compte et tiendra ferme, et c’est Dieu. Le Coran est truffé de versets qui disent au prophète de laisser les mécréants à leur guise s’ils le rejettent et/ou rejettent le Coran, et que s’il les débat ou discute avec eux, de le faire de la meilleure façon (16:125), et que sa mission est seulement de délivrer le message d’Allah (3:20, 5:99).

Allah dit clairement à travers le Coran qu’ “il n’y’a pas de contrainte en religion” (2:265), et au verset 10:99, “Forceriez-vous donc les gens pour qu’ils deviennent croyants?”.

60:8. “Allah ne vous interdit pas, en ce qui concerne ceux qui ne vous ont pas combattus en religion et ne vous ont pas chassés de vos demeures, d’être gentil envers eux, et de les traiter équitablement. Allah aime les justes”.

Et 60:9 “Allah vous interdit seulement, en ce qui concerne ceux qui vous ont combattu en religion et vous ont chassés de vos demeures, de vous allier avec eux. Quiconque s’allierait avec eux, ceux-la seront eux-mêmes des transgresseurs”.

Si les mécréants décident de continuer sur leur voie, alors 73:10 et 11 “Supportez patiemment ce qu’ils disent, et séparez-vous d’eux en bons termes. Et laisse-Moi avec les incroyants qui ont  recu des faveurs, et donne-leur un peu de sursis”.

Les gens sont libres de croire comme ils le souhaitent, pour autant qu’ils ne créent pas d’animosité avec les Musulmans ou les combattent. Sinon, il devrait être fait comme Allah a dit au verset 73:19 “Vraiement, ceci est un rappel, alors que celui qui veuille prenne le chemin de son Seigneur”, et 74:54 et 55 “Vraiement, ceci est un rappel, celui qui voudra s’en rappellera”.

Nous reviendrons tous à notre Seigneur pour rendre compte de ce en quoi nous avons cru et de ce que nous avons fait (2:28, 29:8, 6:164,  et beaucoup d’autres versets), puis Il sera Celui qui déterminera qui était sur le droit chemin, et qui était sur une fausse voie. Quant à passer notre vie sur cette planète, qu’on fasse le mieux qu’on puisse avec cela, en paix, tolérance, et harmonie.

 

 

Although fighting is allowed in self-defense, aggression on its own is not looked upon kindly by Allah. As is any form of transgression, which is going beyond the limits in thought, behaviour, and actions that Allah has established or decreed, aggression is punishable.

2:190. “Fight in Allah’s cause those who fight you, but do not aggress. Allah does not like the aggressors”

The aggression is forbidden in the case of war, but also in all circumstances of regular life. Any trespass on others’ rights or possessions falls under the category of aggression, and therefore transgression against Allah’s commandments.

Fighting is better than strife (2:291, 2:217)

The Law of equivalence, decreed initially for the Hebrews, is kept valid for the Moslems, in order to reduce the harshness and suffering wars and other human misdeeds inflicted upon mankind.

16:126 “And if you (p) punish, then punish in a way similar to the one you were punished with, and if you were patient (patiently endured), it is better for the steadfast.

————————————-

Il est Interdit d’Agresser

Bien que combattre soit permis pour la defense et protection de soi, l’agression, en elle-meme, n’est pas vue d’un bon oeil par Allah. Comme toute forme de transgression qui va au-dela des limites de pensee, de comportement, et d’action qu’Allah a etablies ou decretees, l’agression est punissable.

2:190. “Combattez dans la cause d’Allah ceux qui vous combattent, mais n’agressez pas. Allah n’aime pas les agresseurs”.

L’agression est interdite non seulement en ce qui concerne la guerre, mais aussi dans toutes les circonstances de la vie normale. Toute intrusion ou depassement sur les droits ou les biens d’autrui releve de la categorie d’agression, et de ce fait, de transgression contre les commandments d’Allah.

Meme en cas de defense de soi, on doit essayer de limiter le dommage fait a l’ennemi. La loi d’equivalence, decretee initialement pour les Hebreux, reste valide pour les Musulmans, afin de reduire la durete et les souffrances que les guerres et autres mefaits humains infligent a l’humanite.

16:126. “Et si vous punissez, punissez d’une maniere semblable a celle par laquelle vous avez ete punis, et si vous etes patients (endurez patiemment), cela est preferable pour les endurants”.