G. Richard Jansen
Colorado State University
Fort Collins, CO 80523
January 1, 2002, Revised January 1, 2003
Introduction
On September 11, 2001 the continental United States
(i.e. the lower 48 states), was directly attacked by a foreign enemy for
the first time since the War of 1812 and the burning of Washington by the
British. At 8:45 a.m. on a clear morning American Airlines flight
11, hijacked by Islamic terrorists on a flight from Boston's Logan Airport
to Los Angeles with 92 passengers on board slammed into the north tower
of the World Trade Center in New York City. Shortly after this unthinkable
occurrence a second hijacked plane, United flight 175 also en-route from
Logan to Los Angeles slammed into the south tower. Following multiple
explosions and tremendous fire and heat, both towers unbelievably collapsed
with the estimated loss of life of 3000-4000 innocent people. In
addition two other airliners were also hijacked by Islamic terrorist and
one was crashed into the Pentagon in Washington and the other was
forced to crash in Western Pennsylvania by brave passengers who were aware
by cell-phone with what was happening and prevented the terrorists from
achieving their fourth objective which apparently was either the White
House or the Capitol building itself.
The four planes had been hijacked by 19 Arabs from
Saudi Arabia and several other Arab countries at the direction of Al-Qaeda,
a terrorist network with branches all over the world and headed by Osama
bin Laden, a wealthy Saudi businessman in Afghanistan. It should
be noted that his Saudi citizenship had been taken from him and he had
been deported from both Saudi Arabia and Sudan prior to setting up his
headquarters in Afghanistan. These attacks in New York and Washington were
rightly described by President Bush as evil and as "acts of war",
views agreed to by an overwhelming percentage of the American people.
The President also told the American people that
not only were these attacks acts of war but that the United States was
entering into a prolonged struggle against world terrorism in which our
objective will be to destroy world terrorism and hold all nations accountable
for giving aid or sanctuary to the terrorists. He made it very clear
that there are only two positions possible for nation states; a country
either will work with the United States against terrorism or we will consider
them allies of the terrorists. On these views multiple national polls
indicate that President Bush has the support of 85-90% of the American
people. This country has not been so united since the attack on Pearl
Harbor December 7, 1941.
These recent terrorist attacks, because of their
brazenness and evil nature came as shattering surprises, but shouldn t
have since Osama bin Laden had publically declared war on the West in general
and the United States in particular three years ago in the following statement:
Jihad Against Jews and Crusaders: World Islamic Front Statement: 23 February 1998
Shaykh Usamah Bin-Muhammad Bin-Ladin
Ayman al-Zawahiri, amir of the Jihad Group
in Egypt
Abu-Yasir Rifa'i Ahmad Taha, Egyptian Islamic
Group
Shaykh Mir Hamzah, secretary of the Jamiat-ul-Ulema-e-Pakistan
Fazlul Rahman, amir of the Jihad Movement
in Bangladesh
Praise be to God, who revealed the Book, controls
the clouds, defeats factionalism, and says in His Book: "But when
the forbidden months are past, then fight and slay the pagans wherever
ye find them, seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every
stratagem (of war)"; and peace be upon our Prophet, Muhammad Bin-'Abdallah,
who said: I have been sent with the sword between my hands to ensure that
no one but God is worshipped, God who put my livelihood under the shadow
of my spear and who inflicts humiliation and scorn on those who disobey
my orders.
The Arabian Peninsula has never -- since God
made it flat, created its desert, and encircled it with seas -- been stormed
by any forces like the crusader armies spreading in it like locusts, eating
its riches and wiping out its plantations. All this is happening at a time
in which nations are attacking Muslims like people fighting over a plate
of food. In the light of the grave situation and the lack of support, we
and you are obliged to discuss current events, and we should all
agree on how to settle the matter.
No one argues today about three facts that
are known to everyone; we will list them, in order to remind everyone:
First,
for over seven years the United States has been occupying the lands of
Islam in the holiest of places, the Arabian Peninsula, plundering
its riches, dictating to its rulers, humiliating its people, terrorizing
its neighbors, and turning its bases in the Peninsula into a spearhead
through which to fight the neighboring Muslim peoples.
If some people
have in the past argued about the fact of the occupation, all the people
of the Peninsula have now acknowledged it. The best proof of this is the
Americans' continuing aggression against the Iraqi people using the
Peninsula as a staging post, even though all its rulers are against
their territories being used to that end, but they are helpless.
Second, despite
the great devastation inflicted on the Iraqi people by the crusader-Zionist
alliance, and despite the huge number of those killed, which has exceeded
1 million... despite all this, the Americans are once again trying to repeat
the horrific massacres, as though they are not content with the protracted
blockade imposed after the ferocious war or the fragmentation and devastation.
So here they
come to annihilate what is left of this people and to humiliate their Muslim
neighbors.
Third, if the Americans' aims behind these wars are religious and economic, the aim is also to serve the Jews' petty state and divert attention from its occupation of Jerusalem and murder of Muslims there. The best proof of this is their eagerness to destroy Iraq, the strongest neighboring Arab state, and their endeavor to fragment all the states of the region such as Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Sudan into paper statelets and through their disunion and weakness to guarantee Israel's survival and the continuation of the brutal crusade occupation of the Peninsula.
All these crimes and sins committed by the
Americans are a clear declaration of war on God, his messenger, and Muslims.
And ulema have throughout Islamic history unanimously agreed that the jihad
is an individual duty if the enemy destroys the Muslim countries. This
was revealed by Imam Bin-Qadamah in "Al- Mughni," Imam al-Kisa'i in "Al-Bada'i,"
al-Qurtubi in his interpretation, and the shaykh of al-Islam in his books,
where he said: "As for the fighting to repulse [an enemy], it is aimed
at defending sanctity and religion, and it is a duty as agreed [by the
ulema]. Nothing is more sacred than belief except repulsing an enemy
who is attacking religion and life."
On that basis, and in compliance with God's order, we issue the following fatwa to all Muslims:
The ruling to kill the Americans and their allies -- civilians and military -- is an individual duty for every Muslim who can do it in any country in which it is possible to do it [EMPHASIS ADDED], in order to liberate the al-Aqsa Mosque and the holy mosque [Mecca] from their grip, and in order for their armies to move out of all the lands of Islam, defeated and unable to threaten any Muslim. This is in accordance with the words of Almighty God, "and fight the pagans all together as they fight you all together," and "fight them until there is no more tumult or oppression, and there prevail justice and faith in God."
This is in addition to the words of Almighty
God: "And why should ye not fight in the cause of God and of those
who, being weak, are ill-treated (and oppressed)? -- women and children,
whose cry is: 'Our Lord, rescue us from this town, whose people are
oppressors; and raise for us from thee one who will help!'"
We -- with God's help -- call on every Muslim
who believes in God and wishes to be rewarded to comply with God's
order to kill the Americans and plunder their money wherever and whenever
they find it. We also call on Muslim ulema, leaders, youths, and
soldiers to launch the raid on Satan's U.S. troops and the devil's supporters
allying with them, and to displace those who are behind them so that they
may learn a lesson.
Almighty God said: "O ye who believe, give
your response to God and His Apostle, when He calleth you to that which
will give you life. And know that God cometh between a man and his heart,
and that it is He to whom ye shall all be gathered."
Almighty God also says: "O ye who believe,
what is the matter with you, that when ye are asked to go forth in the
cause of God, ye cling so heavily to the earth! Do ye prefer the life of
this world to the hereafter? But little is the comfort of this life, as
compared with the hereafter. Unless ye go forth, He will punish you with
a grievous penalty, and put others in your place; but Him ye would
not harm in the least. For God hath power over all things."
Almighty God also says: "So lose no heart, nor fall into despair. For ye must gain mastery if ye are true in faith."
Prior to this statement in 1998, Al-Qaeda had killed American Rangers in Mogadishu, Somalia, carried out a truck bombing of the World Trade Center in New York in 1993 and the bombing of the Khobar Towers in Dhahran, Saudi Arabia. Since the above 1998 statement Al-Qaeda bombed the U.S. Embassies in Nairobi, Kenya and Dar-es Salaam Tanzania with much loss of life and the attack on the U.S. Cole in Aden, Yemen killing many sailors and nearly sinking the ship.
This statement should be read carefully by all Americans. The United States has described this war as a war against terrorism. However, our enemy has declared this war to be a holy war, and indeed a resumption of the war between Islam and the Byzantine empire and the Christian Crusaders at the turn of the last millennium. It is the intent of this essay to review the 1500 years during which Western Civilization has been confronted by militant Islam.
It is clear that hatred of the West and Western Civilization runs deep in the Islamic world. Even more so is this true for Al-Qaeda and other Islamic terrorist groups. Questions to be considered are how did we arrive at the present situation and what does the future hold.
The Christian World at the Birth of Islam.
In the early 4th century the Roman Emperor Constantine
was converted to Christianity and the Roman Empire became Christian. In
the middle of the 5th century the Western Empire fell to Germanic tribes
from the north but remained Christian. The Eastern or Byzantine Empire
centered in Constantinople remained Christian for another thousand years
before falling to the Turks in 1453. In the West, were located
the dioceses of Britain, Gaul, Spain, Italy and Africa. In the East
were the dioceses of Dacia, Macedonia, Thrace, Pontus, Asia, East, and
Egypt. The Mediterranean Sea was in essence a Roman and a Christian
lake. In 570, about the time Mohammed is believed to have been born,
most of Europe and Asia Minor including the northern, eastern and
southern shores of the Mediterranean were Christian.
Christians lived in Palestine, Syria, Mesopotamia
and in Persia. Even in Arabia, entire Arab tribes were Christians
and many other tribes and larger communities included substantial Christian
populations. These Christian populations were present throughout the Arabian
peninsula extending even to the extreme southern tip.
Origins of Islam: Muhammed
There are no contemporaneous written accounts of
either Muhammed's birth or his life. The earliest written biographies
were written at least 100 years after his death, much longer than is the
case for Christ. What is known and what is excerpted in this essay
comes from oral traditions, anecdotal comments in the Hadith and from the
Koran itself. Muhammed was born around 570 in Mecca in that
part of western Arabia along the Red Sea referred to as the Hejaz.
His mother died when he was quite young and he was raised by his grandfather,
a prominent member of the Hashim family in the Koraysh tribe. Mecca
was a trading center with a developing relatively wealthy merchant class.
Muhammed married a wealthy widow named Khadija who was an unknown number
of years older than he, and as long as she was alive he took no other wives.
She owned a trading company and Muhammed became first her business agent,
and then her husband.
In and around Mecca and in the Hejaz lived Jewish
and Christian tribes as well as pagans, who were for the most part polytheistic.
However apart from these non-Jewish, non-Christian tribes were others that
were already monotheistic, thus Muhammed did not bring monotheism to the
Arabian peninsula although he obviously greatly strengthened and expanded
monotheism, the belief in a single all-powerful God. These monotheists
before Muhammed were known as Hanifs and included Zoroastrians, Jews and
Christians, as well as Arabs who claimed descent from Abraham as later
did Muhammed.
The tradition says that Muhammed was introspective by nature
who spent time by himself meditating. He became upset at the corruption,
idolatry and polytheistic worship that was predominant in the Korysh tribe,
his tribe, that basically ran Mecca. Among other such experiences,
while alone he went to the Cave of Hira to meditate when he heard a voice
of and saw a vision of a man, subsequently identified as the Angel Gabriel
who recited to Muhammed the revelations from Allah that form the earliest
chapters or suras in what became in time known as the Holy Koran.
After this he had multiple visions and seizures and with Khadija's help
and encouragement became convinced he was the prophet of Allah or God with
the mandate to reveal God's will to all mankind.
In 621 a group of twelve men took an oath with Muhammed
not to worship idols, lie, commit adultery or kill their infant daughters.
They also pledged to obey Muhammed and thereby became his twelve disciples
analogous to the twelve apostles of Christ. This may be said to be
the beginning of what became known as Islam; submission to Allah and Muhammed
as his prophet. However, Muhammed's message and his ideas were not
well received in Mecca and most of his at this time several hundred followers
either lived in or went to live in Yathrib, a town now known as Medina
located approximately 250 miles north of Mecca. Muhammed and his
few remaining converts fled from Mecca to Medina at night in June 622,
an event referred to as the hegira or flight. This term also refers
to the last ten years of Muhammed's life 622-232, the beginning of Muhammed's
ministry and the beginning of the Muslim era, Islam.
Muhammed was faced with the task of establishing
a base of power and authority in Medina where resided already a number
of powerful tribes. He accomplished this in relatively short order.
In February 623, only months after his arrival in Medina Muhammed organized
and led raiding parties against Meccan caravans thus adding considerably
to the wealth he had inherited from his wife Kadija. A bloody victory under
Muhammed's direct command was won at Badr, where 350 of his men fought
and defeated 700 Meccans. After this the raiding parties against
Meccan caravans increased in frequencies until finally the Meccans attacked
and defeated Muhammed and his men in the Battle of Ohod where 74 of Muhammed's
men were killed along with 19 Meccans. However, the Meccans did not
follow up this victory and Muhammed resumed his raids on the Meccan and
other caravans thus greatly adding to his wealth and that of his men.
Muhammed organized his followers, those who followed
him to Medina, into a community called the Umma. Having admired
the moral code of the Jews, he preached a belief in one God, Allah, and
a religion based on a distinction between good and evil. His goal
was to bring the lawless Bedouin tribes into a moral system based
on charity, love, and equality among all followers, i.e. Muslims to be.
Muhammed and the Jews
Initially Muhammed was favorably disposed toward the Jews. Much of the Koran is based on Jewish scripture, i.e. the Old Testament as revealed to Muhammed by the Angel Gabriel, a biblical figure. In Mecca and Medina and in the rest of the Hejaz resided many Arab tribes that were Jewish, and some were quite wealthy. The Koran describes Jews and Christians as privileged People of the Book, and on their part the Jews appreciated and supported Muhammed's efforts to extirpate idolatry and polytheism. However as Muhammed's power increased in Medina, he increasingly insisted that the Jews should acknowledge his claim to be God's Prophet and that Judaism had been superceded by his new dispensation from God. For many valid and theologically well based reasons the Jews not surprisingly refused this demand. This angered Muhammed and in response he changed the direction Muslims should face when praying from Jerusalem, which was his first edict, to Mecca as it is today. In 625 Muhammed ordered the Jews in the community of Nadhir out of their homes and to move to Syria. He and his followers seized the homes and property of the departed Jews. The next act in this process occurred in Medina in April 627 when the last Jewish tribe was annihilated by Muhammed and his men following what is known as the Battle of the Ditch. Eight hundred Jewish captives with their hands tied behind their backs were led to a trench and under Muhammed's order and in his presence were beheaded. Their lands, chattel, weapons, wealth and cattle were divided among Muhammed s men. Approximately 1300 Jewish women and children were sold into slavery to surrounding tribes. The last major action against the Jews occurred in 628 when Muhammed and his men attacked and captured the wealthy Jewish oasis of Khaybar on the route to Syria. The spoils of war were tremendous and considerably enriched Muhammed and his followers. The chief of the Jewish tribe was captured and beheaded. Muhammed took the chief's young wife for his own.
Muhammed and the Christians
As a child Muhammed's first nurse was a Christian
woman from Abyssinia (Ethiopia). In hsi life Muhammed was acquainted
with many Christians including Christian Monks that he knew well, and was
exposed to and familiar with many Christian influences and doctrines.
His influential first wife Khadija had strong Christian links.
As was the case with the Jews, in the beginning
of his ministry Muhammed was favorably disposed to the Christians.
The Christian Gospel was considered by Muhammed to be of divine authority.
He considered Jesus to be a divine messenger or prophet of God, and the
Christian Gospel was in fact the word of God, the Good News, and the truth.
However, in view of his struggles with some of the Arab tribes over polytheism,
he could not accept Christ as the Son of God nor accept the Christian Trinity,
and therefore Christ was not divine. In this he received moral support
from the Jews. Muhammed apparently misunderstood the Trinity as God,
Jesus and Mary, not too surprising in view of the development of Mariolatry
in the Catholic Church.
Muhammed did not believe that Christ was crucified
on the cross. Rather he believed that someone else took his place.
However, Muhammed did accept the death, resurrection and ascension of Christ.
According to the Koran, both Christ and Mary were taken up bodily into
heaven. Muhammed and his followers asserted that Muhammed was the
Holy Comforter spoken of in the Bible, the Paraclete. This claim
was not accepted by Christians.
Unfortunate, as was the case for the Jews, after
Muhammed consolidated his power in Medina he increasingly became hostile
to Christians, as Christians increasingly resisted his religious claims.
Muhammed in 630 led a large military force to the city of Tabuk, 250 miles
northwest of Medina and forced the Christians there to pay a heavy tax
and tribute in order to prevent Muhammed and his men from attacking the
city. This was also done to other Christian towns and cities. Muhammed
informed Christian cities in the Hejaz that he was the Prophet of God and
they must submit to Islam and pay required tithes, taxes and tribute or
face retribution. The situation did not improve with the Caliphs
who succeeded Muhammed on his death.
In January 630, eight years after his flight from
Mecca to Medina, Muhammed and 10, 000 of his followers reentered Mecca
as its conqueror. He was conciliatory toward those who had opposed
him and placated the people in the city who now pledged allegiance to him..
He departed Mecca in about two weeks,
Muhammed died two years later in 632. In the
last two years of his life he consolidated his rule, both temporally and
spiritually among all of the tribes in the Hejaz in Western Arabia.
The Religion of Islam
Islamic religious beliefs are based on the Koran
and the hadiths, o.e. the syings of Muhammed. These beliefs are summarized
in the Pillars of Islam and the Pillars of Faith in Islam. The Pillars
of Islam are the five duties required of all Muslims: 1) the profession
of faith that there is no god but Allah: Muhammed is the prophet of Allah,
2) ritual prayer five times a day with the face turned toward the shrine
of the Ka'bah in Mecca, 3) paying the alms tax levied to benefit the poor
and needy, 4) fasting from sun-up to sun-down during the holy month of
Ramadan, and 5) at least one pilgrimage to Mecca, i.e. the Hajj.
The six Pillars of Faith in Islam are: 1) belief
in God (Allah), 2) belief in Allah's angels, 3) belief in Allah's
revealed books including the Koran, the New Testament, Psalms of David,
and the Pages of Abraham, 4) belief in Allah's messengers including many
of the prophets of the Jewish scriptures as listed below, Jesus,
John the Baptist and previous Arab prophets such as Hud and Salih, 5) belief
in the Last Day, a belief very similar to Christian eschatology including
an intercessory role for Jesus, and a belief in a prophetic figure, the
Mahdi, to come after Jesus, and 6) belief in Allah's determination
of affairs whether good or bad, as in "it is the will of Allah."
The Koran
The Koran is considered by Muslims to be the word
of God, Allah, as revealed to his prophet Muhammed. It is believed by pious
Muslims to provide revelation from God that is complete, unalterable and
final, and is not subject to change or amendment. The intermediary
in these revelations to Muhammed was the Angel Gabriel. It is clear
that Muhammed's understanding of these revelations was influenced by his
knowledge of the Jewish scriptures, the Jwish scriptures (Christian Old
Testament) as well as the teachings of Jesus. It was his view that
the Jews from the time of Jacob, i.e. Israel had gone astray and that his
revelations expressed the true word of God in the lineage from Abraham
to his son Ishmael via Hagar. Abraham was born in Ur,
south of present day Baghdad in Mesopotamia, present day Iraq, moved north
along the Euphates river to Haran, and then after staying in Haran many
years journeyed south to Canaan, present day Palestine.
In the tradition of Islam and Judaism, both Jews
and Arabs are Semites, i.e. descendants of Noah's son Shem. According
to the Islamic tradition Abraham traveled to Medina in the Hejaz with his
Egyptian servant Hagar and their son Ishmael. God asked Abraham to
offer up his first son Ishmael as a human sacrifice which Abraham was prepared
to do until divine intervention produced a sheep to be used in Ishmael
s place. In this tradition Ishmael became the progenitor of all
the Arabs. In the Biblical tradition God asked Abraham to offer up
his second son Isaac as a human sacrifice and who was subsequently spared.
Isaac was the progenitor of the Jews and his son Jacob took the name Israel.
Thus the importance of Abraham to both the Jewish and the Islamic tradition
and indeed to the Christian tradition as well.
Many Bible stories and Biblical history are repeated
in the Koran. The Jewish Torah, the first five books in the Bible,
is considered to be definitive law in the Islamic faith. In the Koran
it is described as a "perfect code for the righteous." The Koran
includes from the Bible the creation story, Adam and Eve's fall, Cain and
Abel, Noah and the flood, Isaac, Jacob, Joseph, Moses, David, Solomon and
many other Biblical stories and events.Of the twenty-seven prophets mentioned
in the Koran exclusive of Muhammed, twenty-two are from the Old Testament
including Adam, Noah, Abraham and Moses. Three are from the New Testament;
John the Baptist, his father Zechariah and Jesus.
The Koran consists of 114 suras, or chapters.
Some of these revelations were made to Muhammed in Mecca before the hegira
or flight to Medina. These are the Meccan suras. The Medinan
suras, approximately two thirds of all suras, are longer than the
Meccan suras and exhibit less apparent religious enthusiasm. There
is more tolerance for other faiths and even pagan Arabs in the Meccan suras
than suras from the Medinan period after Muhammed had consolidated political
and military power, and religious authority. The suras were recorded
by scribes, called ameneunses, since it is believed that Muhammed neither
read nor write. Some were Christians, some were several of his wives
and other Muslims who could read and write.
At the time of Muhammed's death in 632 the Koran
had not yet been compiled and assembled. The first uniform text of
the Koran was fixed in 655, twenty three years after Muhammed's death.
It is not known who arranged the order and named the suras in their present
form. It is likely that information about Jewish and Christian theology
and history was incorporated into the Koran in its formative years from
written sources present in the region in pre-islamic times. There is so
much Old Testament material in the Koran that is it difficult to Imagine
one man, no matter how gifted, memorizing it on hearing it from the Angel
Gabriel, and transcribing it with the aid of his scribes.
Successors to Muhammed.
On Muhammed's death in 632, after some initial uncertainty,
his second in command Abu Bakr became the first Caliph, meaning in arabic
successor. He swiftly consolidated his power against his opponents,
particularly those in Medina and Yemen. Upon his death, possibly
by poisoning, he was succeeded as the second Caliph by Umar, his deputy.
Neither of these two Caliphs were of the family of Hashim, i.e. Mohammad's
family and there were significant numbers of believers who felt that Ali,
husband of Muhammed ' daughter Fatima, was the rightful heir to the Caliphate.
In time the supporters of Ali became known as the Shi'a, i.e. the party
of Ali. After the murder of Umar in 644, the third Caliph was Othman
of the Omayyad clan or family. He, in turn was murdered in 656 and
was succeeded, finally, by Ali. Unfortunately Ali was murdered in
661 and the Omayyad clan came back into power.
The first four Caliphs, Abu Bakr, Umar, Othman and
Ali collectively became known as the Medina Caliphate. In 661 the
Omayyad Caliphate began and after moving the Caliphate to Damascus in Syria
ruled until replaced by the Abbasid Caliphate in 750 which moved the Caliphate
to Baghdad.. The first of the Abbasid Caliphs, Abul Abbas, started
his rule by rounding up members of the deposed Omayyad family, inviting
them to a banquet and then slaughtering them. The nominal suzerainty
of the Abbasids was ended by the Mongol conquest in 1258. Hulagu,
the Mongol, in 1258 initiated a massacre in Baghdad that lasted a month.
The Mongols sacked Baghdad, destroyed most of the city and killed possibly
as many as 800,000 of its residents. Following this event, multiple
Caliphates and Sultanates existed in the Islamic world. In 908 a
Caliphate was established by Abu Muhammed Obaydulla, a leader of the Shi'a
sect. This Caliphate lasted until 1171 and these Caliphs became known
as Fatimids, in honor of Fatima, Ali's wife and Muhammed's daughter. The
Mongols, some of whose leaders were converted to Islam were followed by
the Seljuq Turks and eventually the Ottoman Turks who established the Turkish
Sultanate and Caliphate and ruled the Islamic world until 1919, the end
of the World War I, and the dismemberment of the Ottoman Empire as will
be discussed later.
The Arab and Islamic Conquest
The spread of Islam in the first one hundred years
after Muhammed's death was by Arab conquest and the force of military arms.
By 660, less than thirty years after the death of Muhammed, the Medina
Caliphate ruled all of the Arabian Peninsula, Egypt, Palestine, Syria,
and much of Mesopotamia (Iraq) and Persia (Iran). After Muhammed died in
632, the first Caliph Abu Bakr led the invasion of Syria. During
this military action in 634, the whole region between Gaza and Caesarea
including Palestine and the Holy Land was devastated. Four thousand
peasants, Christians and Jews, were massacred. During the campaigns
in Mesopotamia, between 635 and 642 monasteries were sacked, and monks
killed. According to the Chronicle of John written by the Bishop
of Nikiu in approximately 695, as the Arabs advanced into Egypt "whoever
gave themselves up to them was massacred, they spared neither the old nor
the women or children." In North Africa Tripoli was pillaged in 643
and Carthage razed to the ground with most of the inhabitants killed.
By 750, the end of the Omayyad Caliphate and the beginning
of the Abbasid Caliphate, North Africa, Spain and the Sind region of Northern
India had been incorporated into the Muslim Empire. Spain was conquered
in 712. The Muslim armies then crossed the Pyrenees and invaded France,
raided the southern coast of France, now called the Moorish Coast, before
being defeated by Charles Martel and his men in 732 at the Battle of Poitiers,
two hundred miles from Paris.
Most but not all of the population in these conquered
lands in North Africa, the Middle East and Asia Minor were converted to
Islam. At that time the religious distinctions among Judaism, Christianity
and Islam among the un-lettered masses of people were not as clearly delineated
as they are today, since so much of the Koran was related to Jewish scripture
and in Islam Jesus was venerated as a prophet, although not as the Son
of God.
An important question to be answered is why
the Arab invaders were so successful in converting Eastern Christendom,
the very lands that had become Christian in the first hundred years after
Christ's crucifixion and resurrection, to Islam so quickly. there is no
one that has answered this question so well as Bat Ye'or in her
book: Islam and Dhimmitude:Where Civilizations Collide. The
following analysis is taken directly from this book.
"The Arab conquest which followed domination
by Byzantium embraced a multitude of peoples from diverse ethnic groups,
languages, and cultures. The Christianization of the ancient world, pursued
since the conversion of Constantine, represented not only the eradication
of paganism but primarily an attempt for religious uniformization in the
Eastern and Western Christian empires. The pagan world was collapsing and
Christianity was emerging from the ruins. But in effecting its fusion with
Christianity, paganism brought its beliefs, distortions, and constant sources
of renewed schisms and conflicts. The institution of the Church, the formulation
of worship and its liturgy, and the budding of a patristic literature,
grew and developed amid a profusion of heresies and violent theological
anathemas. Ethnic and cultural divisions blended into the temporal interests
of the powerful Churches, heirs to the pagan priesthood's colossal wealth.
The Church, linked with the imperial Byzantine power, attempted to combat
voices of dissent expressed in the Christological debate: Arianism (in
North Africa, and Spain), Nestorianism, and Monophysitism (in Mesopotamia,
Egypt, Syria, Armenia). Throughout the Empire the struggle to unify the
Christian faith gave rise to bloody religious revolts, the crucifixion
of dissident monks, and murderous fanaticism supported by a repressive
legislative apparatus, inspired by canon law.
These conflicts between Church and State,
and between the different Christian denominations, appeared at every level:
at the levels of the priorities of episcopal sees, the demarcation
of dioceses, the autonomy of financial sources, and the appointment of
bishops. At the level of dogma, the imperial authority intervened to impose
the councils' doctrinal decisions upon recalcitrant bishops. Lastly, a
juridical conflict developed between the Byzantine state, heir to Roman
jurisdiction with its respect for the different religions of its subjects,
and the Church which tried to replace it with canon law in order to impose
a rigid system of religious intolerance and exclusivism in all areas.
After the Arab conquest, Muslim caliphs and
governors knew how to play upon the inter-Christian dissension in order
to impose Islam irrevocably on Christian countries. The Monophysite wish
to be rid of the Chalcedonian Greeks had facilitated the Persian, and then
the Arab, conquest of Egypt, :Mesopotamia, and Syria; the conquest of Spain
was organized by princes and dissident bishops. The Arab advance into Armenia,
then the Turkish conquest of Anatolia and the Balkans, were based on the
same alliances and betrayals in high imperial and ecclesiastical circles.
The alliance between the turban and the tiara constituted a major factor
in the Islamic progression, the patriarch under Islam regaining the legislative
and economic power which the Christian state had disputed. In fact, the
rallying of the Eastern Churches to the Arab-Islamic government reflected
the power struggles between the Christian state and the Churches. It was
through this loophole that Islam, by gratifying the patriarchs' ambitions
for economic and religious autonomy, was able to ensure their collaboration,
amenability, and betrayal in the defeat of the Christian state.
Christians who collaborated with Muslim armies-princes, bishops,
governors, tribes, or mercenaries-are known historical persons, designated
by name and office. During the Arab invasion of the seventh century, Tagrit
(Iraq) was betrayed by the Monophysite Archbishop Marutha, Hira (Iraq)
by its Nestorian bishop, and Egypt ceded by the Melchite Governor-Bishop
Cyrus. Michael the Syrian mentions collaboration by the Coptic patriarch
Benjamin; Damascus was surrendered by its Melchite governor, Mansur b.Sarjun,
who received from the Arabs the administration of the provinces. One of
the leaders of Hims (Syria), Abu Ju'ayd, is also recorded as a traitor
to the Byzantines and as having been active in the capture of Jerusalem
which was handed over without a battle by the patriarch Sophronius. The
invasion of Spain was organized by Prince Julian and by Bishop Oppas. The
Christian Arab tribes-Monophysite and Nestorian-who provided the Muslims
with information or assisted them in the seventh century are well known.
Fully documented, likewise, are the defections by Armenian mercenaries,
the accession of Christian collaborators to the highest offices under the
caliphate, the goodwill toward the Islamic authority on the part of the
Nestorian, Monophysite, and Melchite patriarchs.
However, the illusions were short-lived. Less
than fifty years after the conquest, the wave of destructions of churches,
amply recorded by Christian and Muslim chroniclers, swept over the whole
dar al-Islam. Repression harshened under Harun aI-Rashid (786-809), while
his son, al-Ma'mun (813-33), dealt the death-blow to the Copts' revolts
by massacres and deportations. This is the period-with a few remissions
here and there-of that long hellish descent for the Churches, corroded
by simony and the corruption established by the sale of ecclesiastical
offices to the highest bidder-a system which ruined Christian communities
and favored a trend toward Islamization.
As the inter-Christian divisions were an essential
factor in stabilizing Islamic power, the authorities were quick to support
and exploit them. The caliph was able to manage the large Christian populations,
who constituted the majority of his subjects at the beginning of the conquests,
by playing on the rivalries between Melchites, Monophysites, and Nestorians
through the grant of a favor or the transfer of a church. The caliph entrusted
to the patriarch the task of collecting the taxes extorted from his flock,
leaving him only with a pittance. The chronicles record in detail these
relationships based on money and violence and always involving torture,
from the lowest social level to its summit. Equally, one should have few
illusions about the appointment of high Christian officials, particularly
to the Treasury. Integrated into this Islamic machinery for the destruction
of Christendom, they could, by a gesture, temporarily slow it down, temper
it, or exacerbate it, but could not abolish it".
Major Divisions in Islam
The most significant division within Islam is between
Sunni and Shi 'a Muslims. This division began as a struggle for succession
and leadership of Islam at the time of Muhammed's death in 632. Muhammed's
deputy Abu Bakr was chosen to be the first Caliph, or successor to Muhammed.
A significant number of Muhammed's followers strongly disagreed, and held
that Ali, husband of Muhammed's daughter Fatima and thus from Muhammed's
family should be chosen. Ali was chosen to be the fourth Caliph,
but was murdered in 661 by a Muslim from a rival faction after the First
Civil War. This war also saw the son of Ali murdered by the victorious
Umayyed's who established the next caliphate. This crystalized the
Shi'a's, i.e the party of Ali as a permanent minority and dissenting party.
The remaining Muslims became known as Sunni Muslims
or the party of tradition. Both Sunni and Shi'a Muslims follow Muhammed
and the Koran. Most Muslims in the world follow the Sunni tradition. Sunni's
believe that the first four caliphs were rightful successors to Muhammed,
while Shi'ites obviously do not. Sunni's place more emphasis on tradition
and consensus building. Using consensus they were able to incorporate
a variety of practices and usages that had arisen over time into their
belief system even when support for all such practices could not always
be found in the Koran. Sunni's hold that the historical experience
of the Sunni community gives theological value to precedent and tradition
thus making conformism and obedience religious obligations.
Shi'ites believe that after the death of Muhammed,
and especially after the murder of Ali thirty years later Islam took a
grievously wrong turn, and as a result the majority, i.e. the Sunni's have
been in the words of the historian Bernard Lewis "living in sin."
Shi'ites, are a minority among all Muslims, but Shi'ism has been
the sole legal faith in Persia/Iran since the 16th century. Shi'ites
also differ from Sunni Muslims in having ayatollahs and imams. Ayatollahs
are religious leaders, and imams are Muslim leaders believed by Shi'ites
to be divinely appointed, sinless infallible successors to Muhammed.
The Ayatollah Khomeini led the Iranian revolution that in 1979 led to the
overthrow of the Shah and the establishment of the Islamic Republic of
Iran.
An important tradition within Sunni Islam is Wahhabism.
This movement derived from the teaching of Muhammed ibn Abd al-Wahhab in
the 18th century. This tradition is fundamentalist in the sense that
it requires of its adherents a literal interpretation of the Koran and
a strict doctrine of predestination. Followers of this doctrine describe
themselves as muwahhidin, i.e. as "unitarians" who believe God is one and
only one. Wahhabism condemns as un-Islamic the practice of using
the name of any prophet, saint or angel in a prayer, calling on them for
intercession, making vows to them or visiting tombs for such intercession.
In 1744, Abd al-Wahhad, the founder of this tradition obtained the support
and commitment of Ibn Saud in Arabia and by 1811 the Wahhabi Saudis established
control over most of Arabia. In 1932 the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia was established
with Wahhabism the established religion with Sunni Islam. It
was from this tradition that Osama bin Laden derived his even more extreme
form of Islam.
Another religious tradition within Islam is sufism.
Sufism is a form of Islamic mysticism that developed in the 7th and 8th
centuries and to which Wahhabism was and is strongly opposed. Sufism
developed following the murder of Ali, Muhammed s son-in-law, in reaction
to the perceived worldliness of the Umayyed caliphs and period. In
sufism there exists masters and their bands of disciples. Sufi practice
was characterized by saint worship, veneration and visiting tombs and miracles
hence the strong opposition from the Wahhabis. Orthodox Muslims also
were concerned about the abuse of power and authority by masters toward
their disciples. There were strong conflicts in sufism with
the shariah, or Islamic law. On the other hand sufism led to a flowering
of Islamic and Persian poetry and literature that gave comfort to millions.
Its missionary activities in preaching trust in God, faith in God's love
have enlarged the fold of the believers. In India by virtue of incorporating
earlier pre-Islamic strands of mysticism sufism evolved into dervish orders
which emphasized emotionalism and hypnotic ecstatic states.
Dhimmitude and the Dhimmis
The origin of dhimmitude
and the status of the dhimmis in Islamic societies are well described by
Bat
Ye'or in her book Islam and Dhimmitude: Where Civilizations
Collide:
"The elimination of the Medina Jews between 624 and 627 enriched the umma. The property of the Banu Nadhir formed the Prophet's share of the war-treasure, while the booty taken from the other tribes was apportioned between the Muslim warriors, the Prophet receiving a fifth. In 628, benefitting from a nonaggression treaty (Hudaybiya) with the Meccans, Muhammad went on to besiege the oasis of Khaybar, 140 kilometers away, cultivated by Jewish peasants. They surrendered after a siege lasting one and a half months. According to Muslim jurisconsults some centuries later, the agreement (dhimma) made between Muhammad and the Jews of Khaybar formed the basis of the dhimmi status. The Prophet allowed the Jews to farm their lands, but only as tenants; he demanded delivery of half their harvest and reserved the right to drive them out when he wished. On these conditions, he granted his dhimma, that is to say, his protection for their lives and safety. Similar pacts were concluded in the same year with Jews living in other oases, Fadak and Wadi'l-Qura (628), Mu'ta (629), as well as with nomadic or sedentary Christianized tribes. These tribes preserved their religion on payment of a tribute (jizya), the symbol of their submission. In exchange, Muhammad undertook to respect their religion and to protect them from Bedouin razzias. Each community could keep its own religious jurisdiction. The dhimma of Khaybar inspired the treaties which the Arab conquerors subsequently granted to the indigenous inhabitants of lands outside Arabia. Later treaties concluded with the People of the Book (Jews and Christians) were modeled on the letters of protection which Muhammad sent from Tabuk in 630 to the Jewish and Christian populations of Makna (north of the Hijaz, on the gulf of Eilat) and in south Palestine: Eilat,Jarba, and Adhruh".
The dhimmis thus are People
of the Book, i.e. Christians and Jews who live in Muslim lands
under the authority of Islam. First a word about People of the Book.
In Islam the Koran exists eternally and has from the beginning of time.
Thus the Koran existed prior to the Bible, both old and new testaments.
The Bible is an imperfect and inadequate revelation from God, Allah, and
is superseeded by the pre-existing Koran now revealed to Muhammed by the
Angel Gabriel. Since Christians and Jews are mentioned in the Koran they
are People of the Book. However, unless they accept Islam
they are nevertheless infidels.
The dhimmis thus are Christians and Jews living
in Muslim lands under the "protection" of Islam as discussed above, and
their subservient status is defined by Bat Ye'or as one of dhimmitude.
Under Islam, humiliation and degradation of the dhimmis was
considered a religious duty. The dhimmis, i.e. Christians and Jews
may worship in their faiths, but only in silence and humility. Burials
of thedead must be carried out secretly and quietly, and dhimmis and Muslim
graves separatedand differentiated. Islamic law is supreme in litigation
between Muslims and dhimmis, and evidence and testimony from dhimmis
are inadmissible in Islamic courts. Muslims should not associate with dhimmis.
The subsevient status, i.e. the dhimmitude of Christians
and Jews was daily emphasized by concious degradation of their status.
Differentiation in clothing was the subject of many detailed regulations.
The dhimmis were not allowed to ride such noble animals as horses and donkeys
but must ride only donkeys. When passinf Muslims on the street dhimmis
must turn awat their eyes, bow and make way. Houses of the dhimmis
must be smaller, of humble and dark appearance.
In the 19th century, as the Islamic world receded
and Western, i.e. European power became dominent in Asia, Africa
and the Middle East, much, but not all, of this Islamic order described
above was forced the change under the influence of Western ideas
of modernity and secularization. Thus under Western duress the dhimmis
were freed from a millennium of degradaion. It is of course a reversal
of the effects of modernity and secularization and the return of
authority of a caliph over all the Islamic world, the umma that Miltant
Islam desires.
The Crusades
The Muslim Empire, which had expanded so rapidly
under the Medina and Omayyad Caliphates, consolidated under the Abbasids
who came into the Caliphate in 750. The loose army organization was
replaced by smaller highly trained corps of full-time professional soldiers
who, in the main, had few ties and little contact with the rest of the
population. The Abbasids moved the Caliphate from Damascus to Baghdad,
thus removing it even further from its original Arab birthplace in the
Hejaz of Arabia.
The Abbasids were even less tolerant to Christianity
than had been the Omayyads, and many thousands of Christian churches and
monasteries were closed. Under the Fatimid Caliphate in 969 the church
of the Holy Sepulchre in Jerusalem was burned and in 965 the Christian
Patriarch of Jerusalem was burned alive on charges of being a Byzantine
spy. In 1071 the Byzantine Emperor Romanus IV was defeated in Armenia
by the Seljuk Turks thus further weakening the Byzantine Empire.
Christian pilgrims to Jerusalem, continuing a long tradition of such pilgrimages
were encountering increasing difficulty in gaining access to the holy places,
primarily by extortion of money and humiliation if not by physical force.
The response from Christendom came in the form of the Crusades.
In November 1095 Pope Urban II convened a Church
Council in Clermont. His chief concern was a breakdown of the
Christian peace, or a lawful society in Europe. At the end of the
Council meetings and outside the church he addressed a crowd made up primarily
of nobles who had been present. He denounced the violence and injustice
on the part of some Knights that had contributed to a breakdown of the
peace and civil society. He then suggested that they employ their
strength rather in defense of their Christian brethren in Eastern lands
under Muslim control , specifically the Holy Land of Jesus' birth, life,
crucifixion and resurrection, who were being ill treated by the Muslim
infidels. The Crusades ended in 1291 when the Crusaders were forced
to abandon Acre, their last stronghold. Thus the Crusades lasted
two hundred years in the form of eight wars between the Christian Franks,
as they were called by their enemy, and the Muslim Arabs and Turks.
The first Crusade was successful in capturing Jerusalem
in 1099. The siege and battle were bloody and many Muslims and Jews
were massacred. However, such massacres were not systematic and Muslim
records in Cairo record that the Franks particularly respected women.
As a result of the first Crusade, a Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem was established
that lasted until 1143 when the Crusaders were driven from Jerusalem by
the Seljuk Turks from Anatolia. The second Crusade ended in
a dismal failure. However, by this time Christians and Muslims who
had remained in Syria and Palestine had established a reasonable accommodation
with each other and a blended civil society resulted. However, some
of the Franks were not satisfied with this status quo and waged a short
war in which they were soundly defeated by Saladin in 1187.
The third Crusade, renowned in lore for the battles
between Richard the Lion-Hearted and Saladin also was unsuccessful.
However Saladin also was unsuccessful in driving the Frankish presence
from the Holy Land. The fourth Crusade is known mainly for the sack
of Constantinople, the Byzantine Capital in 104l by the Christian
Crusaders from the West who established a short lived Latin Kingdom in
the East that only lasted until 1234.
Little glory can be awarded to either side in the
Crusades. The battles were bloody and there were many massacres of
innocents on both sides. The period was characterized by intrigue,
treachery, betrayal and broken promises on both sides. It must be
noted that the Crusades did not come about because of anti-Muslim fanaticism
but rather because of a visceral and deeply rooted attachment to the holy
places in the Holy Land. The preeminent historian of Islam Bernard
Lewis, at Princeton University points out that the initial Crusades, even
including the conquest of Jerusalem attracted little attention in the Muslim
world. The real counter-crusade began when the crusaders started
to attack the Muslim holy land of the Hejaz, including the holy cities
of Mecca and Medina. Professor Lewis points out that in the Arabic
historiography of the period the words Crusade or Crusader do not occur.
The Christian invaders were referred to as Franks or infidels.
A positive outcome of the Crusades was a weakening
of the feudal system in Europe and a creation of artisan and craftsman
guilds. It was a rather remarkable accomplishment for the Crusaders
to remain in the holy land in small enclaves for two hundred years, so
far removed from their base of supplies and reenforcement. In addition
our whole concept of the Holy Land emerged from the objectives laid out
by Urban II in 1095 and the results of the Crusades themselves.
The Mongol Conquests
The first Mongol invasion of the lands of Islam occurred
in 1220. Under the leadership of Genghis Khan, many cities in Transoxonia
and Khorasan were terrorized and destroyed. When Genghis Khan died
seven years later his empire stretched from the Caspian Sea to the Sea
of Japan. In 1256 forces under the Mongol leader Hulegu invaded Persia
and Syria, sacked Baghdad and took control of Mesopotamia and the
valley of the Tigris and Euphrates rivers in the fertile crescent.
These Mongol regimes became rivals and struggled
with each other for control of territory. The group derived from
Hulegu s leadership were known as the Ill-Khans and controlled Persia,
and Mesopotamia, lands where Islam had been well established. In
1295 a Buddhist named Mahmud Ghazan became Khan, converted to Islam and
compelled most of the Mongol leadership to become Muslim as well.
However, by the middle of the 14th century Mongol rule became weak, fragmented
and too diffuse to resist successfully Turkic power. Unfortunately,
the Mongol invasion and the sack of Baghdad had a devastating effect on
Islamic culture and its artistic and scientific achievements.
The Ottoman Empire
The Byzantine Empire on its Eastern flank increasingly
was pressed by Turkic speaking pastoralists from central Asia known to
history as the Seljuq Turks. They became converted into Sunni Islam
early in the 11th century, and expanded their power and influence into
western Persia and Syria, and occupied Baghdad. As tribal bands occupying
much of Anatolia (present day Turkey), they pressed very close to Constantinople,
the Byzantine capital. During the first half of the 14th century,
the Anatolian Seljuq sultanate was one of the most important Muslim states
of its day. It ruled over a heterogeneous population including both
Armenian and Greek Christians.
Lasting Muslim power in Anatolia did not, however,
come from the Seljuqs, but rather from a warrior state on the frontier
of the Byzantine Empire. This tribal state known as th Osmanlis or
Ottomans was named after its founder Osman I who ruled from 1281-1324.
In 1453 the Sultan Mehmed II laid siege to and conquered Constantinople
thus ending the Byzantine Empire. He allowed his troops three days
of plunder before entering and assuming control over the city. Many men,
women and children were massacred. In 1683 from July 17 to September
12 the Ottoman Turks laid siege to Vienna. They were defeated by
a combined force led by John III Sobieski of Poland. This marked
the beginning of the end of Turkish domination in Eastern Europe.
The peak of Ottoman power and influence as well as of Ottoman culture was
reached during the sultanate of Suleyman I who ruled from 1520-1566, and
who was known among the Ottomans as the Lawgiver , and who became known
in Europe as the Magnificent . After his reign the Ottoman Empire,
due to a variety of causes and influences declined until at the outbreak
of World War I it became known as the sick man of Europe.
20th Century Developments
Many developments in the early years of the 20th
century are important in relation to the interactions of the Islamic World
with Christendom, i.e. the culturally still Christian West in
Europe and the Americas. Most seminal in this regard was WorldWar
I and its aftermath. This war, referred to at the time as the Great
War led to the end of the Russian and Austrian-Hungarian Empires and the
rise of communism, fascism and Naziism in that order. More important
to the subject ofthis essay was the demise of the Ottoman Empire.
The Ottomans had made the bad mistake to side with the Central powers,Germany
and Austria against the Allies, namely Britain, France and Russia.
Prior to the catalyst for the Great War to come
that occurred in Sarajevo in 1914, there had been several earlier wars
in the Balkans. The Balkans were and still are a place where Catholic
Christianity, Eastern Orthodox Christianity and Islam interacted violently.
A major problem facing the Ottomans in the early 20th century and facing
Western Europe today was the irredentism of national minorities in the
Balkans in general and within the Ottoman Empire in particular. Within
Armenia, Armenian national consciousness was developing strongly with hopes
and aspirations for a separate, independent and Christian Armenia.
This was not something the Ottomans favored in fact they reacted violently
against the Armenians. The so-called Young Turks headed by Enver
Pasha in control in Istanbul, subjected the Armenians to deportation and
exile with the intent to populate the vacant towns and villages with Muslim
refugees. A ruthless campaign was initiated by the Ottoman authorities
to disarm the entire Armenian population of all personal weapons.
As an aside, the 2nd Amendment to the United States Constitution in the
Bill of Rights was intended specifically to prevent this action by a government
against its citizens. What followed in 1915 were mass deportations and
massacres of men women and children in what is now known as the Armenian
genocide. The total number of victims will never be precisely known,
but the most accepted and authoritative estimates puts the total at over
one million men, women and children dead, and hundreds of thousands more
deported.. The Ottomans also disposed in a similar manner the Assyrians
in Iraq, another Christian minority.
About the Armenian massacres, Bat Ye'or in
her book The Decline of Eastern Christianity under Islam wrote as
follows:
"The genocide of the Armenians was the natural
outcome of a policy inherent in the politico-religious structure of dhimmitude.
This process of physically eliminating a rebel nation had already
been used against the rebel Slav and Greek Christians, rescued from collective
extermination by European intervention, although sometimes reluctantly.
The genocide of the Armenians was a
jihad. No rayas took part in it. Despite the disapproval of many Muslim
Turks and Arabs and their refusal to collaborate in the crime, these massacres
were perpetrated solely by Muslims and they alone profited from the booty:
the victims' property, houses, and lands granted to the muhajirun, and
the allocation to them of women and child slaves. The elimination of male
children over the age of twelve was in accordance with the commandments
of the jihad and conformed to the age fixed for payment of the jizya. The
four
stages of the liquidation-deportation, enslavement, forced conversion,
and massacre-reproduced the historic conditions of the jihad carried out
in the dar ai-harb from the seventh century on. Chronicles from a variety
of sources, by Muslim authors in particular, give detailed descriptions
of the organized massacres or deportation of captives, whose sufferings
in forced marches behind the armies paralleled the Armenian experience
in the twentieth century.
This policy was not an isolated phenomenon. It was part
of a defensive strategy to maintain Islamic jurisdiction over a territory
which had been conquered by war and to eliminate dhimmi nationalism. The
Armenian tragedy was therefore accompanied by the destruction of Jacobite
and Nestorian Christians in the Euphrates valley north of Syria. In September
1915, at Jabal Musa (Antioch), French ships took on board 4,000 to 5,000
Armenians, in extremis, who had been encircled by the Turks and Arabs.
However, the British and French authorities, fearing the hostility of the
Muslim populations, refused permission for the Armenians to disembark in
Egypt, Rhodes, Cyprus, Tunisia, and Morocco. In the end, the British High
Commissioner of Egypt agreed to let them go ashore temporarily at Alexandria
."
At the conclusion of the Great War(WWI) in 1918,
the victorious Allies proceeded to dismantle the Ottoman Empire.
The Russians coveted Istanbul and control of the Bosporus waterway between
the Black and the Mediterranean seas. In this they were thwarted
by General Mustafa Kemal, better known as Attaturk the father of the secular
state modern day Turkey. This was accomplished by the force of military
arms under Attaturk s command against the Western powers.
During the war, Britain and France sought help in
the Middle East against the Ottomans wherever they could find it.
Sharif Hussain ibn Ali of Mecca in the Hijaz of Arabia along the Red sea
had imperial ambitions for an Arab nation, headed of course by himself.
The British bribed the sharif and his Bedouin sons and tribesmen with gold
and the promise of booty in what perhaps misleadingly has been termed the
great Arab revolt, and glamorized by Lawrence of Arabia. The forces of
Hussain and his sons attacked and captured the port of Aqaba on the Red
sea in their most famous victory and eventually entered Damascus as victors
along with the real victors the British army. However, at the time
most of the Arab world from one end to the other was indifferent or hostile
to this desert revolt. Specifically, there was little interest to
this event in Palestine and the Muslims in Mesopotamia (Iraq) were hostile
to it. Lawrence had made promises to the Arabs and the British and
France had signed the Sykes-Picot agreement on dividing up the Ottoman
Empire after the war, and these agreements were not feasible to keep in
the reality of the post-war situation.
The outcome of many diplomatic maneuvers at Versailles
and elsewhere was to give France a Mandate (i.e. temporary authority) over
Syria and Lebanon and Britain a Mandate over Palestine and Iraq.
Sharif Hussein's son Feisal was made King over Iraq. His son Abdullah,
as a consolation prize since he had coveted Iraq, was made King of a newly
established Hashemite Kingdom of Trans-Jordan, now called Jordan,
which was carved out of the British Mandate of Palestine in violation of
the spirit if not the letter of the Balfour declaration of 1917 in which
the British had promised Palestine to the Zionists as a national home.
It was called Hashemite in view of Abdullah's claimed lineage with the
Hashim family of the Prophet Muhammed. Kuwait had achieved its status
as a British protectorate after World War I, and full independence in 1961.
Arab Nationalism
Arabism, or Arab nationalism and Islamism have important
elements in common, but the differences are more important and crucial
for understanding than the similarities. All Arabs are not
Muslim, some are Christian, and all Muslims are not Arab. In fact,
by virtue of the Arab conquests of the 7th and 8th centuries all people
that speak arabic are not Arabs, witness the Berbers of North Africa where
there is currently a revival of Berber nationalism and the native Berber
language of pre-Islamic conquest time. Many Arabs in the middle East speak
arabic, consider themselves to be Arab and especially in the past ,identified
themselves with Arab nationalism. Until the Lebanon civil war Lebanon
was a predominately Christian country.
We have seen that sharif
Hussein of Mecca's call for an Arab nation under his control fell on mostly
deaf ears throughout the Arab world. After World War II the cause
of Arab nationalism was promoted most vigorously by military dictators
interested in power for themselves and their respective cliques, not Arab
nationalism per se. A good example was Nasser who fell out
of favor after Egypt's humiliating defeat by Israel in the six-day war
of 1967, and Arab nationalism has been in decline ever since. The
high water mark of Arab nationalism was the merging of Egypt and Syria
into the United Arab Republic in 1958 but this didn't last long.
The truth is that pan-Arabism or Arab nationalism was more of a dream by
Western Orientalists or romantics such as Lawrence of Arabia than a practical
political reality in the Arab world, Even though many of the Arab national
states in the Middle East were creations of the Western powers after World
War I, the rulers of these national states are much more interested in
their national identities as Egyptians, Syrians, Iranians and so on than
in surrendering any power to such a vague idea as Arab nationalism per
se.
Islamism (Islamic Fundamentalism)
According to the Merriam-Webster Collegiate dictionary
on the internet, Islamism is the "faith, doctrine or cause of Islam." The
cause of Islam has been described no better than by Martin Kramer
in his book Arab Awakening and Islamic Revival as follows:
"The idea is simple: Islam must have power
in this world. It is the true religion-the religion of God-and its truth
is manifest in its power. When Muslims believed, they were powerful. Their
power has been lost in modem times because Islam has been abandoned by
many Muslims, who have reverted to the condition that preceded God's revelation
to the Prophet Muhammad. But if Muslims now return to the original Islam,
they can preserve and even restore their power.
That return, to be effective, must be
comprehensive; Islam provides the one and only solution to all questions
in this world, from public policy to private conduct. It is not merely
a religion, in the Western sense of a system of belief in God. It possesses
an immutable law, revealed by God, that deals with every aspect of life,
and it is an ideology, a complete system of belief about the organization
of the state and the world. This law and ideology can only be implemented
through the establishment of a truly Islamic state, under the sovereignty
of God. The empowerment of Islam, which is God's plan for mankind, is a
sacred end. It may be pursued by any means that can be rationalized
in terms of Islam's own code. At various times, these have included persuasion,
guile, and force.
What is remarkable about Islamic fundamentalism
is not its diversity. It is the fact that this idea of power for Islam
appeals so effectively across such a wide range of humanity, creating a
world of thought that crosses all frontiers. Fundamentalists everywhere
must act in narrow circumstances of time and place. But they are who they
are precisely because their idea exists above all circumstances. Over nearly
a century, this idea has evolved into a coherent ideology, which demonstrates
a striking consistency in content and form across a wide expanse of the
Muslim world.
This is, in Kramer's view what Islamism, or Islamic
fundamentalism is all about. Bassam Tibi, in his book The Challenge
of Fundamentalism:Political Islam and World Disorder describes
Islamic fundamentalism in a similar manner.
Islamic fundamentalism, as a form of religious fundamentalism
has been considered by some, mistakenly, to be analogous to Protestant
fundamentalism. Nothing could be further from the truth. Protestant,
or Evangelical fundamentalism is mostly a 20th century movement with its
roots stretching back into the 19th century. It emphasizes a literal
interpretation of the Bible and the inerrancy of scripture. It seeks
a return to the peaceful teaching of Jesus and his apostles. Islamic fundamentalism
also seeks a return, in its case to the inerrant teachings of Muhammed
as found in the Koran and the Hadith, or the sayings of Mohammed.
The differences between these two fundamentalism are immense. Evangelical
fundamentalism seeks a return to Christ's teaching by preaching the gospel,
i.e. the good news, and the conversion of people to Christianity by persuasion,
as in the time of Paul and the other writers of the New Testament.
In contrast, Islamic fundamentalism, as we have
just described, and as derived specifically from Muhammed in the Koran
and in the Hadith is by Jihad or holy war and a revolution to institute
an Islamic world order. The Islamic concept of Jihad , or holy war
is described as documented in and derived from the Koran by Ibn Warraq
in his book Why I am not a Muslim as follows:
"The totalitarian nature of Islam is nowhere
more apparent than in the concept of jihad, the holy war, whose ultimate
aim is to conquer the entire world and submit it to the one true faith,
to the law of Allah. To Islam alone has been granted the truth: there is
no possibility of salvation outside it. It is the sacred duty-an incumbent
religious duty established in the Koran and the traditions of all Muslims
to bring Islam to all humanity. Jihad is a divine institution, enjoined
specially for the purpose of advancing Islam. Muslims must strive, fight,
and
kill in the name of God.
Sura 9.5-6: Kill those who join other gods with God wherever
you may find them.
Sura 4.76: Those who believe fight in the cause of God.
Sura 8.12: I will instill terror into the hearts of the Infidels,
strike off their heads then, and strike off from them every fingertip.
Sura 8.39-42: Say to the Infidels: If they desist from their
unbelief, what is now past shall be forgiven them; but if they return to
it, they have already before them the doom of the ancients! Fight then
against them till strife be at an end, 'and the religion be all of it God's.
Sura 2.256: But they who believe, and who fly their country,
and fight in the cause of God may hope for God's mercy: and God is Gracious,
Merciful. It is a grave sin for a Muslim to shirk the battle against the
unbelievers those who do will roast in hell.
Sura 8.15, 16: Believers, when you meet the unbelievers preparing
for battle do not turn your backs to them. [Anyone who does] shall incur
the wrath of God and hell shall be his home: an evil dwelling indeed.
Sura 9.39: If you do not fight, He will punish you severely,
and put others in your place. Those who die fighting for the only true
religion, Islam, will be amply rewarded in the life to come.
Sura 4.74: Let those fight in the cause of God who barter the
life of this world for that which is to come; for whoever fights on God's
path, whether he is killed or triumphs, We will give him a handsome reward.
It is abundantly clear from many of the above
verses that the Koran is not talking of metaphorical battles or of moral
crusades: it is talking of the battlefield. To read such blood thirsty
injunctions in a holy book is shocking. Mankind is divided into two groups,
Muslims and non-Muslims. The Muslims are members of the Islamic community,
the umma, who possess territories in the dar al-Islam, the Land of Islam,
where the edicts of Islam are fully promulgated. The non-Muslims are the
Harbi, people of the dar al-Harb, the Land of Warfare, any country belonging
to the infidels that has not been subdued by Islam but that, nonetheless,
is destined to pass into Islamic jurisdiction, either by conversion
or by war (Harb). All acts of war are permitted in the dar al-Harb."
Jihad is defined in Merriam-Webster as a holy war
waged on behalf of Islam as a religious duty. In al-islam,
an important and authoritative Islamic web site, jihad, defined as fighting
in the cause of Allah, is documented in many references in both the Koran
and the hadiths under such heading as; excellence of jihad, judgment pertaining
to jihad, elements of the battle, the stages of the battle, spoils and
treaties and covenants.
Ibn Khaldun, who died in 1406), made the
following comments concerning Muslim jurisprudence of the preceeding five
centuries with regard to the uniquely Islamic institution of jihad:
"In the Muslim community, the holy war is
a religious duty, because of the universalism of the (Muslim) mission and
(the obligation to) convert everybody to Islam either by persuasion or
by force. ..The other religious groups did not have a universal mission,
and the holy war was not a religious duty for them, save only for purposes
of defense. ..Islam is under obligation to gain power over other nations."
The concept of Islamic fundamentalism in the 20th century can
be traced back to the writings of the Egyptian teacher and political preacher
Sayyed Qutb writing in the immediate post World War II period.
In his writing the Christian West is morally bankrupt, about to crumble
and only Islam is prepared to assume world leadership from the West for
a Islamic world order.
The late sheikh of Azhah, Judulhaq Ali Judulhaq
made a distinction between Islamic Jihad, peaceful for worthy purposes,
and Jihad Massallah, a resort to violence and in fact terrorism to accomplish
the Islamic world revolution. In contrast Islamic fundamentalist
Hassan al-Banna ridiculed such an idea, and described lesser and greater
forms of jihad. In his view, violent Islamic world revolution through
force and terrorism is the greater jihad true to the teachings of Muhammed.
In the view of Hassan Tibi in his book referenced above Islamic fundamentalism
is not a renaissance of religious belief but rather is a political movement
toward the hegemony of a world Islamic order. This author points out perceptively
that Islamic fundamentalists are not terrorists, per se, but Islamic terrorists
are Islamic fundamentalists.
The Issue of Palestine
Historically Palestine encompassed the Holy Land
of Judea, Samaria and Galilee, as well as the present country of Jordan,
which, as mentioned earlier was carved out of the British Palestine Mandate
after World War I. For our purposes we will start with the year 70
in the Christian era when the Romans destroyed both the Jewish state in
Palestine and the Jewish Temple in Jerusalem. The Jews were dispersed
from Palestine to all over the known world in what is known as the diaspora.
After another Jewish revolt in 132, the Jews were driven even more from
Judea, although some remained, especially in Galilee. With the conversion
of Constantine to Christianity in the early 4th century the residents of
Palestine were mostly Christian. In 352 the Jews in Galilee revolted
as did the Samaritans in the 6th century. Both revolts were violently suppressed.
Jerusalem came under Persia control in 614 but in 628 Palestine and Jerusalem
were restored to the Byzantine (Christian) Empire again. A short
ten years later, Palestine was conquered by the Arabs. The periods
of the Arab conquest, the Crusades,, the Ottoman Empire and many relevant
events in the 20th century have been covered earlier in this essay.
Following widespread pograms against
the Jews in Russia, as written about by Sholem Aleichem in his stories
about Tevye the Dairyman, and as dramatized in Fiddler on the
Roof, a first wave of Jewish immigration into Palestine from Russia took
place in the 1890's. The Zionist movement began in 1896 on the
publication of Theodor Herzl s book A Jewish State. Especially following
the widespread anti-Semitism revealed in France by the Dreyfus affair,
the Zionists had come to the conclusion that the Jews would never be fully
accepted and assimilated in Europe and therefore a Jewish national home
or state was necessary. Zionism was a secular movement and was not supported
by orthodox Jews who held to the view that a return to Palestine, i.e.
Zion, would and should only occur following the long awaited arrival of
the Jewish Messiah. The map on page 22 shows that the
British divided the Palestine Mandate in 1922 such that three-quarters
of it went to form the newly established Hashemite Kingdom of Trans-Jordan
with Abdullah as its King. It is fair to say that Trans-Jordan was
the establishment of an authentic Palestinian State, but unfortunately
with an imported Arab from the Hijaz as its King.
Following the founding of Trans-Jordan the remaining
one quarter of Palestine was set aside as a Jewish national home in at
least partial honoring of the Balfour agreement of 1917. Unfortunately,
at least for the Jews, the British backed away from even this commitment
by recommending the further partition of the remaining one quarter of Palestine
into Palestinian and Jewish sections.
In 1919 an important event happened that is not
widely known. This was a signed agreement between Emir Feisal, representing
the Arab Kingdom of Hijaz and Chaim Weitzman, representing the Zionist
organization. Feisal, of course was later installed by the British
as the King of the newly created Kingdom of Iraq. This agreement
is worth citing in its entirety:
AGREEMENT BETWEEN EMIR FEISAL AND DR. CHAIM WEIZMANN,
JANUARY 3, 1919
His Royal Highness the Emir Feisal, representing and acting on behalf
of the Arab Kingdom of Hedjaz, and Dr. Chaim Weizmann, representing and
acting on behalf of the Zionist. Organisation, mindful of the racial kinship
and ancient bonds existing between the Arabs and the Jew-
ish people, and realising that the surest means of working out the
consummation of their national aspirations is through the closest possible
collaboration in the development of the Arab State and Palestine, and being
desirous further of confirming the good understanding which exists between
them, have agreed upon the following Articles:
ARTICLE I
The Arab State and Palestine in all their relations and undertakings
shall be controlled by the most cordial goodwill and understanding, and
to this end Arab and Jewish duly accredited agents shall be established
and maintained in the respective territories.
ARTICLE II
Immediately following the completion of the deliberations of the Peace
Conference, the definite boundaries between the Arab State and Palestine
shall be parties hereto.
ARTICLE III
In the establishment of the Constitution and Administration of Palestine
all such measures shall be adopted as will afford the fullest guarantees
for carrying into effect the British Government's Declaration of the 2d
of November, 1917.
ARTICLE IV
All necessary measures shall be taken to encourage and stimulate immigration
of Jews into Palestine on a large scale, and as quickly as possible to
settle Jewish immigrants upon the land through closer settlement, and intensive
cultivation of the soil. In taking such measures the Arab
peasant and tenant farmers shall be protected in their rights, and
shall be assisted in forwarding their economic development.
ARTICLE V
No recognition nor law shall be made prohibiting or interfering in
any way with the free exercise of religion; and further the free exercise
and enjoyment of religious profession and worship without discrimination
or preference shall forever be allowed. No religious test shall ever be
required for the exercise of civil or political rights.
ARTICLE VI
The Mohammedan Holy Places shall be under Mohammedan control.
ARTICLE VII
The Zionist Organisation proposes to send to Palestine a Commission
of experts to make a survey of the economic possibilities of the country,
and to report upon the best means for its development. The Zionist Organisation
will place the aforementioned Commission at the
disposal of the Arab State for the purpose of a survey of the economic
possibilities of the Arab State and to report upon the best means for its
development. The Zionist Organisation will use its best efforts to assist
the Arab State in providing the means for developing the natural re-
sources and economic possibilities thereof.
ARTICLE VIII
The parties hereto agree to act in complete accord and harmony on all
matters embraced herein before the Peace Congress.
ARTICLE IX
Any matters of dispute which may arise between the contracting parties
shall be referred to the British Government for arbitration. Given under
our hand at London, England, the third day of January; one thousand nine
hundred and nineteen.
Chaim Weizmann.
Feisal ibn-Hussein.
RESERVATION BY THE EMIR FEISAL
If the Arabs are established as I have asked in my manifesto of January
4th addressed to the British Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, I
will carry out what is written in this agreement. If changes are made,
I cannot be answerable for failing to carry out this agreement.
Feisal ibn-Hussein.
The key statement is this document is this reservatiom by Emir Feisal . What he meant by the Arabs being established as he had asked was the fantasy of an Arab nation including Arabia, Mesopotamia, Syria, Palestine and Egypt under a caliphate with sharif Hussain of Mecca as caliph. Nobody in the Islamic world wanted this except for sharif Hussain and his followers.
The events that occurred at the end of World War
I related to the breakup of the Ottoman Empire are important and relevant
to the Palestinian problem with us today and also to the sources of Arab
resentments and rage to be discussed later in this essay.
In 1916 Great Britain and France with the assent
of then imperial Russia made provisions for the breakup of the Ottoman
Empire at the end of hostilities. The provisions of this secret Sykes-Picot
agreement were disclosed to the world by the newly established Bolshevik
government in Russia in 1917. As discussed earlier in this essay
the British during the war had enlisted the services of the shariff of
Mecca in the Hejaz, Hussain ibn Ali in the war against the Ottoman Turks
in the Middle East. Hussain and his ambitious sons Feisal and Abdullah
had imperial ambitions of their own and they also were the recipients
of British armaments and gold. Hussain's family, the Hashemites, wanted
to establish an Arab Nation extending from Mesopotamia, soon to be Iraq
all the way to Yemen at the southern end of the Arabian peninsula. Colonel
T.E. Lawrence, of Lawrence of Arabia fame was a romantic Arabist who shared
this vision and on behalf of the British expressed considerable support
for this imperial dream. The dream and fantasy died because of Arab
fractiousness, which Lawrence was well aware of and which had frustrated
him in his dealings with the Arabs, and because of political realities.
In the Sykes-Picot agreement for dismembering the Ottoman Empire, the French
and British assigned Lebanon and Syria to France, and southern Mesopotamia
including Baghdad, and the ports of Haifa and Acre to Great Britain.
In the Balfour Declaration of 1917 the British government said it would
look favorably on the establishment of a Jewish National home on Palestine
in response to Zionist interests. In 1920 at the San Remo Conference
the French Mandate of Syria and the British Mandates of Iraq and Palestine
were established as already described.
These developments did not sit well with sharif
Hussain and his sons in the light of what ever promises had been made by
Lawrence on behalf of Great Britain for an Arab Nation. However,
in compensation the British made Feisal King of Iraq and Abdullah King
of Trans-Jordan. However in Arabia the Hashemites lost out to the
family of ibn Saud who defeated them in a war for control of Arabia, lost
the Hejaz to the Saudis in 1924 and saw the establishment of the Royal
Kingdom of Saudi Arabia with fundamentalist Wahhabism as the religion of
the state.
The 1920's saw the beginning of considerable Jewish
immigration into Palestine, with many establishing Kibbutzim, communal
farms, or settling in the towns and cities. The Jews established
their presence in Palestine by buying land and property from what we now
refer to as the Palestinians. The Palestinian authorities fought violently
against this Jewish presence by rioting and reprisals against the Palestinians
who had sold land to the Jews. The Palestinian authorities ordered
that land should not be sold to Jews, and those that did so would be severely
punished. In support of the Arab world in general and the Palestinians
the British severely limited Jewish immigration, with such limitation formally
sanctioned with a White Paper in 1930.
After World War II and the Holocaust in which Nazi
Germany killed six million Jews for no other reason than that they were
Jewish and talented, Zionist pressure for a Jewish state in Palestine,
which was still under British control, grew stronger. The British announced
their withdrawal and the United Nations proposed to partition Palestine
into Jewish and Arab states. The Jews accepted but the Arabs did
not. In 1948 the Jews announced the establishment of the state of
Israel which was immediately recognized by the United States and the Soviet
Union. Israel was immediately invaded by five neighboring Arab
countries. The Arab states were defeated in this 1948 war of independence
for Israel. After the 1948 war 800,000 Jews were expelled from Arab lands
with most re-settling in Israel. Approximately 650,000 Palestinians
were displaced from Israel and ended up in refugee camps in Jordan and
elsewhere where they remain today.
Egypt, Syria, Jordan and Iraq again made war on
Israel in 1967 and were again defeated in what is known as the Six
Day War. As a result the socalled West Bank, essentially Judea and
Samaria, moved from Jordanian to Israeli control. All of jerusalem was
now under Jewish authority. The Arab countries were again defeated by Israel
1973 in the Yom Kippur war.
It is clear to this writer that the Jews, have accepted
unconditionally and as an unalterable historic fact the division of Palestine
into Jordan and Israel. They also have accepted, perhaps reluctantly
but accepted nonetheless that there must be some sort of Palestinian autonomy
and self government in the West Bank (Judea and Samaria), and Gaza.
It is equally clear that the Palestinian leadership and indeed much of
the Arab world has not yet accepted the right of Israel to exist As a nation
with secure and defensible borders.
The Palestinian Authority knows where the terrorists
against Israel are in the West Bank and Gaza, and could go after them in
a meaningful way if they wished to So far they have not chosen to crack
down on Hamas, Hizb Allah or the Islamic Jihad. At this time the
situation in Israel, the West Bank and Gaza is unresolved, volatile and
dangerous.
French and Vatican Arab Policy: The Anti-Jewish Fulcrum
The role of Christian anti-semitism in the issue of Palestine today must be considered. No one has done this better than Bat Ye'or in her book Islam and Dhimmitude: Where Civilizations Collide. The following analysis is taken directly form her book:
"The great Arab uprising against the Ottoman
sultan which France had sought in the 1830s did not occur for want of a
concept which would unify ethnically diverse and mutually hostile populations.
The missionaries who, had flocked to the Levant helped to fill this gap.
>From the 1840s they set about teaching and modernizing the Arabic language,
the centralizing pole of a future Arab nation which would detach the Arabic-speaking
provinces from the Ottoman Empire. Thus, the concept of an Arab nation
was born in the French Catholic missions of the Levant. After the massacres
of Christians in Syria between 1840 and 1860, the Christians clung to Arabism
in order to surmount the religious conflicts and strengthen a policy of
rapprochement with the Muslims.
The French protectorate over the Catholic
rayas directed them to Arabization, and used them as agents of its anti-Zionist
Arab policy. Simultaneously, the Judeophobic campaign frequently renewed
blood libel accusations in Europe, in Russia, and in the Ottoman Empire
where Christian rayas endeavored to associate with Muslims. This was the
beginning of the polarization of the Eastern Christian communities, Arabized
by Catholic missions, in the anti-Jewish and anti-Zionist campaign, and
the appearance of a theme that was to have a great future: a struggle that
would unite Christians and Muslims against the "Jewish enemy."Thus the
return of the Jews to Palestine, contemporary with an immigration of Levantine
Christian refugees, unleashed antisemitic passions in Europe . At the end
of the century, French religious and extreme-right parties called for the
abolition of the republican laws, the segregation of the Jews in ghettos--as
had been done by Pope Pius IX in Rome-and the restoration of their traditional
discriminatory status, in order to remove their means of political and
economic action. Closely associated with the European antisemitic movements,
the Eastern Churches--particularly the Palestinian Churches--integrated
European antisemitism into the machinery of hatred and linked it to Arab-Muslim
anti-Zionism. After the First Zionist Congress in Basle (1897), a two-stage
Christian-Muslim strategy was developed: the fabrication of The Protocols
of the Learned Elders of Zion, and its incorporation into Arab nationalism.
The Protocols, a Christian work of anti-Zionist political theology, was
symbiotically connected by Arab Christians with the concept of an Arab
nation, an ideology uniting Christendom and Islamdom. This symbiosis is
revealed in a book by Negib Azoury, Le Reveil de la Nation Arabe
(The Awakening of the Arab Nation), published in Paris in January 1905.
A Latin Catholic close to; the Jesuits, Azoury was born in Lebanon in 1873,
studied in Paris in the mid-1890s, and lived there toward the end of 1904
till 1908, frequently returning to Cairo. >From 1898 to 1904 he was an
assistant to the Turkish governor of Jerusalem, Kiazim Bey.
For Azoury, France and Rome represented two
basic political poles of an Arab nation which extended over the whole Levant,
except for Egypt. This Arab nation not only gathered Arab Christians and
Muslims together in Palestine, but It also represented all the branches
of Christianity Hence ;Arabism embodied the nucleus of the Muslim-Christian
symbiosis, bringing 'together the whole of Christendom and Islamdom against
Israel. For Azoury, the pillars of this symbiosis would be the papacy,
as a unifying force of Christianity in its entirety through the Uniate
movement; and the Caliphate on the Muslim side. Both institutions, of irreproachable
morality, would coordinate their activity in perfect harmony, under the
political aegis and military protection and collaboration of France. Azoury
further explains that his present book "will allow the reader to realize
the unique idea that we are recommending in our two books." He is referring
to Le Riveil de La Nation Arabe and a forthcoming book, Le Peril ,Juif
Universel (The Universal Jewish Peril), both united in the same concept.The
link between traditional Christian anti-Judaism and the Christian involvement
in anti-Zionism and Arabism is thereby acknowledged. Azoury declares that
he has exposed the universal nature of the Jewish peril from new and entirely
unknown point of view".
The Christian West and the Islamic World Contrasted
Islam Today
In Islamic theology the Koran is eternal and inerrant. There is no central Islamic authority, outside the Koran, as there was in the days of the Caliphs. To gain a glimpse of Islamic beliefs and practices today we turn to the Islamic question and answer web site: www.islam-qa.com.
Welcome to Islam Question & Answer!
This site aims to provide intelligent, authoritative responses to anyones
question about Islam, whether it be from a Muslim or a non-Muslim, and
to help solve general and personal social problems. Responses are composed
by Sheikh Muhammed Salih Al-Munajjid, a known Islamic lecturer and author.
Questions about any topic are welcome, such as theology, worship, human
and business relations, or social and personal issues.
All questions and answers on this site
have been prepared, approved, revised, edited, amended or annotated by
Shaykh Muhammad Saalih al-Munajjid, the supervisor of this site.
With the spread of Islam world-wide walillah
il-hamd and its diffusion into the internet, some sites have been published
claiming to serve Muslims and to speak in the name of Islam. However, not
all of these sites, which discuss issues relevant to Islam, present accurate
and reliable information based on the true beliefs and practices of the
Prophet (peace & blessings of Allaah be upon him) and his companions.
Thus, there is a need to increase the number of sites providing resources
based on these authentic teachings. It is hoped that this site will be
among them. The objectives of Islam Q&A include:
* to teach and familiarize
Muslims with various aspects of their religion
* to be a source for guiding
people to Islam
* to respond to users questions
and inquiries to the best of our resources and capabilities
* to assist in solving the
social and personal problems of the Muslims in an Islamic context
It was decided to make the site all-encompassing,
directed towards Muslims and non-Muslims alike. Subject areas include,
but are not limited to, Islamic fiqh and jurisprudence, Islamic history,
Islamic social laws (including marriage, divorce, contracts, and inheritance),
Islamic finance, basic tenets and aqeedah of the Islamic faith and tawheed,
and Arabic grammar as it relates to the Quran and Islamic texts.
The responses are handled by Sheikh Muhammad
Salih al-Munajjid, using only authentic, scholarly sources based on the
Quran and sunnah, and other reliable contemporary scholarly opinions. References
are provided where appropriate in the responses. All requests are held
with confidence, and replies are available personally and/or publicly (posted
to this site).
A database organized by subject areas,
containing common as well as previously asked questions, is available for
exploring, either by browsing the entire contents or specific subject areas,
or by searching for specific keywords. In an effort to maximize efficient
use of everyones time and effect the most rapid responses, please be sure
to consult the database before submitting a question to make sure it has
not already been asked before.
Information on Shaykh Muhammad Saalih al-Munajid
He was born on 30/12/1381 AH. He completed
his elementary, middle and secondary schooling in Riyaadh, and completed
his university studies in al-Dahran, in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. He
attended the classes of Shaykh Abd al- Azeez ibn Abd-Allaah ibn Baaz,
Shaykh Muhammad ibn Saalih al- Uthaymeen and Shaykh Abd-Allaah ibn Abd
al-Rahmaan al-Jibreen; they were the shaykhs from whom he learned the most.
He also studied under Shaykh Abd al-Rahmaan ibn Naasir al-Barraak and
Shaykh Muhammad, the son Seedi al-Habeeb al-Shanqeeti. He learned the recitation
of the Qur aan from Shaykh Sa eed Aal Abd-Allaah.
Among his shaykhs from whom he learned
were also Shaykh Saalih ibn Fawzaan Aal Fawzaan, Shaykh Abd-Allaah ibn
Muhammad al-Ghunaymaan, Shaykh Abd al-Muhsin al-Zaamil and Shaykh Abd
al-Rahmaan ibn Saalih al-Mahmood.
The shaykh from whom he learned the most
with regard to fatwas was Shaykh Abd al- Azeez ibn Abd-Allaah ibn Baaz
may Allaah have mercy on him; his relationship with him lasted for fifteen
years. He is the one who encouraged him to teach, and wrote to the Da wah
and Guidance Centre (Markaz al-Da wah wa l-Irshaad) in Dammaam to ask
them to co-operate with him in arranging lectures, khutbahs, and classes.
Because of Shaykh Abd al- Azeez ibn Baaz (may Allaah have mercy on him),
he became a khateeb, imaam and lecturer.
He also started the website Islam Questions
and Answers on the Internet in 1997, and this work is still continuing
until the present. And Allaah is the Source of Strength.
Meaning of Islam
Question Reference Number::
10446
Title: Meaning of the word Islam
Question:
What is the meaning of the word Islam?
Answer:
Praise be to Allaah.
If you refer to Arabic language dictionaries
you will find out that the meaning of the word Islam is: submission, humbling
oneself, and obeying commands and heeding prohibitions without objection,
sincerely worshipping Allaah alone, believing what He tells us and having
faith in Him.
The word Islam has become the name of the
religion which was brought by Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allaah be
upon him).
Why is this religion called Islam? For
all the religions on earth are called by various names, either the name
of a specific man or a specific nation. So Christianity takes its name
from Christ; Buddhism takes its name from its founder, the Buddha; the
Zoroastrians became well known by this name because their founder and standard-bearer
was Zoroaster. Similarly, Judaism took its name from a tribe known as Yehudah
(Judah), so it became known as Judaism. And so on. Except for Islam, for
it is not attributed to any specific man or to any specific nation, rather
its name refers to the meaning of the word Islam. What this name indicates
is that the establishment and founding of this religion was not the work
of one particular man and that it is not only for one particular nation
to the exclusion of all others. Rather its aim is give the attribute implied
by the word Islam to all the peoples of the earth. So everyone who acquires
this attribute, whether he is from the past or the present, is a Muslim,
and everyone who acquires this attribute in the future will also be a Muslim.
From Kitaab al-Islam Usooluhu wa Mabaadi uhu by Dr. Muhammad ibn Abd-Allaah ibn Saalih al-Suhaym. (www.islam-qa.com)
Citizenship
Question Reference Number::
14235
Title: Ruling on Muslims taking
on European nationality
Question:
What is the ruling on taking European nationality for a Muslim who has come to a European country fleeing from oppression in his homeland, where he has lost his identity papers and has lost all hope of going back to his country? May Allaah reward you with good?
Answer:
Praise be to Allaah.
In order to answer this question, we must
explain two things.
1 Whether settling in a kaafir
country is permissible
2 Establishing whether there is a need
to take the nationality.
With regard to the first matter, settling
in a kaafir country is not permissible unless the following conditions
are met:
1- There should
be a legitimate need for settling in their country, which cannot be met
in the Muslim lands, such as trade, da wah, officially representing a
Muslim country, or seeking knowledge that is not available in a Muslim
country either because it does not exist there, or what is available is
not of good quality. Or there should be fear of death, prison or torture,
not mere harassment, for oneself or for one s family and children, or
fear for one s wealth.
2- Settling there
should be regarded as temporary, not permanent. It is not permissible to
have the intention of staying there permanently; rather one should have
the idea that it is temporary, because settling there permanently means
that one has migrated (made hijrah) from the land of Islam to the land
of kufr. This clearly goes against the ruling of sharee ah that it is
obligatory to migrate from the land of kufr to the land of Islam. Having
the intention of staying there temporarily means that when the need to
stay in the kaafir country no longer applies, one will get up and leave.
3- The kaafir country
in which one wants to settle should be one which is at peace with the Muslims,
not one which is at war with them. Otherwise it is not permissible to settle
there. A country is regarded as being at war with the Muslims if it is
hostile towards the Muslims.
4- There should
be religious freedom in the kaafir country, so that the Muslim will be
able to practise his religion openly.
5- He should be
able to learn the laws of Islam in that country; if it is difficult for
him to do so then it is not permissible for him to settle there because
that implies that he is turning away from learning the religion of Allaah.
6- He should think
it most likely that he will be able to protect and maintain his religious
commitment, and that of his family and children, otherwise it is not permissible
for him to settle there, because preserving one s religious commitment
takes precedence over preserving one s self, one s wealth and one s
family. Whoever meets this condition and how difficult it is to meet
it is permitted to settle in the land of the kuffaar, otherwise that
is forbidden to him, because of the texts which clearly forbid settling
there and enjoin migrating from such lands, as is well known, and because
of the great danger which that poses to religion and morals, which no one
can deny except one who is arrogant.
Secondly: there should be a legitimate
need for taking the nationality, such as the benefits for which the Muslim
has settled in the kaafir country being dependent upon his taking the nationality.
Otherwise that is not permissible for him, because taking the nationality
is an obvious manifestation of befriending the kuffaar, and because it
involves speaking words which it is not permissible to believe in or adhere
to, such as approving of kufr or man-made laws. Moreover, taking the nationality
may lead to staying in the kaafir land permanently, which is not permissible,
as stated above. Having established these two points, I hope that Allaah
will forgive the Muslims who settle in kaafir lands for the great danger
that they have exposed themselves to, because either he is forced to settle
there and necessity makes permissible that which is ordinarily forbidden,
or to serve an interest which outweighs the harms. And Allaah knows best.
Shaykh Khaalid al-Maajid, Faculty Member, College of Sharee ah, Imaam Muhammad ibn Sa ood Islamic University. (www.islam-qa.com)
Question Reference Number::
11309
Title: The kufr of those who
rule by man-made laws
Question:
Is the one who fails to rule by that which Allaah has revealed and bases the entire legal system on man-made laws a kaafir? Should we differentiate between him and one who judges according to sharee ah, but may rule in a manner contrary to sharee ah on some issues, because of his own whims and desires or because of a bribe, etc.?
Answer:
Praise be to Allaah.
Yes, we must make this distinction. The
one who rejects the law of Allaah and casts it aside, and replaces it with
man-made laws and the opinions of individuals has committed an act of kufr
which puts him beyond the pale of Islam. Whereas the one who adheres to
the religion of Islam, but is a sinner and wrongdoer by virtue of his following
his whims and desires in some cases, or pursuing some worldly interest,
but admits that he is a wrongdoer by doing so, is not guilty of kufr which
would put him beyond the pale of Islam.
Whoever thinks that ruling by man-made
laws is equal to ruling by sharee ah, and thinks that it is OK to do that,
is also guilty of kufr that puts him beyond the pale of Islam, even if
it is only in one instance.
Shaykh Abd-Allaah al-Ghunaymaan (www.islam-qa.com)
Jihad
Question Reference Number::
7461
Title: Ruling on booty from
the wars which Muslims are fighting today
Question:
In a situation where the muslims are engaged in
jihad against an agressor like in bosnia. when the mujahideen are fighting
they sometimes capture land and booty: Money, arms, etc..
Islamically speaking it is haram in islam to
steal. but is this theft? If it is not then...
1) how must the money be used?
2) who can use it?
3) does it have to be distributed? to who?
4) what is ment by a fifth?
Answer:
Praise be to Allaah.
Allaah has prescribed jihaad for His sake
for great purposes and reasons, such as spreading this religion, telling
people about it and about the purpose for which Allaah created them. Other
purposes of jihaad include repulsing the aggression of the enemies of this
religion, who fight it in order to extinguish its light and are trying
to eliminate it and its followers. The basic evidence for this is the aayah
(interpretation of the meaning):
Permission to fight (against disbelievers)
is given to those (believers) who are fought against, because they have
been wronged; and surely, Allaah is Able to give them (believers) victory
Those who have been expelled from their homes unjustly only because they
said: Our Lord is Allaah. [al-Hajj 22:40]
What is happening in Bosnia, Kosovo, Chechnya
and other parts of the Muslim world is that which Allaah has told us about
concerning the kuffaar (interpretation of the meaning):
They wish that you reject Faith, as they
have rejected (Faith), and thus that you all become equal (like one another).
[al-Nisaa 4:89] and they desire that you should disbelieve [al-Mumtahanah
60:2]
Many of the people of the Scripture (Jews
and Christians) wish that if they could turn you away as disbelievers after
you have believed, out of envy from their ownselves, even after the truth
has become manifest unto them [al-Baqarah 2:109]
Never will the Jews nor the Christians
be pleased with you (O Muhammad) till you follow their religion [al-Baqarah
2:120].
So the fighting that is taking place between
the Muslims and the kuffaar is the checking of one set of people by means
of another, which is part of the laws of the universe created by Allaah,
which Allaah mentioned when He said (interpretation of the meaning):
So they routed them by Allaah s Leave
and Dawood (David) killed Jaaloot (Goliath), and Allaah gave him [Dawood
(David)] the kingdom [after the death of Taloot (Saul) and Samuel] and
Al-Hikmah (Prophethood), and taught him of that which He willed. And if
Allaah did not check one set of people by means of another, t