Fitzgerald: The cultural imperialism of the Arabs

Jihad Watch Board Vice President Hugh Fitzgerald discusses how Arab-ness is in many ways inextricable from Islam -- a phenomenon that has had effects even among dhimmi populations.

Within Islam, a supposedly universalist religion where all Muslims in the ummah are equal, there is a special place for the Arabs. But how could it be otherwise? Islam itself, a mishmash of pagan Arab lore, Judaism and Christianity, has its origins in the attempt to take what was available and construct out of it something, a belief-system, that would both promote, and justify, Arab attacks on, and Arab conquest of, far more advanced, settled, and wealthy populations of Christians, Jews, and pagans -- and with the attack on Sassanid Persia, Zoroastrians.

Within Islam, the supremacist ideology is expressed first, and perhaps most importantly, in linguistic and cultural imperialism. The Qur'an is written in Arabic, and was delivered to, given to, revealed to, the Arabs, that best of people. That best of men, Muhammad, was an Arab, and so were the Companions. The Qur'an itself should ideally not be read in any language other than Arabic (the Arabic in which it was written, not in any simplified or updated version). Qur'anic recitation is in Arabic. The students in Pakistan or Indonesia or elsewhere who pass their young lives memorizing Qur'anic passages are essentially memorizing Arabic, a language that they do not know at all, and understand most imperfectly. Yet it is 7th century Arabs, real or imaginary, who must serve as a guide to existence. Was Muhammad against sculptures? Against music? Against painting of living creatures? Very well then. For all time, and in all places, good Muslims will emulate Muhammad. For he is central to Islam, far more significant than Jesus is in Christianity. Yes, it is true that "Allah knows best" but so to does Muhammad – see Qur’an 33:21. They both know best.

Think of all the Pakistanis, clearly the descendants of persecuted or terrified Hindus, who have taken Arab names, or appropriated the honorific Sayeed to indicate their connection to the Prophet. Think of how the Berbers and other non-Arab Muslims have had to struggle to save their own language. The Iranians supposedly managed to prevent linguistic arabization through the superior quality of their own poets -- for after all, "Islamic literature" is mostly a product not of Arabs but of Persians. High Islamic civilization was very much a product both of non-Muslims and Muslims, and in the latter category, the Arabs played a much smaller role than the Persians.

The riots in Tizi-Ouzo a few years ago -- unreported in the Western world except in France -- reflect the unhappiness of the Berbers with this cultural and linguistic imperialism. So does the greater participation of Berbers in such organizations as "Maghrembins laiques" in France. The Kurds, the black Africans with their marabouts and syncretism, and even those described as Malaysian "intellectuals" and Indonesian "intellectuals," have realized that the Arab supremacist view, which encourages all Muslims to ignore their own pre-Islamic or non-Islamic history and heritage, leaves a lot to be desired. This is similar to the phenomenon in Brazil, where what prevails is not always orthodox Christianity, but some blend with pagan African beliefs and traditions that gives rise to Candomble.

And then there are so many examples of Arabs riding roughshod, and worse, over non-Arab Muslims. Think of the treatment of the Berbers, especially but not only in Algeria. Or of the black African Muslims in Darfur, or in Chad, or elsewhere where Arabs and blacks, even if all of them are Muslims, collide. There is also a religious dimension. Though there are non-Arab Sunnis (Turks, Kurds) and Arab Shi'a (see southern Lebanon, Yemen, the Hasa province of Saudi Arabia, the Hazaras in Afghanistan, Bahrain, even Kuwait, especially among Fouad Ajami's worldly Behbehanish friends and hosts), and both Sunni and Shi'a in Pakistan, Sunni Islam is identified with the Arabs, Shi'a Islam with Iran. No getting around this.

In Saudi Arabia there is apartheid: the signs "Muslim" and "Non-Muslim" are everywhere, both physically and in the minds of men. But "Muslims" are further divided into Arab (first class) and non-Arab (second class). This has not escaped the attention of the many Muslim non-Arabs who live in Saudi Arabia -- or at least not the attention of all of them.

As Infidels seek out ways to divide and weaken Islam, surely the exploitation of this linguistic, cultural, and political imperialism of the Arabs should be high on the list. Remember how the "Arabs" were hated even by some of their "Afghan" allies whom they treated with such cannon-fodder contempt --at least according to all the reports that have come out of Afghanistan. The resentment of non-Arabs, of Kurds, Berbers, blacks, Persians, Malays and so on, is perfectly understandable. It is not a Western invention. It has not in any way been fanned by the West. It need not be. It need only be pointed out. And even then, the Arabs themselves help this cause by continuing to show their contempt and indifference for non-Arabs, though they wish those non-Arabs to adopt whatever causes they, the Arabs, deem important.

Part of weakening Islam is to show many Muslims that Islam was simply an Arab invention and export, a poisoned chalice that has lain low higher and superior civilizations. This is likely to resonate especially in Iran among those who have had their fill of the Islamic Republic of Iran -- that is, every thinking and morally aware person in Iran.

The treatment by the Arabs of non-Arabs has been at least high-handed, and as the glinting daggers of Arab aggression tell us, often of a more horrid hent.

Yet at the same time, the pride in Uruba -- Arabness, Arabdom -- that affects so many Arabs, has also convinced many non-Arab people who speak Arabic that they too are or must be or should be "Arabs." The scholar Franck Salameh has written a brilliant analysis of linguistic imperialism, of how the Arabic-user (even the Maronites) comes to believe that he therefore must be an "Arab" -- even if his ancestors clearly were living in, say, the Lebanon long before the Arabs arrived on the scene. It is quite a trick.

Yet almost all of those who left Lebanon and Syria between 1880 and even as late as about 1930, even if their passports identified them in some cases as "Turks" (they were still in the Ottoman Empire) knew that they were something else, and that the best way to describe themselves was as "Lebanese" or as "Christians." Only later did some of them begin to think that they were “Arabs.” Muslims in the United States have tried to create a false sense of an identity of interest, using that meretricious term "Arab-American." This is meant to enroll in the Muslim Arab campaign for acceptance, the descendants of people who not only were not part of the Muslim Arab world, but were the main victims of that very world – people who left the Middle East precisely because of their growing insecurity among the Muslims. From 1860 on there were massacres of Maronites and Assyrians and other Middle-eastern Christians in present-day Turkey, Syria, Lebanon, and Iraq.

The Christian Arabs, or those who have considered themselves Arabs, needed to find a place in the sun. They knew they had to appeal to something, anything, other than Islam straight up. What was Ba'athism, which the Christian from Damacus, Michel Aflaq (he made a deathbed conversion to Islam) but an attempt to find a way for the Christians of the area to be enrolled in something that, in its philosophy, would be aggressive, totalitarian, but more pan-Arab than pan-Islamic? So it was that Ba’athism was born and found its greatest appeal in the two countries where, for various and complex reasons, the ruling elites (Alawite in one case, Sunni the other) found it useful to have an alternative to pure Islam. For the Alawites were not orthodox Muslims, and had Islam been the only game in town, in Iraq the sectarian majority was Shi'a, not Sunni.

Note that the phenomenon of "islamochristians" is particularly pronounced among the "Palestinian" Arabs. Despite the obvious and steady pressure on Christians and Christianity wherever the "Palestinians" have extended their sway, Naim Ateek and Hanan Ashrawi are both perfect examples of the cunning propagandistic use to which islamochristians can be put. Why, Naim Ateek is the go-to guy for the Christian churches' Middle-Eastern policy, judging by all the divestment measures he has skillfully, sabeellly, managed to push. And we all know of the requited affection between the late Peter Jennings and Hanan Ashrawi, whom he had as a special guest on September 13, 2001, to discuss you-know-what.

Compare, among those who live in or came from predominantly Muslim lands and who are Christians, the non-Arab and the Arab Christians. It is fascinating to see the difference. Christian Pakistanis have nothing to do with Islam. They do not defend it in the slightest. Look at Christian Iranians. They do not defend Islam. They have nothing to do with it. Look at Christian blacks in Nigeria or the Sudan. They have nothing to do with Islam. Look at Christians in Indonesia. They feel no need to defend Islam.

But many (although by no means all) Christian Arabs do -- and the reason is that goddam ethnic pride in being an Arab -- or thinking one is an Arab because everyone tells you that if you speak Arabic you must be (not true, of course). And Islam is the great gift of "the Arabs," and Islam and the Arabs go way back, and well -- it's hard for some, perhaps many, Arab Christians not to end up as Defenders not so much of the Faith (that Faith being Islam) but of the political attitudes and atmospherics and defensiveness that all arise so naturally from Islam.

| 34 Comments
del.icio.us | Digg this | Email | FaceBook | Twitter | Print | Tweet

34 Comments

Dear Hugh,
You said in your post: " For all time, and in all places, good Muslims will emulate Muhammad. For he is central to Islam, far more significant than Jesus is in Christianity. ".

Muhammad more significant in Islam than Jesus is to Christianity? Now that's a silly remark.
Without Christ there is no Christianity. Without Buddha, no Buddhism.
Have you forgotten the saints' constant striving for the imitatio Christi?

Jihad delenda est.

I hesitated before writing that sentence. But I think that the role of Muhammad is so central in Islam that the earlier word used in the West -- "Muhammadanism" -- more accurately conveys what it is all about than does the word Islam. Christians are taught to heed the lessons, the parables, and to emulate the exaple of Christ. But Christ is, in Milton's phrase, a "human form divine." It is easier for men to imitate someone who, like Muhammad, can be claimed to be only a man, and not divine, even if that man is presented as the Perfect Man in all things.

I'm not suggesting a Hazel-Motesian (see "Wise Blood") "Church of Christ without Christ" can exist. I am suggesting that Muhammad is, in the minds of Muslims, so present everywhere in the Qur'an, and the Hadith and Sira are all about not Allah but Muhammad, what he said and did, or even what he was silent about, that I still maintain that Muhammad is more important in Islam than Jesus, believed by Christians to be the Son of God, is in Christianity.

This is a view that would require three, or possibly four, volumes to defend. I am perfectly prepared not to defend it. Perhaps those who were raised in Islam, and have jettisoned it, but are now devout Christians, such apostates as Walid Shoebat, can offer views, based on personal experience, of the comparative significance of Muhammad, and of Christ, in the respective belief-systems with which they are identified.

Hugh - Thank you for analysis and the background information. One could certainly strike up some interesting conversations around the watercooler, the bowling alley, the doctor's waiting room or create an essay to post online using any one of the topics raised.

Many of us at JW rely on you to grant us access to difficult to understand information that is often unaccessible.

I agree with Hugh's statement about Muhammad being more important to Islam than Jesus to Christianity.

Of course, the following is just a guess about why, including my own beliefs, which is likely very different than Hugh's.

Jesus embodied, more than anything else, a set of principles to live by, rather than an entire lifestyle. His essential humility - a trait that separates him from Muhammad - says "look at God, not at me".

We are not encouraged to wear sandals, become carpenters, do the "Jesus shuffle" if he had a particular walk, eat Jesus' favorite foods, etc. Also, I have little experience of Jesus having thousands of tiny and insignificant rules and rituals, when to pray, how to pray, how often, fasting (at least the Protestants), the role of women, superior camel grooming techniques, etc. The Catholics invented lots of rituals, but did not demand adherence to them on the threat of punishment.

All the mini rituals, of any cult, are mostly there to drum into your head the sense of utter subservience.

In contrast, there is no aspect of Muhammad's life that is not to be utterly duplicated, grand or obscure. Imagine transplanting a zealous 7th century arab warrior to London, or Philadelphia, to integrate and grow. Now you get the idea.

Jesus was the culmination of thousands of years of scripture and prophecy, some of it apparently accurate. But no one can doubt that what the Essene Jew brought is built upon the Old Testament, and its several Jewish Prophets.

By contrast, Mohammad tried to buy his way in to the succession of prophets, not only as Jesus' successor but also as the Last Prophet, bringing the God's final word from on high.

But, as he was in the process of rolling out his Koran, it became apparent to Mohammad (pbuh) that he had botched his grafting of Islam onto the Judeo-Chrisitian tradition. So, he took action in two ways:

1) He (pbuh) invented anti-semitisim, and

2) He (pbuh) swung his half-built religion away from the Jedeo-Christian and towards the cultic. Thus the Sunnah, which spawns the Sharia.

The fact is, the Sunnah idea was a brilliant idea for organization his cult. Of course, Mohammed (pbuh) got some help when God weighed in with Koran 33:21:

“Indeed, in the Messenger of Allah (Mohammed) you have the most beautiful pattern of conduct.”

But the horrifying fact is that Mohammed's conduct was unimaginabaly dangerous, harmful, and awful.

By this sequence we're looking at 1.2 billion people under God's direct commandment to do as Mohammad did.

We're in a world of hurt, here.

I don't think it's accurate to say that Mohammed in Islam is "far more significant than Jesus is in Christianity".

One could never comparatively measure the sheer weight of significance of each founding figure for each religion.

It's not that we can measure the respective degrees of significance; it is rather that we can differentiate the kinds of significance. It's a qualitative thing, not a quantitative thing ("more").

One could far more comfortably measure out the degrees of significance accorded to Mary among Lutherans vs. Catholics. But Christ is so central to (orthodox) Christians, Christ to them is the Measure of Humanity, the Creator of Humanity, and the Redemeer of Humanity, for God's sake.

Hugh writes:
"For all time, and in all places, good Muslims will emulate Muhammad. For he is central to Islam, far more significant than Jesus is in Christianity. Yes, it is true that "Allah knows best" but so to does Muhammad – see Qur’an 33:21. They both know best."

and later:
"But I think that the role of Muhammad is so central in Islam that the earlier word used in the West -- "Muhammadanism" -- more accurately conveys what it is all about than does the word Islam."

Factually correct on the first, and I completely
agree with the opinion expressed later, though I
agonized briefly since it is a deliberate insult,
and a bit longer to type. As Muhammad is considered perfect, and his (evil) life to be emulated, I don't see how one can think otherwise. It's less silly than calling the odious New York Times, well, you know...

I'm hoping that an illustrated comic book version of the life of Muhammad is released, I bet it
would be a real eye opener.

Hugh, remember that in ancient Rome all men were equals, but Caesar considered himself "First among equals". Guess the same kind of imperialistic logic applies to Arabs in regards to Islam.

Of course Hugh is right, one can't join islam with out declaring that allah is the only god AND mohammed is his prophet. And the last and final prophet of this arabian religious, political and cultural way of life, so moh becomes the pattern for all mohammedans. You can't practice the religion from the indications of the koran alone,you need to consult the hadiths (the collections of his actions and words).

Really islam is not monotheistic, but dualistic,
actually allah is mohammed's evil twin.

There is a comic book on-line along with some songs.Make sure your speakers are on.

http://islamcomicbook.com

There's also a bunch of guys doing something I always wanted to do,here:http://anarchangel.blogspot.com/2005/06/team-infidel.html

Bugler writes:
"There is a comic book on-line along with some songs.Make sure your speakers are on.

http://islamcomicbook.com"

I hate to be a critic, but it's rather crude, and besides, it's quite easy to take a bunch of
stories from the Bible to do somethinig similar.

I was quite precise when I said I'd like to see a comic book version of the life of Muhammad. There's no need to make caricatures either, you could draw Muhammad as a handsome or ordinary guy
and the actual facts of his behavior are damning.
Stick with the most canonical accounts of his life.

I empathize with the anarchangels, and I too
consider proficiency with firearms, sadly, to
be a continuing necessity.

PS: Does *anyone* play the bugle anymore?

A quick glance at the Moslem Male hardly evokes thoughts of supremecism.

But what they *are* supreme at is organization.

Sure, they fall down trying to organize pretty much anything else, and have a woeful track record in agriculture, military, arts, science, operations, and other human pursuits.

Can we deny that the Moslem Man is always better organized to take and hold power than his counterparts?

Gotta give credit where credit is due.

I think I am grasping the point that Hugh is making about Muhammad being more important to Islam than Christ is to Christianity. It is a "outside-looking in" concept. When Muslims speak about Islam, it is Allah and Muhammad that is virtually always said in the same breath.

When we speak about Christianity the world hears us praise God, as rightly they should, but we may not give enough reverence to Christ outwardly at the same time. It is assumed by us as Christians that the world understands about Christ, through our name of Christianity.

Maybe we as Christians should look inside ourselves and ask ourselves why don't we speak about God the Father, and God the Son, and the gift of The Holy Spirit conjunctively? We have a message of Christ to spread as God's Son and as our Saviour. Christ died that all may have eternal life. Maybe we have become lax in proclaiming this to the world as individual Christians, thinking that all the world should know? Muslims take no chances that you don't know about Muhammad and Allah.

Christ died for our sins and through the plan of Salvation we can be resurrected with Him in Heaven and He will be seated at the Right Hand of God. If we humble ourselves and honor Christ as God wants us to honor His Son, we might not have as much to worry about with Islam. Christ will return one day and Islam will be defeated. Until then, we must endure through our love for His Sacrifice, and our belief in God His Holy Father. We can accomplish that with the gift of The Comforter, the Holy Spirit.

This reminds me of the old church Hymn:

"I am not ashamed to own my Lord, and to defend His Cause. Maintain the honor of His Word, till the decisive hour."

No comments other than reassertation that you are a national treasure Hugh. I've bookmarked this essay of yours.

And two more voices of reason appear: Voiceofskippy and American- coherent,intelligent and very mature.

As the resident Christian fundie, I'm not sure I can agree that Muhammad is more important to Islam than Christ to Christianity. If the eternal Word of God, 2d person of the Holy Trinity, did not become man for our sakes, there would be no Christianity, period.

"Christ" is simply the Greek translation of "Messiah", and if there is no Messiah, there can be no religion based on him.

Many thanks Hugh.

When a belief system is so totally reliant on one 'person', as Christianity, Buddhism and islam, it is disastrous to have a mo; obviously the belief system will be a sick menace to all others, just as mo was.

Anyway, thank you Hugh, again.


Christianity without Jesus Christ is ( as I heard ) like the Apollo program without the moon. It simply cant be done. The whole point of Christianity is the everlasting love of God for man made manifest in the Life, Death and Resurrection of Jesus Christ. This is as
St Paul says in 1Co 1:23 But we preach Christ crucified: unto the Jews indeed a stumblingblock, and unto the Gentiles foolishness.

Absent this Christianity is just one species of humanism and may not be worth your time.

Without Muhammad, there would be no Islam, no "Allah", no Ramadan, no silly rituals which Muhammad borrowed from the pagan Arabs. In fact, the pagan rituals of muslims survive almost intact from the pagan rock worshiping days. Had Muhammad not slaughtered his own tribe, Ar-Rahman, the original name of Muhammad's god head, would have had to create a different set of rituals.

The pagan's rock god "Allah", or "god most high (Allah Ta'ala'), was and still is the black rock Muslims now call a jewel from Allah's heavenly brothel. Muhammad didn't really "invent" islam, he just reconfigured the pagan multi-rock god worshiping one (which he was well practiced in) into a monolithic one, plagiarized some jewish fables which ironically found their way into the Koran.("Allah" wasn't too bright, putting fables in the koran.)

Because Muhammad was illiterate, he didn't know that these were fables from Jewish folklore, not from the bible. He then mistakenly incorporated them into the Koran, which was only orally repeated, not written during his lifetime.

The Koran wasn't originally written in Arabic, In fact, Arabic wasn't a written language in Muhammad's time. Bits and pieces were written down in the languages known by those who surrounded Muhammad at the time, or memorized.

Ishaq was the first to put the life of Muhammad to pen 180 years after his death. It is the first, the ONLY, and most complete and accurate written account of Muhammad's life. Even that original work is lost. Later Islamic writers like Hisham, Bukhari, Tabari,and Muslim rely on Ishaq's work, some leaving out the more despicable things Muhammad had done. It is likey the first Koran was produced from Ishaq's works as well, although none exist from Ishaq's time.
Even in Ishaq's time Arabic still wasn't a written language, so if there was a koran written around his time based on his work, it wouldn't have been written in Arabic.

It's generally thought that the first Arabic koran wasn't actually written for 800 years after Muhammad's death.

A good source for this is Rev. W. St. Clair's "THE ORIGINAL SOURCES OF THE QUR'AN"

"Rev. W. St. Clair's "THE ORIGINAL SOURCES OF THE QUR'AN" -- from a posting above


Should read "W. St. Clair Tisdall."

I agree with Hugh & VoiceOfSkippy.

When guidance is desired, Christians may well ask WWJD, while muslims ask WWMD. What is the difference? Christians would not ask this question in a toilet.

For muslims it is a part of learning absolutely no self-responsibility, learning not to think about anything, learning only to submit and follow from fear.

Fear is the heart of Islam. While Christians may ask WWJD and others may look to the stars or hug a tree, they most often seek a positive result. Good/bad. Muslims look to avoid a negative. Halal/haram, which has nothing to do with good/bad. "Muhammadanism" succeeds in obliterating the natural good/bad instincts of humanity and seeks to reward most those who battle for the primacy of Islam.

So, some muslims may be lax in their prayer times, others try to make the month of fasting special, but all, I repeat all, are living without the ethics/morality of good/bad, only with haram/halal.

Here is where Mohamed is more important in Islam than Jesus in Christianity. Jesus gave people guidance and a choice. Mohamed gave guidance and no choice.

Maybe "importance" is not the right word.

"When guidance is desired, Christians may well ask WWJD, while muslims ask WWMD. What is the difference? Christians would not ask this question in a toilet."
--- from a posting by Annakita above

Brilliantly put.

Hugh, you are right on the money; don't listen to the bible-thumpers. Jesus has very little to do with modern churchianity, it's mostly the ravings of Saul, the lunatic hallunications of "St. John", and the Pagan traditions of Europe. You know it, I know it, and the Churchians will never, ever, EVER let themselves believe the truth.

To the poster above who thinks I might wish to smite believing Christians hip and thigh:

No, I don't wish to do so. I like Christmas carols, am glad that Ratzinger is now the pope, think the 1611 edition of the Bible makes far better reading than almost anything being published today, and always look for a copy of the Book of Heaven in my Hopperesque motel after I've checked a few names for fun (Shakespeare, Dickens, George Gascoigne) in the local Book of Bell. It has taken me awhile, but now that I've familiarized myself, with a little help from James Hall and Millard Meiss and Ernst Kitzinger and people like that, I can better comprehend Christian iconography, and therefore enjoy, trips to the local pinacoteca more than I did before. And even my choice of postcards in the shop is better informed.

On the other hand, I'm a perfectly contented atheist, or at least whatever discontent I have (with most of the world) does not come from lying in bed listening to the night rote made by the withdrawing sea of faith's estranging roar. Some of my favorite close relatives are in science, and they are almost always right. I also like Martin Gardner's "Fads and Fallacies."

And now, if you don't mind, I want to get the tohu-va-bohu of the day's events out of my mind, and to do that I have to choose between what seems to be (let be be finale of seem, just this once) on offer on the night-table: John Donne's "Devotions" with its sudden jolting opening, or "What Is Mathematics?" by Courant and Robbins.

Decisions, decisions.

Exceedingly well put, Hugh. The truth of your position is evident not only from your arguments, but is clearly expressed in the sentiments of muslims worldwide, who fall (like some of our trolls) back into accusations of racism while hurling racism themselves. Very well put indeed.

Regarding the "Mohammed being central to islam" thesis: have you considered an essay?

Geoff

"Jesus has very little to do with modern churchianity"

Jesus and his gospel are everything, it's above the "church" especially those which condone sin which is an abomination to God.

Shows how little you know, and why you should not comment on ANY religion.

"..arabs, the best of people.."

"first among equals"

I recall the phrase "Ubermuslims"

Now, what was that book? Ah yes, "Animal Farm"

"All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others"

That would be the pigs, correct?

I crack me up.

Hugh, no three or four volumes are needed to defend that view.

In the book
HINDU TEMPLES
WHAT HAPPENED TO THEM
Volume II
The Islamic Evidence
(Second Enlarged Edition)
by SITA RAM GOEL
The following is written concerning the fact that Muhammad had deflected towards him the adoration formerly directed towards the ancient pagan idols:
Muslims have a popular saying in Persian language, “bã Khudã dîwãnã bãsh wa bã Muhammad hoshiyãr,” that is, one may become wild about Allãh but one should beware when it comes to Muhammad. Khudã is the Persian word for Allãh. Islam is, therefore, spelled out more correctly when it is called Muhammadanism. For, it is not Allãh but Muhammad who sits at the heart of Islam and controls its head as well.
The process of deifying the life-style of the Prophet had started in his own life-time. Margoliouth (observes, “He inherited the devotion and adulation which had hitherto been bestowed on the idols; and though he never permitted the word worship to be used of the ceremonies of which he was the object, he ere long became hedged in with a state which differed little form that which surrounded a god…” The concept of the Sunnah, that is, the practices of the Prophet, had also developed towards the end of his days.
The rightly-guided Caliphs who followed the Prophet regarded the Sunnah as a sure key to success. Quirks of history, which gave many victories to the Muslim arms in the first century AH, convinced the theologians of Islam that the Sunnah was divine in its inspiration. They became busy in collecting and collating every detail of the Prophet’s practices, from the act of coughing to that of waging holy wars and administrating what had become his exclusive kingdom. The Sunnah was soon placed on par with the Qur’ãn. “In the Qur’an,” they propounded, “Allah speaks through Muhammad; in the Sunnah, He acts through him. Thus Muhammad’s life is a visible expression of Allãh’s utterances in the Qur’ãn. God provides the divine principle, Muhammad the living pattem.” While the ulamã expounded the Sunnah to the sultãns, it was the sûfîs who practised it most meticulously.
The very first sûfî illustrated what the Sunnah stood for. Farîdu’d-Dîn Attãr gives the story of Uwaysh Qarnî who lived in the days of the Prophet but had never met or seen him. ‘Umar and ‘Alî were on a visit to Kufa when they learnt that Qarnî lived in the valley of ‘Urfa, grazing cattle and eating dry bread. They went to see him. “The honourable Uwaysh said, ‘You are Companions of the Prophet. Could you tell me which one of his sacred teeth was martyred in the battle of Uhud? Why have you not broken all your teeth out of reverence for the Prophet?’ This said, he opened his mouth and showed that all his teeth were gone. He explained, ‘When I learnt that a tooth of the Prophet had been martyred, I broke one of mine. Then I thought that perhaps some other tooth of his had been martyred. So I broke all my teeth, one after another. It is only after that that I felt at peace’. Having heard him the two Companions got awestruck, and felt convinced that this was the correct conduct…”(Shaykh Farîdu’d-Dîn Attãr, Tadhkirãt al-Awliyã‘ translated into Urdu by Maulãna Zubayr Afzal Usmãnî, Delhi n.d., p. 16.)

Yes, and also Hugh, Arabic sounds bloody awful.

This is far too simplistic a comment to warrant your lofty interest, and yes, I admit it’s a lesser complaint than, let’s say, world historical treasures being dynamited, innocent Christians being hacked to death with machetes, threats to wipe out entire countries, and other such Islamic dainties; nevertheless it definitely ranks within my top 250 complaints against Islam and Muslims.

They take away our freedom of speech, bomb our cities, riot and ban our piggy banks – all this one can sadly get used to (like droughts in Africa or twisters in Kansas) – oh but that language – never, never! It’s like a cross between clearing one’s throat, dry retching, and the muffled wails of somebody who has just stubbed their big toe.

Little wonder Islam and this atrocious vernacular are interrelated. They somehow compliment each other.

Hugh, you have hit on an extremely important point defining the difference between Christ and Muhammad. Jesus continually spoke of God as "Father" and never witnessed of himself, preferring that his faith be a living example of "the way" to know God and to receive His gift of eternal life. His parables express eternal religious truths so that human beings living in any time might be comforted by them.

Never did He seek to pin down and define the "good" in the manner of a fanatical egoist like Muhammad. Jesus was a learned rabbi who left nothing in writing for His followers to someday distort. He left us one prayer: "Your kindgom come, Your will be done, on earth as it is in Heaven," revealing God's Will to be the highest good - not some list of "thou shalt and thou shalt nots" nor a list of "we believes."

The religion of Christ is elastic and liberating not fixed and enslaving. It's a huge difference - the difference between day and night.

Getting back to Hugh’s important point, let me ask: was Islam designed to rationalize Arab plunder and oppressive rule?

From what I’ve read, Islam, historically speaking (as opposed to the mythology,) was an Arab supremacist movement. Plunder and tribute were the objective. There was little emphasis on religious conversion at first. Even with conversion, non-Arabs were outsiders to the ruling Arab power elite. This apparently changed when the Umayyad dynasty in Damascus was replaced by the Abbasid dynasty in Baghdad around 750 AD. At this point, Persian access to power required a change in emphasis from an ethnic to a religious identity within Islam.

This is what I’ve read but I’d like to know more about this early history. Any references come to mind?

Rebecca, well done and thank you for the above.

chaz:

I suspect anti-Semitism preceded Mohammed's arrival by a long-shot. Some of the most virulent anti-Semites are middle eastern Christians who hold the Jews fully accountable for Christ's crucifixion and I'm sure that's not a recent development.

I have no desire to offend Christian posters here, but the Jews of that era were never really given the opportunity to answer the charge any more than the Jewish tribes of the Hejaz who were massacred by Mohammed and his accomplices. Should not accounts that suggest this was done entirely at the behest of the Jewish community and had nada to do with the notoriously benevolent Romans who were previously so well known for their tolerance of any threats to their control be viewd as just a tad questionable?

Waterdragon~ being Christian, I am not offended :P These things are part of history and to be learned from (and Never repeated).

The anti-semitism you mention was pretty much set in place by the time Rome fell. It might Not have been, if one particular bit of infighting in the Church had gone to Pelagius instead of Augustine... but too late for that now.

Of course, I hadn't thought through my objection to Hugh's Mohammed-vs.-Christ comment -- specifically, the totalitarian ritualization of life centered around Mohammed, down to the smallest details and up to the sordidest deeds.







Not Peace But A Sword by Robert SpencerDid Muhammad Exist? The Muslim Brotherhood in America, by Robert SpencerIslamophobia: Thoughtcrime of the Totalitarian FutureMuslim Persecution of Christians, by Robert Spencer Obama and IslamThe Ground Zero Mosque: Second Wave of the 9/11 Attacks
The Complete Infidel’s Guide to the Koran


Stealth Jihad


The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam


The Truth About Muhammad


What they’re saying about Robert Spencer
“My comrade-in-arms, my pal, my buddy.”
Oriana Fallaci

“Robert Spencer incarnates intellectual courage when, all over the world, governments, intellectuals, churches, universities and media crawl under a hegemonic Universal Caliphate’s New Order. His achievement in the battle for the survival of free speech and dignity of man will remain as a fundamental monument to the love of, and the self-sacrifice for, liberty.”
Bat Ye’or

“Robert Spencer is indefatigable. He is keeping up the good fight long after many have already given up. I do not know what we would do without him. I appreciate all the intelligence and courage it takes to keep going despite the appeasement of the West.”
Ibn Warraq

“America's most informed, fearless, and compelling voice on modern jihadism.”
Andrew C. McCarthy, Senior Fellow at National Review Institute

“Robert Spencer is the leading voice of scholarship and reason in a world gone mad. If the West is to be saved, we will owe Robert Spencer an incalculable debt.”
Pamela Geller, Atlas Shrugs

"The consummate Islam critic and expert." — Bruce Bawer

“Over the years, we have become friends, and I have received his assistance on several pieces of legislation I proposed.”
Former Congressman Tom Tancredo

“Few people are capable of applying scholarship, analytical reasoning, and objectivity to their topic -- while simultaneously being readable and witty -- as can Robert Spencer.”
Raymond Ibrahim

“A national treasure...The acclaimed scholar of Islam.”
Frank Gaffney, Center for Security Policy

“I am indeed honored to call him my friend.”
Brad Thor, novelist

“A top American analyst of Islam....A serious scholar...I learn from him.”
Daniel Pipes

“A brilliant scholar and writer.”
Douglas Murray

"One of my best teachers."
Ashraf Ramelah, Voice of the Copts

“Thank God there’s at least one man with balls left in the West.”
Kathy Shaidle, Five Feet of Fury

“I read people like [Mark Steyn] and Bob Spencer and the rest of them, and I say, ‘Boortz, you’re pretending you’re an author. These people really are. They really write some entertaining, some standup stuff.’”
Neal Boortz

“Robert Spencer is the Stephen King of Jihad.”
Chris Gaubatz, Muslim Mafia

“Armed with facts and fearlessness, Spencer stands up for Western civilization.”
Michelle Malkin

“Widely read in conservative foreign policy circles.”
New York Times

“Widely read in many quarters in Washington.”
Washington Post

“A canny operative who likely has the inside track on the State Department’s Middle East affairs desk should the tea party win the White House.”
New York Magazine

“A hero of the American right.”
Karen Armstrong

"The leading anti-Islamic intellectual in the United States....The go-to Islam expert for the right wing."
Salon Magazine

“Robert Spencer is an Edward Said turned upside down.”
Stephen Suleyman Schwartz

“One of the nation's most notorious Islamophobes.”
Hamas-linked CAIR

"Geller and Spencer are probably the most important propagandizing Islamophobes in the world. These people's voices speak very loudly — not just here in the United States but overseas."
Heidi Beirach, Southern Poverty Law Center

“Satanic ignoramus.”
Khaleel Mohammed

“The Likud anti-Christ.”
Dar al-Hayat newspaper (Saudi Arabia)

“Zionist Crusader, missionary of hate, counter-Islam consultant.”
Al-Qaeda’s Adam Gadahn, “Azzam the American”



Follow me on Twitter
facebook islam
RSS feed

Monthly Archives



Donate
Jihad Watch is a 501 (c) 3 organization. Donations are tax-deductible.


Robert Spencer debates on The Quran Teaches WarVideo: Robert Spencer on CPAC Breitbart News
SIOAFreedom Defense InitiativeJihad Watch VideosAmerican Freedom Law Center
Note: Listing here does not imply endorsement of every view expressed at every linked site.

» ACT for America
» Always on Watch
» American Center for Democracy
» American Coptic Association
» American Council for Kosovo
» American Freedom Alliance
» American Freedom Law Center
» American Islamic Forum for Democracy
» American Sheepdogs
» American Thinker
» Americans Against Hate
» Americans for Legal Immigration
» Amerisrael
» Amillennialist Contra Mundum
» Annaqed
» A New Dark Age Is Dawning
» Answering Islam
» Answering Muslims
» Anti-CAIR
» Apostates of Islam
» Aramaic Broadcasting Network (ABN)
» Armies of Liberation
» Assyrian International News Agency
» Atlas Shrugs
» Atour — The State of Assyria
» Australian Islamist Monitor
» Biafra Nation
» Blazing Cat Fur
» Bosch Fawstin
» Brad Thor
» Brussels Journal
» CAIR Watch
» Campus Watch
» Caroline Glick
» Christians Under Attack
» Citizen Warrior
» Coalition for the Defense of Human Rights
» Conservative Nation News
» Copts.com
» Creeping Sharia
» Daniel Pipes
» David Horowitz Freedom Center
» The David Project
» David Thompson
» David Yerushalmi Law
» D. C. Watson
» Dearborn Underground
» DEBKAfile
» Dhimmitude.org
» Dry Bones
» Ellis Washington Report
» Europe News
» Eye On Islam
» Ezra Levant
» Faith Freedom International
» Father Zakaria
» Federale
» Five Feet of Fury
» Foundation for Democracy in Iran
» Free Congress Foundation
» The Free Copts
» Freedom Defense Initiative
» FrontPage Magazine.com
» Geert Wilders
» Genocide1915.info
» Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center
» History of Jihad
» Hizb ut-Tahrir Watch
» Honest Reporting
» Honor Killings
» Human Rights Congress for Bangladesh Minorities
» India Defence
» Infidel Blogger’s Alliance
» Infidels Are Cool
» The Intelligence Summit
» International Analyst Network
» International Free Press Society
» Internet Haganah
» The Investigative Project on Terrorism
» IOwnTheWorld.com
» IranPressNews
» Iran va Jahan
» Islam Review
» Islam Speaks
» Islam Versus Europe
» Islam Watch
» Islamic Terrorism in India
» Islamist Watch — Middle East Forum
» Israel Matzav
» JihadOnBuddhists.org
» Kejda Gjermani
» KRSI: Radio Sedaye Iran
» Liberated
» Logan's Warning
» Looking At the Left
» Mahdi Watch
» Mapping Sharia
» Mark Steyn
» Martin Kramer
» MEMRI TV
» Middle East Facts
» Middle East Quarterly
» Middle-East-Info.org
» Middle East Media Research Institute
» Middle East Review of International Affairs (MERIA)
» Militant Islam Monitor
» Morning Star
» Muhammad Tube
» The Muslim Issue
» Muslim World Today
» Myths and Facts
» National Vietnam & Gulf War Veterans Coalition
» NewsReal Blog
» No Mosques At Ground Zero
» Nonie Darwish
» Northeast Intelligence Network
» Occidental Jihadist
» One Jerusalem
» Open Speech
» Operation Give
» Operation Gratitude
» Organiser
» Orwellian Culture
» Palestinian Media Watch
» PamelaGeller.com
» Panun Kashmir
» Pedestrian Infidel
» The People's Cube
» The People of the Book
» Persecution Project
» Political Islam
» Politically Incorrect
» Politiskt Inkorrekt
» Q Society of Australia
» Radio Farda
» Radio Jihad
» RAWA: Revolutionary Association of the Women of Afghanistan
» Raymond Ibrahim
» Red Alerts
» Refugee Resettlement Watch
» Religion of Peace
» Republican Riot
» Reuters Middle East Watch
» The “Reverend” Jim Sutter
» SANE: Society of Americans for National Existence
» The Second Draft
» Shire Network News
» SITE Intelligence Group
» Small Wars Journal
» Smoke-Filled World
» The Snooper Report
» Snow Report Blog
» StandWithUs
» Steve Lackner
» The Stiletto Blog
» STOP! Honour Killings
» Sultan Knish
» Tell the Children the Truth
» Terrorism Awareness Project
» Theodore’s World
» Tom Gross Media
» Translating Jihad
» Una via per Oriana
» Undaunted
» United States Central Command
» Urban Infidel
» Walid Shoebat
» Winds of Jihad
» Women Against Shariah
» World Council for the Cedars Revolution
» Yid With Lid
» Z Street
» Zilla of the Resistance
» Zionist Conspiracy
Crucified Again by Raymond IbrahimDavid LittmanOriana Fallaci Thousands of Deadly Terror Attacks Since 9/11The incredible Reza Aslan automated insult generator! iGoogle Gadget
Site Meter