| FrontPageMag.com | By Robert Spencer | By Hugh Fitzgerald | Books | Jihad Watch | Islam 101 | Qur'an Blog | Raymond Ibrahim | Robert Spencer |  |
|
|
|||||||||||
|
|
According to Aafaq, the dean of student affairs at American International University, Abu Hamza Hijji, responded, writing that Allah the Most Merciful forbids praying for mercy for the non-Muslim dead, or even for the non-Muslim living, and that it is only permitted to pray that they be rightly guided. He added that what happened was a sad occurrence, but that does not give Muslims the right to transgress the laws of Allah the Most Merciful. – from this article
News of this reply, by the Muslim dean at American University, should be spread far and wide.
It will shock many, and it will attract the attention of a great many, for it connects to an event that has, and will receive, a great deal of coverage. Merely pointing out what is the standard Muslim view of not praying for Infidels, when those Infidels have just been murdered, will allow for a discussion of a much larger question. But think of the hypotheticals. Did Muslims pray for the victims of the 9/ll attacks? Of course not (many celebrated, in fact). What if the attacker at Virginia Tech had been a Muslim? Would Muslims then have prayed for those killed? Answer: of course not.
What does this answer from the American University dean point up? (He is no doubt chagrined that an Arabic-speaker was eavesdropping and could write about it, as Mohammed Ibn Guadi has.) It points up how, in Islam, there is a complete division of the world between Believer and Infidel. Until someone is following "the right path," he has no claim to sympathy or loyalty of any kind. That is owed by Believers only to Believers. There is nothing of the human fellow-feeling that has developed in all other religions, so that one can certainly sympathize with, and help protect, others not of the same faith -- see Liviu Librescu, holding the door against the gunman with his body, so his students could escape.
In Islam, loyalty -- one's sole loyalty -- is owed to fellow members of the umma al-islamiyya. One does not owe, one is wrong even to think about owing, any true loyalty to Infidels or to an Infidel nation-state. One can go through some motions, when it may be deemed advisable in order to protect and promote Muslim interests -- but a good Muslim will never offer even such an outward display save to prevent too much inquiry by Infidels about the doctrines of Islam in a society still run by Infidels.
And Muslim loyalty must always be offered up to this trans-national community. That is why so few Muslims serve in the military -- excluding Black Muslims, whose creed and attitudes are not in all respects orthodox (though more and more attempts are made to make it so). There is also a handful of orthodox Muslims who do serve. Surely some are no longer true Muslims, and others are hoping to employ the training and knowledge of military techniques in ways that will or could be used to further Islam. This has been written about on Muslim websites.
Those engaged in the sometimes frustrating and certainly difficult task of convincing Infidels of what Islam inculcates, and above all else, what Islam inculcates about the view Believers must take toward Infidels, should recognize that this offers a revealing view into this world. For the American University’s Muslim dean was simply expressing a view that is central to Islam, a belief-system that originated in the need for conquering Arabs to have an alternative to the faiths of those far richer, more advanced, and above all more numerous peoples, Christians and Jews and then Zoroastrians. It is fascinating that the only person who objected to this perfectly standard Muslim view was a convert ("revert" in Islam, for if we are all born Muslims, we can only "revert" to it) -- that is, someone who, as happens carefully with such new converts, did not realize much of what Islam is all about. In manuals of Da'wa, Muslims are told to be careful about revealing everything at once. In a sense, they are mimicking the slow unveiling of the successive revelations. One suspects that they do this because any potential convert, if he or she was given the full truth about Islamic tenets before being accepted hurriedly into the faith while scarcely knowing much more beyond the five pillars of ritual (shehada, zakat, salat, Ramadan, hajj), would reject it. The new converts are then watched over carefully by the imam and others in the mosque, who take it upon themselves to monitor the "progress" of the new convert -- with great sympathetic attention, with ostentatious kindnesses, with a "welcoming into the fold" that makes some poor souls so very, very grateful. They have found, they think, At Last the answer to their Spiritual Search.
What this article reveals is nothing new to Muslims or to those non-Muslims who have studied Islam and refuse to lie about it. That leaves out the espositos and armstrongs -- of whom there are so many. But it will shock many, and that is a good thing. For in that shocking, other truths may come to light about what Islam teaches, and why it matters that more people know about this, grasp it, sooner rather than later -- later, when it is too late.
Finally, what will happen to that dean at American University? Will he be fired or asked to resign? He should be. And if he is not, then the alumni of American University, and the students, should demand it of the administration. For it is clear that had the gunman killed three dozen students at American University, the current Dean would have counseled Muslims that it is wrong to pray for those dead. That should get attention.
And what can that Dean do? Deny that that is the doctrine of Islam? Not at this point.
Make a case about this. Make a huge case.
Posted by Hugh at April 20, 2007 9:32 AM
Print this entry
| Email this entry
| Digg this
| del.icio.us
I heard that one of the students murdered was a muslim. So this imam that led the convocation at VT, his prayers were only for this murdered muslim?
I wonder what the families of the other 31 murdered students would feel had they known that.
![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/nav-commenters.gif)
at April 20, 2007 10:18 AM
"One can go through some motions, when it may be deemed advisable in order to protect and promote Muslim interests -...."
see: Iraq, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Egypt, Jordan, Qatar, Kuwait, Syria, et al ...ad nauseum...
at April 20, 2007 10:41 AM
HUGH: "News of this reply, by the Muslim dean at American University, should be spread far and wide."
...with emphasis on the fact that this is a relatively mainstream Muslim view.
It's imperative that we shoot down the "tiny minority of extremists" canard. Yes, those Muslims who engage in terrorist violence may be a tiny minority (although in this case, the word "tiny" is somewhat relative), but attitudes of supramacism and intolerance are not at all anomolous among Muslims.
Posted by: Cornelius at April 20, 2007 10:59 AM
"For if ye love them which love you, what reward have ye? do not even the [tax collectors] the same? And if ye salute your brethren only, what do ye more than others? do not even the [tax collectors] so?" -- Matthew 5:46-47
"Tax collectors," indeed. Would it now be "jizya collectors?"
Posted by: gus3 at April 20, 2007 11:42 AM
Is this the American University in D.C.? I have a 15 year old son who was thinking about applying. If it is, guess that's one trip we won't be making. Thanks in advance.
Posted by: MP at April 20, 2007 12:30 PM
Somebody please tell me again WHY is Islam in the United States of America? And why are we Americans continuing to permit this abomination be practiced on US soil?
I really have no idea why Islam is operating here and why or how it continues to evade the radar of US legal statutes (which could provide sufficient legal ammunition to get it outlawed in about 15 minutes if we had anyone with half a brain in the Supreme Court these days).
Posted by: pythagoras at April 20, 2007 2:24 PM
Hugh said
What if the attacker at Virginia Tech had been a Muslim?
I'm curious, what religion did he practice? I've been watching the news reports fairly carefully; they mentioned that the attacker talked about "his own" religion in his manifesto and videos, but never got around to telling us what "his own" religion is. Not that it's relevant, I'm just curious.
In this story (chosen randomly, the same quote could have been pulled from any of the identically non-informative news reports), we read:
As experts pored over the videotaped rant and the twisted writings of the gunman, Gov. Timothy Kaine declared Friday a statewide day of mourning for the victims, and parents urged everyone to focus on the young people cut down in the attack, not the killer.
It has been 4 days since the 8-page note explaining the motivation of the killer was found, and experts are still poring over it. By my calculation (assuming no overtime is being pulled on investigating this event, just working 9 to 5), that works out to approximately 0.9375 words-per-minute. Most third-graders can read an 8-page document in much less than one hour. If the words are meaningless gibberish, then what harm can come from releasing them? Why did NBC carefully choose, under direction of the FBI, to release only 5 of the pages? Why release 5 pages of gibberish, and not the rest? What is on the video file titled "am al qaeda"?
While not intending to "focus on the killer", I'm still a little curious as to what he said his motivation was. Don't show us photos of him holding weapons (that would inflame the emotions of the survivors), don't show us the same video clips of him mumbling, just show us what he wrote.
Posted by: special_guest at April 20, 2007 2:29 PM
MP,
I think it's the "American International University" in London.
(At their website, however, I could not find an "Abu Hamza Hijj" -- though that doesn't necessarily mean anything: it could be my poor searching skills, or their poor construction of their website at fault.)
If it is the right university, take a look at their Dean's list:
http://www.richmond.ac.uk/resources/student-resources/deans-list-fall06.asp
Most of the names on there are probably non-Muslims, and if there were a similar attack on the American International University of London, their own Muslim Dean would presumably not pray for them and their families.
at April 20, 2007 2:39 PM
My impression is that this "American International University" is an online diploma mill incorporated in Dominica, with some sort of connection (surprise) to saudi arabia.
notice the logo of "the saudi arabian quality council" on the bottom right, with the palm tree.
Posted by: del at April 20, 2007 2:54 PM
On the same link that del provided, under "Contact us", there is this:
Financial, Administrative & Academic Oversight Agents:
UDEX Company for Higher Education Services
Cairo, Arab Republic of Egypt
So, the administrative offices are in Egypt.
Posted by: special_guest at April 20, 2007 3:08 PM
Yaa, with prayers like that who needs a God?
Posted by: MZ at April 20, 2007 3:43 PM
I'll go post this where it should be excuse me, Ya all! Still, above reading sucks! Please someone save ME!!!
Posted by: MZ at April 20, 2007 3:47 PM
"Allah the Most Merciful forbids praying for mercy for the non-Muslim dead"
LOL.
Posted by: Alexander at April 20, 2007 4:18 PM
"the saudi arabian quality council"
lol, the world gets more like a bad novel everyday
Posted by: Ian at April 20, 2007 4:29 PM
Naseem and Abdullah seem not to care to comment on this topic. I, for one, would love to read their sentiments. For pedagogical value, of course.
Posted by: Concerned Citizen at April 20, 2007 7:14 PM
Until someone is following "the right path," he has no claim to sympathy or loyalty of any kind. That is owed by Believers only to Believers. There is nothing of the human fellow-feeling that has developed in all other religions, so that one can certainly sympathize with, and help protect, others not of the same faith -- see Liviu Librescu, holding the door against the gunman with his body, so his students could escape.
you can find the answer in the appalling statement belowMaududi likewise wrote that non-Muslims have “absolutely no right to seize the reins of power in any part of God’s earth, nor to direct the collective affairs of human beings according to their own misconceived doctrines.” If they do, “the believers would be under an obligation to do their utmost to dislodge them from political power and to make them live in subservience to the Islamic way of life.”
But Qutb and Maududi did not originate these ideas. They are an extrapolation of Qur’anic passages such as 9:29, which assumes that Muslims will wield state power over Jews and Christians, exacting from them a poll tax (jizya) and making sure that they pay it “with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.” There is no concept in the Qur’an, Islamic tradition, or Islamic law of non-Muslims living as equals with Muslims in an Islamic state: Muslims must be in a superior position
Posted by: godisnotallha at April 20, 2007 9:07 PM
Until someone is following "the right path," he has no claim to sympathy or loyalty of any kind. That is owed by Believers only to Believers. There is nothing of the human fellow-feeling that has developed in all other religions, so that one can certainly sympathize with, and help protect, others not of the same faith -- see Liviu Librescu, holding the door against the gunman with his body, so his students could escape.
you can find the answer in the appalling statement belowMaududi likewise wrote that non-Muslims have “absolutely no right to seize the reins of power in any part of God’s earth, nor to direct the collective affairs of human beings according to their own misconceived doctrines.” If they do, “the believers would be under an obligation to do their utmost to dislodge them from political power and to make them live in subservience to the Islamic way of life.”
But Qutb and Maududi did not originate these ideas. They are an extrapolation of Qur’anic passages such as 9:29, which assumes that Muslims will wield state power over Jews and Christians, exacting from them a poll tax (jizya) and making sure that they pay it “with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.” There is no concept in the Qur’an, Islamic tradition, or Islamic law of non-Muslims living as equals with Muslims in an Islamic state: Muslims must be in a superior position
Posted by: godisnotallha at April 20, 2007 9:09 PM
,Maududi likewise wrote that non-Muslims have “absolutely no right to seize the reins of power in any part of God’s earth, nor to direct the collective affairs of human beings according to their own misconceived doctrines.” If they do, “the believers would be under an obligation to do their utmost to dislodge them from political power and to make them live in subservience to the Islamic way of life. “the believers would be under an obligation to do their utmost to dislodge them from political power and to make them live in subservience to the Islamic way of life.”
and there you have it but that they feel that non-Muslims do not have a right to obtain political power over Muslims or as they put it to interfere with affairs of humans
But Qutb and Maududi did not originate these ideas. They are an extrapolation of Qur’anic passages such as 9:29, which assumes that Muslims will wield state power over Jews and Christians, exacting from them a poll tax (jizya) and making sure that they pay it “with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.” There is no concept in the Qur’an, Islamic tradition, or Islamic law of non-Muslims living as equals with Muslims in an Islamic state: Muslims must be in a superior positionlets seehere is that
Posted by: godisnotallha at April 20, 2007 9:49 PM
OT but DON'T VOTE FOR LE PEN. HE IS NOT ANTI-MUSLIM. On the contrary, he is trying to garner votes from muslims.
Phillipped De Villiers is the only anti-muslim candidate.
Posted by: Voltaire at April 20, 2007 11:20 PM
An old Jewish professor, sacrifices his own life so that the young students of other faiths may have a chance of survival.
Abu Hamza Hijji, another Islamic professor. forbids Muslims to even pray for the souls of the young victims who are not Muslims.
Nothing better expresses the differences between Judaism and Islam.
at April 20, 2007 11:26 PM
In the aftermath ofthe Asian tsunami muslims wrote in for online fatwas asking whether it was Islamically halal to donate to tsunami relief charities.
The predictable fatwa issued advised that it was only permissable to donate if the donor was certain his money would go only to Muslims and no other.
This response has changed my whole attitude to who my charitable dollars go to.
It may seem like "Magruder's Law" in action but too bad.
at April 21, 2007 2:24 AM
Well... this guy at least said don't pray for them at all. In our religion class in the school in Iran my religion teacher used to say that not only we should not pray for them to invoke any blessing upon them, but we should pray that God either bring them to the right path (e.i. make them convert to Islam) or kill them and take them off of the face of the earth! And believe me; she was very very sincere about it!I was about 13 years old when I heard this in my class in Iran. Not only that but another religion teacher for another grade used to say that after Muslims make ablution (ritual washing) before the Namaz (Muslim's 5 time daily prayer) they should be careful not to touch some especial things before they can perform their Namaz. Touching these things will nullify their ablution and that means they should make the ablution all over again before they could be allowed to pray, otherwise their prayers will not be accepted to God. These things that nullify ablution are called Najis (meaning dirty and impure) and they are (in no specific order) :1. excrement, urine, dog, pork, alcohol, blood, and a Kafir(atheist), and a Jew or Armenian (Christian minority in Iran and Turkey and many other places). Once you accidentally or purposefully touch these things your prayer will not be accepted unless you go and wash again and pray again. Besides the place you perform your Namaz should be Pak (which is the opposite of Najis, meaning pure and clean) and in order to keep one's home which is also a place for performing Namaz clean one better wash oneself well after going to toilet, never adopt a pet, or have alcohol or blood spilled around, or invite a non-Muslim to one's house.Otherwise one's home will become Najis and the prayers performed there will not be accepted to God. These are just a few things that we learned in our religion classes at school in that Hellhole called "the Islamic Republic of Iran"!
Posted by: ritamalik at April 21, 2007 7:01 AM
ritamalik, I hope you continue to share your experiences with us. You have first-hand knowledge, it helps us to understand.
Posted by: special_guest at April 21, 2007 11:49 AM
Hugh wrote:
"in Islam, there is a complete division of the world between Believer and Infidel. Until someone is following "the right path," he has no claim to sympathy or loyalty of any kind. That is owed by Believers only to Believers. There is nothing of the human fellow-feeling that has developed in all other religions"
Hugh - you are very indulgent towards other religions. However, these doctrines, which I agree are shocking, are not unique to Islam.
The Orthodox Christian church forbids its followers from praying for non-Orthodox people (including Catholics and Protestants).
The exception to this is that Orthodox Christians are allowed to pray for non-Orthodox people to become Orthodox, just as, in the story above, Muslims are only allowed to pray for non-Muslims to convert to Islam.
The Orthodox Christian attitude to prayer for the dead is also identical to the Islamic one. As it is too late for the dead to convert to the 'right way', it is strictly forbidden to pray for those who died as non-Orthodox believers.
I personally find this doctrine impossible to stomach. But it is the official teaching of the Orthodox Church, as this link attests:
http://www.orthodoxinfo.com/praxis/prayer_nonorth.aspx
at April 21, 2007 1:14 PM
special_guest, I am glad if I could be of any help in our battle to sanitize the world from those who spread violence and hatred in the name of God. But the good news regarding our religious class is that neither I nor any of my classmates took those nonsense that were taught to us in religion class seriously, and all of us after the lessons where laughing and mocking the ignorant and fanatical religion teachers. Their ugly worldview and hateful words only brought them down in our esteem and never affected our view about religious minorities and non-Muslims. At least in our classroom and I assume in thousands of other classrooms as well!
Posted by: ritamalik at April 21, 2007 4:35 PM
I wonder if the Orthodox church got their ideas from the Muslims? Both Greece and parts of Russia were at one time conquered by Islam, and they may have absorbed Islamic practices. This can be seen in Islamic countries today, where dhimmis can be heard using "Allah" in regular speech.
It could also be a defensive measure. Praying for non-believers means praying for the health and welfare of your Islamic overlords, not the attitude most conducive to your defeating them.
Posted by: aynrandgirl at April 21, 2007 8:52 PM
"The Orthodox Christian attitude to prayer for the dead is also identical to the Islamic one. As it is too late for the dead to convert to the 'right way', it is strictly forbidden to pray for those who died as non-Orthodox believers.
I personally find this doctrine impossible to stomach. But it is the official teaching of the Orthodox Church, as this link attests:
http://www.orthodoxinfo.com/praxis/prayer_nonorth.aspx"
Posted by schmegel.
Schmegel, you should have read further. While it forbids the orthodox from public prayer it also specifically says they can offer private prayers and that they'll leave it to God to decide who gets into heaven, whether they were believers or unbelievers during their life. I think you'll agree that this is in fact quite different and not identical at all to islamic theology.
at April 22, 2007 2:38 PM
In every Orthodox Liturgy, the priest or deacon must pray for the civil authorities "that they may be strengthened in every good deed" regardless of whether they are Orthodox or not. This prayer may be for "the president, the armed forces, and the civil authorities" or similar words. We know the president and most soldiers are not Orthodox. In the UK, they pray for the queen and the Orthodox Churches in Jordan pray the same prayer for King Abdullah by name.
The litany also has prayers for "travellers by land or sea" without any limitation only to the Orthodox. I assume that even the writer of the article you linked above says these prayers during liturgy. Perhaps he should have paid attention to the words.
at April 25, 2007 10:56 AM
Comments are turned off and archived for this entry.
(Note: The Comments section is provided in the interests of free speech only. It is mostly unmoderated, but comments that are off-topic, offensive, slanderous, or otherwise annoying stand a chance of being deleted. The fact that any comment remains on the site IN NO WAY constitutes an endorsement by Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch, or by Robert Spencer or any other Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch writer, of any view expressed, fact alleged, or link provided in that comment.)