“Tolerant al-Andalus”? Really? The History of Jihad From Muhammad to ISIS contains verses the Muslim jurist Abu Ishaq wrote in 1066 to the Berber king Badis about Granada’s Muslim ruler, who had dared to choose a Jew as his secretary:
He has chosen an infidel as his secretary
when he could, had he wished, have chosen a Believer.
Through him, the Jews have become great and proud
and arrogant— they, who were among the most abject….
They collect all the revenues,
they munch and they crunch.
They dress in the finest clothes
while you wear the meanest….
Their chief ape has marbled his house
and led the finest spring water to it.
Our affairs are now in his hands
and we stand at his door….
He laughs at Allah and our religion….
Hasten to slaughter him as an offering,
sacrifice him, for he is a precious thing….
Do not consider it a breach of faith to kill them,
the breach of faith would be to let them carry on….
The Muslims of Granada heeded Abu Ishaq’s call. On December 30, 1066, rioting Muslims, enraged by the humiliation of a Jew ruling over Muslims, murdered four thousand Jews in Granada. The maddened Muslim mob crucified the Jewish secretary, Joseph ibn Naghrila and plundered the homes of the Jews.
Click here to preorder The History of Jihad, the only comprehensive one-volume history of jihad in the English language, and one of the few books that elucidates Islamic antisemitism, including the Islamic world’s response to the State of Israel, as one aspect of that jihad.
Timothy says
The portrait is intense.
mortimer says
Jihad Watch followers should get and read:
The Myth of the Andalusian Paradise: Muslims, Christians, and Jews under Islamic Rule in Medieval Spain Hardcover – Feb 22 2016
by Dario Fernandez-Morera (Author)
JawsV says
They should also get and read:
“Jihad in the West: Muslim Conquests From the 7th to the 21st Centuries” by Paul Fregosi (1998). 415 pp.
A comprehensive and well-written history published 3 years before 9/11. A lot on Spain.
Nour says
Historian Bernard Lewis said that “Diatribes such as Abu Ishaq’s and massacres such as that in Granada in 1066 are of rare occurrence in Islamic history.”
I don’t think it’s rational to judge an 800 year rule based on one single incident.
Do you have an answer for this: “Why is it that Jews were expelled from Spain after the European triumph over the Muslim rule in 1492?”
The European says
Bernard Lewis is a biased historian. He is very fond of Islam, and he always tries to minimize the devastating effects which Muslim rule had had on those who were subjugated to sharia law.
For example, he denies that such a thing as Muslim slave trade had ever existed – in spite of ample counterevidence.
Only recently did he claim that the Armenian genocide (1915-1922) had never happened. Of course, he can’t deny the mass killings of Armenians at the hand of the Turks, but he does not admit that these killings were planned, organized and carried out by the Turkish government. Here again, ample counterevidence demonstrates beyond doubt that these killings were genocidal in character. and the doing of Turkish officials and statesmen.
When Lewis writes about Islam, he is not trustworthy.
The mass murder of these 4000 Jews in Granada in 1066 is by no means a very rare occurrence. Even in Spain, Islam had a “proud” tradition of bigotry and tyranny, harassment and subjugation. If you want to know more about the rule of Islam in Spain, you should read Dário Fernandez-Morera, a Spanish scholar who debunked the myth of peaceful and harmonious coexistence between Muslims, Christians and Jews in medieval Spain ( “The Myth of the Andalusian Paradise” is a good read).
Your last question seems to imply a couple of other questions:” Why didn’t the Muslims expel the Jews from Spain during their long rule over Spain?” and “Why did Isabel and Fernando expel them, just a little time after their conquest of Granada?” and “After all, wasn’t Islam more tolerant in Spain than Christianity?”
Well, the answer is quite simple.
First: Jews were only a tiny minority in medieval Spain. Thus, they were no threat to Muslim rule.
Second: Jews were dhimmis, and as dhimmis they were obliged to pay a poll-tax, the so-called jizya. As the Jews were often quite wealthy merchants and traders the poll-tax they had to pay was very high; and why should the caliph not fleece a well-to-do Jewry? It was was not his interest to expel them, but he wanted to gain financially from them
Third: Wherever Islam has established its rule, Muslims were not so much interested in mass conversions of non-believers, for, if they converted to Islam, they were exonerated from the heavy poll-tax which was vital to Muslim economy, since Muslims did not have to pay heavy taxes. Muslims were fine with Jews, as long as they paid the protection money (the jizya can be seen as money Jews and other dhimmis had to pay, if they wanted themselves and their property to be safe, yes, a kind of racketeering), were obedient to sharia law and tried not to convert Muslims to Judaism. The rule of Islam did not so much depend on religious homogeneity, but on sharia law which allowed Muslims to subjugate non-believers and to exploit them economically.
Fourth: Although Jews were not expelled from Spain during Islamic rule, many Jews fled from Islamic apartheid in Spain to France and Germany ( especially around the times of the first crusade), because they were better treated in those countries than their homeland.
Fifth: Contrary to Islam, the Spanish thought that the unity of the state was predicated on religious homogeneity, and since the Jews didn’t convert to Christianity and those who had adopted the Christian faith were often -and very often unjustly- regarded as crypto-Jews, they were perceived as a threat to Spanish rule and had to be expelled.
No, Islam was not more tolerant, Muslims just had other priorities.
Nour says
According to Alferd Butler in his book, “Muslim Conquest of Egypt”, the Jizya tax was a small amount of money every year. Muslim jurists required adult, free, sane males among the dhimma community to pay the jizya while exempting women, children, elders, handicapped, the ill, the insane, monks, hermits, slaves,and non-Muslim foreigners who only temporarily reside in Muslim lands.
There is a lot of noise about this tax and people tend to ignore that it was a defense tax: non-muslims didn’t have to serve in the Muslim army.
b.a. freeman says
OK, there was no way to reply to Nour, so i’m replying to The European instead.
according to “the reliance of the traveler” (“umdat al-salik”) section o11.4, the minimum jizya payment is 4.235 gm. of gold per male person per year, and the maximum is “whatever both sides agree upon.” of course, this is an english translation from which i am quoting, which was translated by keller, a pious muslim who wants to cast islam in a good light, so given past practices of the caliphs of various times, i would say that this is a deliberate mistranslation. most likely, if arabic sources are consulted, the caliph can take as much as he deems necessary to enrich his own coffers and humiliate the hated kuffar, and whether or not they pay it, he may revoke the “contract” at any time and order mass murders. since when have kuffar been able to negotiate jizya? remember, this is a protection racket; the mafia probably learned that business from the muslims when they ran sicily for 260 years.
sorry, Nour, not buying it.
Flavius Claudius Iulianus says
Nicely put “The European.”
I posted the following on this site on May 1, 2018 regarding the “sanitization” of Mohammadan history and how it was aided and abetted by many English speaking historians:
“A varnished, rosy picture of Mohammadism was painted by Wahhabist writers who put Saladin, the occupation of Spain, etc in a glowing light of a heaven-on-earth. These “histories” and original Arab source documents were then translated, without any critical thought regarding veracity, into English by the Oxfordian Islamic enthusiasts (“hobbyists”). (Cambridge also had a hand in contributing to the promulgation of these lies.) These hobbyists, called “Islamicist” at the time, took every word to be the truth. They naively eschewed all scholarly verifications.
Since then, these “histories” have deceived most who study the subject. Only recently have comparisons been done against primary sources to find that these translations are little more than lollypop histories. Even then, some historians hold these deceptive stories close to their hearts and refuse to see the true history of the savagery of Mohammadism and dhimmitude.”
kuriakose says
Another reason is that some muslim rulers understood that the Jew (and Christian) made for more reliable and trustworthy and intelligent administrators and workers than the muhameddans. Like many muslim countries today that seem prosperous, check out the statistics for the work force.
For nour, what is the meaning of jizyah? A painful and humiliating tax, to be paid and be humiliated while paying it. Small tax indeed! Don’t you know the pact of Umar?
HugoHackenbush says
Many Jews attained positions within the Muslim bureaucracy and were see to be in league with the Muslim rulers. They were therefore seen as a threat and potential “fifth column”. This is not to excuse the actions of Ferdinand and Isabella regarding the Jews. See the following (a great read): https://www.amazon.com/Myth-Andalusian-Paradise-Dar%C3%ADo-Fern%C3%A1ndez-Morera-ebook/dp/B01AL2SP76/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1527467965&sr=8-1&keywords=myth+of+the+andalusian+paradise
gravenimage says
Hideous apologist for Muslim savagery Nour wrote:
Historian Bernard Lewis said that “Diatribes such as Abu Ishaq’s and massacres such as that in Granada in 1066 are of rare occurrence in Islamic history.”
I don’t think it’s rational to judge an 800 year rule based on one single incident.
………………………….
“A single incident”–what *absolute crap*., The whole point is that Islam is full of hideous incidents like this one. In the Pact of Umar–the ur document of dhimmitude–it states that no Infidel is allowed to hold a position of power in any Muslim state.
More:
Do you have an answer for this: “Why is it that Jews were expelled from Spain after the European triumph over the Muslim rule in 1492?”
………………………….
Tu quoque. Yes, Christians have done unjust things in history–none of this is based on Christianity.
There are lots of Jews in Spain today, and they have completely equal rights with Christians and other Gentiles. Whereas most Jews have been expelled from Dar-al-Islam, and the few places where a remnant remain–as in Iran and Yemen–they are persecuted and threatened. Can Nour explain this? I rather doubt she will even reply.
More:
According to Alferd Butler in his book, “Muslim Conquest of Egypt”, the Jizya tax was a small amount of money every year. Muslim jurists required adult, free, sane males among the dhimma community to pay the jizya while exempting women, children, elders, handicapped, the ill, the insane, monks, hermits, slaves,and non-Muslim foreigners who only temporarily reside in Muslim lands.
There is a lot of noise about this tax and people tend to ignore that it was a defense tax: non-muslims didn’t have to serve in the Muslim army.
………………………….
Now the vile Nour is *defending the horrors of dhimmitude*–treating Infidels as humiliated second-class citizens.
And being kept out of the military was not a perk, as she pretends, but a way of further marking Infidels as less than Muslims. It is also a key part of dhimmitude that the filthy Kuffar be kept unarmed.
Will the vicious Nour also defend the Jannisary system? How about enslaving Infidels? I would not be surprised…
Lavéritétriomphera says
@Nour,
It is not because some people preach violence and murder, that they must be imitated. Christians have made a lot of mistakes, but their holy book does not teach them to murder people and injustice.
Eur says
Well there are a lot of examples. Muslims killed 5000 Christians on a single day in Toledo for refusing paying de yizia. 5000 in a single day!!!!!
Of course Christian kingdoms were not a pace full places… they were also intolerant, fanatics and killers.
In the first centuries of the Arab invasion, Jews were looking for protection under Christian kingdoms and then they went to the south looking for protection under Islamic caliphates.
Middle ages were savages, al andalus is a myth.
The Jews were not only expelled from the Iberian Peninsula. In many European kingdoms there were expulsions of Jews and in that context one should try to explain the causes of this expulsion. The expulsion of Muslims is much easier to explain … they were the enemy and it was impossible to mix and coexist. There is a saying in Spanish that says “either all Moors or all Christians.” In fact there are many expressions in Spanish that we have inherited from those wars of religion. For example, “there are no Moors on the coast” to express that the road is clear. For centuries the Berber pirates attacked the Mediterranean coasts in their continuous raids and had the collaboration of the native Muslim population. The Ottomans at that time were a real challenge for the European kingdoms, which had to unite to roll back the threat (Battle of Lepanto). The Muslims conquered Constantinople (Byzantium) and were eager to do the same with Rome and recover the Iberian Peninsula. That is why the Muslims were expelled from the peninsula … despite trying to assimilate them through peaceful means and other not so peaceful ones. The Muslims revealed themselves many times, they committed massacres in whole villages, rapes … and the Christian armies … they also devastated the Muslims. During the mastery of the Islamic authorities what happened the native population had to submit and over the centuries many were converted to Islam because it was more comfortable to live that way. Also in other areas, unchristianized, the Celtibera population opted to adopt Islam with less resistance than the areas already Christianized, kept their ancient customs in secret but claimed to be Muslims.
Eur says
“There is a lot of noise about this tax and people tend to ignore that it was a defense tax: non-muslims didn’t have to serve in the Muslim army”
Ohhhhh come on boy!!!! what kind of history book do you have?
The yizia has been from the beginning a tax of submission on non-Muslims. There is no stipulated amount, in Andalusia for example, it was 30% of the harvest produced by a Christian … they were abusive measures to exploit non-Muslims and they ended up converting to Islam. Muslims had zakat, a fixed amount and if they did not pay they were called to order. If a non-Muslim does not pay the yizia it is considered that he has rite the pact of submission and the sentence is death. Islam when it arrived in the Iberian Peninsula gave three options to Christians … to become Muslim, to accept the condition of submission … or war. The population that was not yet Christian (outside the urban centers) had no choice but to convert to Islam or be killed because the Islamic authority considered them pagans. I’m not going to talk about the barbarities of the Catholic Church, the inquisition … there is always much talk and with good reason. Islam in the Iberian Peninsula came in blood and fire and left the peninsula in blood and fire.
jewdog says
Sounds like the golden age was a bit tarnished – only 12 karat.
gravenimage says
Ramadan Day 11 thought for the day from Robert Spencer’s The History of Jihad
………………..
This is standard Muslim behavior–all Infidels must be humiliated, or face slaughter at the hands of the “faithful”. *Horrifying*.
Lydia Church says
In connection with the earlier comments for today (please see!) regarding the apostasy of the church and related end times events, there is evidence of the planned infiltration if one does the research. It is mostly by the vehicle of the ‘new age’ movement.
Below is a sampling: NOTE: VERY LUCIFERIAN IDEAS BELOW, REPEATED FOR THE PURPOSE OF EXPOSING THE PLOT. DO NOT BE DECEIVED BY WHAT FOLLOWS.
They are all parts of articles (source below).
1.
Even Alice Bailey herself, who personified New Age consciousness, backs what these previous quotes imply:
“The new era is coming; the new ideals, the new civilization, the new modes of life, of education, of religious presentation and of government are slowly precipitating and naught can stop them. They can, however, be delayed by the reactionary types of people, by the ultra-conservative and closed minds…. They are the ones who can and do hold back the hour of liberation. A spiritual fluidity, a willingness to let all preconceived ideas and ideals go, as well as all beloved tendencies, cultivated habits of thought and every determined effort to make the world conform to a pattern which seems to the individual the best because, to him, the most enticing–these must all be brought under the power of death.4”
If one understands the rationale behind these statements, then it becomes clear what they are talking about. Those who will accept the Christ consciousness can stay–those who won’t–must go. The quote about people’s “ability and desire” to assimilate the “Christ energy” as the determining factor in their fate is very thought provoking.
Barbara Marx Hubbard, a major New Age proponent and a supporter of Marianne Williamson’s Department of Peace efforts in Washington, DC says there must be a “selection process” for those “who refuse to see themselves and others as a part of God [Hubbard’s New Age God].” She states:
He [God] describes, therefore, the necessity of a “selection process” that will select out resistant individuals who “choose” not to evolve.5 (emphasis added)
Human must become Divine. That is the law.6
2.
The Great Apostasy
In light of the many who will be coming in Christ’s name, I also believe the Alice Bailey “prophecies” can provide further insight into what the apostle Paul called in 2 Thessalonians 2:3 the falling away. Bailey eagerly foretold of what she termed “the regeneration of the churches.”11 Her rationale for this was obvious:
“The Christian church in its many branches can serve as a St. John the Baptist, as a voice crying in the wilderness, and as a nucleus through which world illumination may be accomplished.12”
In other words, instead of opposing Christianity, the occult would capture and blend itself with Christianity and then use it as its primary vehicle for spreading and instilling New Age consciousness! The various churches would still have their outer trappings of Christianity and still use much of the same lingo. If asked certain questions about traditional Christian doctrine, the same answers would be given. But it would all be on the outside; on the inside a contemplative spirituality would be drawing in those open to it.
There are many more examples exposing what is going on at websites such as Lighthouse Trails Research Project. Go to the search box and enter ‘new age,’ ‘selection process,’ ‘world peace,’ ‘rick warren,’ and the scroll drops down a mile or more… as more puzzle pieces fall into place.
Note: I was shown this information BEFORE coming across that website and others like it, those things just confirmed what was already revealed to me. And of course there is more.
The European says
to Nour
So, the jizya was a “defense tax?”
Pick up a Qur’an, open it at sura 9,29 and read: “Fight those (the unbelievers)…until they pay the jizyah with willing submission, and feel themselves sudued.”
Does that sound like a defense tax non-Muslims had to pay to make up for not being obliged to serve in the army? Throughout Islamic history, this jizyah-tax has always been associated with the humiliation and degradation of the dhimmi; in Spain, for example, non-Muslims who delivered the jizyah had to stand before a high-ranking Muslim who would collect that tax while sitting on an chair. He then would order the dhimmi to bow low, slap his face and take the money.
As to its amount, it was never a small tax since Muslim economy depended largely on it. The sums the dhimmis had to pay, were determined by the caliph and they depended on his whims and greed.
Lavéritétriomphera says
They do not know their coran as I found out for myself, when I quoted verse 4:34 to a young Muslim colleague, she could not believe it.
gravenimage says
And yet, Muslims beat their wives all the time. I’d take Muslims being surprised by what Islam demands with a grain of salt.
Lavéritétriomphera says
I had a case where a Muslim man was beaten by his girlfriend, he had one eye injured, and I even feared that she could kill him.
The ordinary Muslim does not know what is written in his quran. It’s forbidden. That is why so-called “Islamic scholars” demand that all critics of quran be punished. It’s intellectual terrorism.
gravenimage says
They demand that *critics* of the Qur’an be punished.
Your belief that Muslims are forbidden to read the Qur’an could not be morfe mistaken.
And while there may be occasional incidents of Muslim women beating men, Muslim men beating women–and doing so on the basis of the Qur’an itself–is *far* more common.
IslamQ&A–the most popular Islamic site in English–affirms that men can beat their wives:
http://islamqa.org/hanafi/zamzam-academy/20486
JawsV says
“Al Andalus” means “The Land of the Vandals” though it was really the Visigoths who inhabited Spain at the time of the Muslim invasion (711) and before. The Mooslims got it wrong. Not Vandals, Visigoths!
Lavéritétriomphera says
The vandals occupied North Africa, and Andalusia comes from the word vandalusia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Name_of_Andalusia.
Eur says
The Visigoths were a minority in pre-Islamic hispania. Even the population of Roman origin was a minority. The majority of the population was celtibera and Basque … that was the native population of the Iberian peninsula and the current population is a direct heir. Of course there have been mixed, Phoenicians, Romans, Visigoths … but the base of the population of the peninsula is the Iberian and Basque and Celtic population.
The Arab and Berber phenotype brought by the Islamic invasions were expelled from the Iberian Peninsula. The Berber phenotype that prevails in the autochthonous population of the Iberian Peninsula comes from migrations thousands of years ago when the first human beings crossed the Strait of Gibraltar.
GNR says
Many good comments. I have been been reading serious books about Islam for some time. Morera’s, “The Myth Of The Andalusian Paradise” was very well documented. One book that I didn’t see mentioned was Giles Milton’s “White Gold”.
One only needs to wonder if Islam is peaceful and neighborly then where have all the Christians and Jews gone that inhabited the Middle East, North Africa, parts of Asia and Europe for the last two thousand years?
You can shake the willfully blind until their teeth fall out and they will remain unseeing. Yet we still need to try and alert those who are just ignorant of the purpose of Islam.
From the time Muhammad established his evil empire in Medina, Islam has flourished either by persuaion or harassment.
Islam is a twin to violence. Bottom line? Wherever Islam goes, blood flows.
End of story but let’s keep tring to spread the word.
gravenimage says
Good post.