Dubai Forums Dubai Discussions Dubai Politics Talk Philosophy and Religion Forums

Muslims often say you have "quoted out of context" when you quote verses such as this:

Quran 9:5 “Then, when the sacred months have passed away, kill the "idolators" (mushrik*) wherever you find them …”

"The context!", you plead.

The words immediately after these say, “and seize them, besiege them and lie in ambush everywhere for them.”

Ah-ha, you say, you have to use the NEXT bit of context.

“If they repent and take to prayer and render the alms levy, allow them to go their way. God is forgiving and merciful.”

So far, the Quran tells you to: kill non-allied mushrik (those who err*) who are not seeking asylum with you.

"These are words of peace, love and tolerance", you say.

But .... they are saying that if these Hindus/Buddhists etc become Muslims THEN they will be left in peace. In fact, the whole sura, which has 129 verses, ie, the whole context, is totally intolerant. Sura 9 is the source of many totalitarian Islamic laws and principles, such as the concepts of Jihad and dhimmis, rendering the Christians and Jews to inferior status in an Islamic state. Since the historical context is one of raids, massacres, booty, sex-slaves and assassinations, it is crystal clear that real blood and guts fighting is being advocated.
Unbelievers cannot be trusted, you cannot take them for friends, they are evildoers, unclean, and you have to fight them - Allah tells you it's "good for you".

But it's all about Self-Defense! you say.

Self-defence is instinctual and doesn’t need to be taught. Even dinosaurs knew how to defend themselves. Why say the obvious? Like "eat when hungry".

Ah! But they need to be taught the MERCY part! you add.

Right, so why write: "SLAY the idolators whever you find them, sneak up on them etc?" You don't need that verse if you're talking about mercy!

"But it was the era they lived in with lots of wars going on", you plead, suddenly switching from textual to historical context.

The "era" argument is not available in fact to Muslims, since the Quran is the eternal word of allah and true and valid for always. Thus, for Muslims themselves there is no historical context. "Slay the idolators" is just as valid today as it was in 666AD, or whenever it was written.

But you STILL didn't view the context; what about verse XYZ! you plead.

Let's turn context around. You quote the mercy verses and I'll say to you: "What about the context!?" and then I quote the violent verses. See? Two can play at that game.

The bottom line is that the "context" argument is a desperate attempt to rescue Islam from drowning in the ocean of Western (ie Christian) Ethical standards to which is cannot measure up.

But wait, you insist, what about the Preceding Verses!

Silly me

9.1 A (declaration) of immunity from Allah and His Messenger, to those of the Pagans with whom ye have contracted mutual alliances 2 Go ye, then, for four months, backwards and forwards, (as ye will), throughout the land, but know ye that ye cannot frustrate Allah (by your falsehood) but that Allah will cover with shame those who reject Him. 3. And an announcement from Allah and His Messenger, to the people (assembled) on the day of the Great Pilgrimage,- that Allah and His Messenger dissolve (treaty) obligations with the Pagans. If then, ye repent, it were best for you; but if ye turn away, know ye that ye cannot frustrate Allah. And proclaim a grievous penalty to those who reject Faith. 4. (But the treaties are) not dissolved with those Pagans with whom ye have entered into alliance and who have not subsequently failed you in aught, nor aided any one against you. So fulfil your engagements with them to the end of their term: for Allah loveth the righteous. 5. But when the forbidden months are past, then fight and slay the Pagans wherever ye find them

Summary: Allah has allowed you to break your treaties with “polytheists”. Best if they turn to Islam or they will end up with a “grievous penalty” (not specified if the penalty is in the afterlife or this life). But only dissolve the treaties with the polytheists who are not allies. Then slay the polytheists wherever you find them

In other words: kill ONLY non-allied people who err* who are not seeking asylum with you.

"These are words of peace, love and tolerance", you say.

We return to ..... But .... they are saying that if these Hindus/Buddhists etc become Muslims THEN they will be left in peace. In fact, the whole sura, which has 129 verses, ie, the whole context, is totally intolerant. Sura 9 is the source of many totalitarian Islamic laws and principles, such as the concepts of Jihad and dhimmis, rendering the Christians and Jews to inferior status in an Islamic state. Since the historical context is one of raids, massacres, booty, sex-slaves and assassinations, it is crystal clear that real blood and guts fighting is being advocated.
Unbelievers cannot be trusted, you cannot take them for friends, they are evildoers, unclean, and you have to fight them - Allah tells you it's "good for you".

_____________________________________________________

*Mushrik is a person who "errs". The definition includes trinitarians and polytheists, but it is also used for those who are "in error" according to the Quran:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mushrik
The word shirk is derived from the Arabic root Š-R-K (ش ر ك). This consonantal root has the general meaning of "to share" (A. A. Nadwi, Vocabulary of the Qur'an). In the context of the Qur'an, the particular sense of "sharing as an equal partner" is usually understood, so that polytheism is "attributing a partner to God". In the Qur'an, shirk and the related word (plural Stem IV active participle) mushrikūn (مشركون) "those who commit shirk and plot against Islam" often clearly refers to the enemies of Islam (as in verse 9.1-15) but sometimes it also refers to erring Muslims.