Response to Pipes, Egroeg and Bostom

Submitted by Pungky Sumadi (United States), Jan 6, 2003 at 18:36

Response to Daniel Pipes, Husb Egroeg and Andrew Bostom.

By Pungky Sumadi, Graduate Student, Department of Urban and Regional Planning, the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.

Reading the debates and comments on the PBS's Muhammad (peace be upon him / pbuh) feature made by the above three commentators (in bold), I feel the urge to provide my comment to them. I hope my response will open their eyes (and others) to the truth of Islam and the life of the prophet Muhammad (pbuh).

No commentator is so impolite and unsycophantic as to note that however admirable this was in seventh-century Arab society, Muslim women today suffer widely from genital mutilations, forced marriages, purdah opaqueness, abject illiteracy, sexual apartheid, polygamy, and honor killings (Pipes). If what Pipes mean as genital mutilations as circumcision, he missed the reason of the latter, which is for healthy reason. In fact, Muslim males are also circumcised for the same reason, as well as hundreds of millions of other males from different religions. Forced marriage, abject illiteracy, sexual apartheid and honor killings are not from Islamic teaching, they are results of human ignorance, backwardness of human culture and society's level of education (that cause misinterpretation of Islamic teachings).

The film treats religious beliefs or myths -- such as Muhammad's "Night Journey," when the Qur'an says he went to heaven and entered the divine presence -- as historical facts. All this smacks of a film shown by Hollywood missionaries, not a prime-time documentary (Pipes). The "Night Journey" of prophet Muhammad (pbuh) is well documented in: (1) the Qur'an itself (Chapter or Surah 17), and (2) the history of the Prophet (pbuh) written by many authors. They provide many proofs of the journey, e.g., when the prophet was flying from Jerusalem to Mecca, he saw a lost camel that was being searched by the owners. Upon his arrival in Mecca, the prophet (pbuh) met the owners and informed them where the camel was. The people of Mecca asked him (pbuh) of any proof of the night journey, and the prophet (pbuh) described how Baitul Maqdis (the mosque in Jerusalem) looked like (Al-Mubarakfury 1997).

The concept of "saving one life is saving humanity" is contradictory to the present situation where Muslims butchered thousands of people in the name of Allahu Akbar (Pipes). Yes, it is contradictory, because not all Muslim read, understand, and more importantly, practice the teachings of the Qur'an as shown by the prophet Muhammad (pbuh). Lots of them are misusing the concept of jihad and committing acts that are plainly contrary to Islam for lots of different reasons. Allah SWT says in the Qur'an: "Verily we have revealed the Book to you in Truth, for (instructing) mankind. He, then, that receives guidance benefits his own soul, but he that strays injures his own soul. Nor are you set over them to dispose of their affairs (Surah 39 Verse 41). We know David Koresh killed himself and his followers, Hitler killed millions of Jewish, Hindus butchered thousands of Muslims in India, and the Christian Ambonese killed their fellow Muslim in Indonesia. We also know there were ethnic cleansing in African and Eastern European countries, did we claim that the religion is to blame? Have we scrutinized (and misinterpret) their holy Books / Scriptures to justify the killings?

Few moderate Muslims dare to publically criticize their fellow Muslims' horrific action, for fear of a death sentence (fatwah) from some evil mullahs with jihad on their minds (Egroeg). Egroeg denied the comments, statements and writings by Muslims and Islamic scholars in the US and around the world condemning horrific actions made by those who claim to be Muslims.

The prophet Muhammad (pbuh) had numerous wives and concubines (Egroeg). He should know that during that period a man could have unlimited number of wives and concubines; it was a custom. Women were treated unfairly and unjustly. Relationship between men and women were unbelievably wrong and unacceptable (e.g. a man could order his wive to sleep with other man in order to get an unexpectedly good quality heir). The Muslims believe that Muhammad (pbuh) had 12 wives. The main idea for the prophet (pbuh) to marrying many wives is that Allah SWT wanted to establish His marriage-related laws (applicable to all human being) and remove the wrong values, customs, traditions and practices of the (then) society on how men take women and treat them as wives. Egoreg just mentioned two of the reasons in his article, the others are—among others—to establish a new tie between two different tribes who were fighting each other; to save a person and her tribe from dishonor fate; and to documents the prophet's (pbuh) daily life as examples how mankind practice the teaching of Islam and translate the Qur'an in action. When these laws were completed, Allah SWT revealed the Surah 4, Verse 3 to Muhammad (pbuh). Allah SWT forbid the prophet Muhammad (pbuh) to take anymore wives. By that moment a man is allowed only to take four wives at the maximum, and only if he can spare his love, attention and wealth justly to the others. In addition to this law, a man has to have approval from the current wive(s) before he takes another wive.

The Muslims also believe that Muhammad (pbuh) had no concubine. He is the last Messenger of Allah SWT. As a messenger, the Prophet (pbuh) delivered the Qur'an, a guide for mankind to conduct their life in this world. It prohibits sexual act outside formal marriage. Logically, how can a prophet preach and teach the words of Allah SWT while at the same time his life is contradictory to the teachings of Allah SWT? To confirm that the prophet (pbuh) does exactly what he teaches consistently to the Qur'an, many authors of the life of the prophet (pbuh) and his wives wrote that Aisha was once asked to describe the Prophet (pbuh), and she replied that he was "the Qur'an walking", meaning that his behavior was the Qur'an translated into action.

Introducing conversion at the pain of the death and torture (Egroeg). He was not clear with this statement (where did he get this idea, anyway?). He misunderstands the Qur-an; It comes from Allah SWT through Muhammad (pbuh). It is a message and a guide to human being on how to live the life according to His way. Allah SWT promises unlimited joy and reward if we follow what He says and avoid the bad things that He forbids. He warns us that if we still do the bad things, He will punish us. Clearly you miss pointing out the unlimitedly positive rewards of obeying Allah SWT and His messenger (pbuh).

Classification of human beings (Egroeg). Again, there is no hierarchical classification (whatsoever) in Islam, just like Hindu's caste classification of human beings. All people are the same. In the Qur'an the use of Muslims, the people of the Book, Jews and so on are for classifying human beings according to what they are / believe in / origins. Just like we classify people by origin, religion and so on. About the labels of the kafirs as pigs and apes, it seems Egroeg just took the verse that says about it (Surah 5, Verse 60), but intentionally took off the previous verses that explain in what context that the kafirs are transformed (and not labeled) into apes and pigs. In the Qur'an the transformation (which is a curse of Allah SWT) were (and are) directed to those who ridicule and hate the Muslims whose only sin were accepting Islam as their religion (Surah 5, Verses 58-59). The evidence of this curse happened in Turkey during earthquake in 1999, as quoted by Al-Talib, 2000 and many other newspapers (for easy reference, visit www.geocities.com/islam_miracles/ miracles_earthquake.htm): "An American scuba-diver was sent down to see if there were any traces of the naval-base in Golcuk. He said that he went down 100 metres and there was no trace of the naval base. On the diver's return toward the surface, he noticed at about 62 metres the remains of the casino. What he saw there shocked him. He saw a person in a frozen position with arms wrapped around a tree trunk while holding a bottle of liquor in his hand. He was wide-eyed in terror and his face was transformed into that of a pig! Another person holding cards in his hand had the same wide-eyed expression, but his face had been transformed into that of a monkey! The diver said he will never again go down there".

Blasphemy law in Islamic countries (Egroeg). In the Islamic believe, Allah SWT is the most Holiness and the most Powerful. All praise goes to Him. There is a big difference between praising and supporting Allah SWT. He, the Almighty, does not need our support. In fact, human beings always need His support and help. The blasphemy law in Islamic countries is meant to avoid hostility (and death) that may result from blasphemy thrown from followers of one religion to those of others—an event that has been happening since thousands of years ago.

When old and new Testaments, Hindu and Buddhist scriptures had been critically examined, what prevents the Qur'an from being subjected to such probing review? (Egroeg). Human beings were blessed by Allah SWT with intelligence and free will. Muslims believe that without guidance these blessings tend to be used to satisfy human desires, needs and wants in inappropriate ways, including reviewing and improvising previously revealed holy Books for the sake of human interests. The Qur'an cannot be reviewed because it is already perfected by Allah SWT (Surah 5 Verse 3). Surah 6 Verse 115 says that "the Word of your Lord finds its fulfillment in truth and in justice; none can change His Words for He is the One Who hears and knows al"l. Furthermore Allah SWT says in Surah 15 Verse 9: "We have, without doubt, sent down the Message; and We will surely guard it (from corruption)". Human being are blessed by Allah SWT with intelligence and the Muslims believe that it is their obligation to use these blessings to understand the meaning of and practice the teaching of the Qur'an in daily life. People may have different views and understandings about the interpretation and the meaning of the Qur'an, but none is able to successfully revise the Qur'an.

"The Koran teaches you that the saving of one life is as if you saved all of humanity". Muhammad hijacked this verse from Talmud (Pipes).
Did Muhammad read and thoroughly study Talmud? Did he get the verse from other priests, rabbis or other religious clerics only to find the truth of Talmud and claim it as part of the Qur'an? Once again, it is not the words of Muhammad (pbuh), but of Allah SWT. There are at least two reasons: (1) Muhammad (pbuh) is illiterate. The Qur'an says: "And you (Muhammad) were not (able) to recite a Book before this (the Qur'an), nor are you (able) to transcribe it with your right hand: in that case, indeed, would the talkers of vanities have doubted" (Surah 29, Verse 48). (2) The revelation of the Qur'an is from Allah SWT (Surah 39, Verse 1). Some of its contents were revealed in the previous and original Books, such as Torah and Gospel (Surah 10 Verse 37, Surah 5 Verse 48, Surah 35 Verse 31, Surah 46 Verse 30). The instruction to human beings to conduct good deeds was revealed in the previous and original Books before the Qur'an. So, if the teaching of "saving one life" comes from Allah SWT and is found in the previous and original Books, why can't it appear in the Qur'an?

The Massacre of the Banu Qurayza. In his article Andrew Bostom only said that the Jews was alleged to have aided the forces of Muhammad's enemies in violation of a prior pact. He failed to describe the content of the pact the Qurayza and Muhammad (pbuh) had agreed, which are, among others, the Muslims and the Jews agreed: (a) to respect each other's religion; (b) to help each other in fighting whoever wants to disrespect the pact; (c) to provide good advise and perform good deed to each other and live in harmony; (d) the Jews have to help the Muslims if the latter are in war; (e) not to protect and help the Quraish (the enemy of the Muslims) (Al-Mubarakfury 1997).

The killing to the Qurayza occurred after the Khandaq war. The Muslims were informed that the Qurayza had helped the Quraish in fighting the Muslims in that war. The prophet Muhammad (pbuh) asked his friends to conduct a thorough investigation of the information. The prophet (pbuh) not only had convincing evidence that the Qurayza, lead by Ka'b Asad Al-Qurazhy, did help the Quraish to kill Muhammad (pbuh) and his followers, but also other evidences that the Qurayza deliberately breached the pact by, among others, ridiculing Islam and the prophet (pbuh) and treating the Muslims as enemy.

Realizing that the Muslims had surrounded the Qurayza, Ka'b Asad Al-Qurazhy proposed three options to his people: (a) that they convert to Islam and get security guarantee over their lives, wealth, women and children (he even reminded his people that Muhammad (pbuh) is a true prophet sent by God and it is his name that they have read in their Book); (b) that they kill their own children and women and then fight against Muhammad (pbuh); (c) they strike Muhammad (pbuh) and his followers and break their religious ban of not fighting on Saturday. The Qurayza refused all options. They decided to leave their fate to Muhammad (pbuh). But Muhammad (pbuh) left the decision in the hand of Sa'd Mu'adh, the leader of the Aus, a companion of Qurayza, and the prophet (pbuh) also confirmed that the decision would bind the Qurayza and the Muslims. Muhammad (pbuh) had full confidence that whatever decision Sa'd would make, it would be guided by Allah SWT. It means the decision will be fair and just, even if it was to forgive the Qurayza.

What Qurayza did to the Muslims is just like your neighbors helped your enemies to butcher you, your family and fellows. This act of treachery was (and is) a serious crime. Al-Mubarakfury (1997) wrote that at that time, such a treachery was considered as a war crime. The Muslims later found out that the Qurayza had made thousands of weapons and prepared themselves to fight their neighboring Muslims.
...

---

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".