Quran only recognizes defensive war - no offensive war or conquest
-
Thank you very much for these knowledge. Now how should the following humans be treated according to Quran?
- The people who impose tax to people from other religions, because of their faith.
- The people who persecute minority, expel them, kill them because of their faith.
-
Thank you very much for these knowledge. Now how should the following humans be treated according to Quran?
- The people who impose tax to people from other religions, because of their faith.
- The people who persecute minority, expel them, kill them because of their faith.
The verses quoted tells us to fight back against those who wish to persecute us and force us into exile because of our faith or otherwise. It also tells us that we are to fight against any form of oppression.
49.9. If two parties of believers fall to fighting, make peace between them (and act promptly). But if one of them aggressively encroaches the rights of the other, then fight you all against the aggressive side until they comply with God's decree (concerning the matter). If they comply, then make peace between them with justice and be scrupulously equitable. Surely God loves the scrupulously equitable.
We are to fight against any form of aggression and oppression and we judge and rule between any parties we are to do so with proportionality and equity.
-
Probably you did not understand me earlier Bigmo. I was not talking about two parties of believers. I was talking about two parties one is sunni/shia, other may be Jews/Christians/atheist/hindu etc. You do know that, rulers from the past taxed people because of faith. Practiced oppression. They did that for political/other reasons, but they got support from hadiths. According to Quranic teaching, how should Jews/Christians/atheist/hindu etc treat these sunni/shia? And according to Quranic teaching, how should we, Quran aloner treat sunni/shia? Lets assume we have power to crush anybody standing on our way.
offtopic
I can remember a video where some talibans were stoning adulterous/adulteress. Clearly it is not a Quranic teaching. It is crime called "killing". Now lets consider I can spot everyone who carried out this heinous task and I have power over them. According to eye for eye law, can I carry out "recursive stoning" to everyone who stoned adulterous/adulteress?About "recursive stoning"
50 human(men,women) were the criminals who stoned. Lets separate one. This one is gonna die. And rest of 49 must stone him/her. one has gone to dogs. Grab another one. Remaining 48 must stone this new one. This process should go on and on. I am sure about the last one, though.
There is a reason for asking these disturbing questions History.
-
I do not think that the tax in principle was based on religion, but on military service. If people of other religion chose not to do that service for the country, they were taxed instead, but it seems that everybody who choose not to join the armey was taxed even beeing muslim. I readthat that was the case for instance of egyptian peasants who did not want to join the army being muslims, they were taxed the same.
And I think that is logical, if you do not serve with your person at least serve with your money to keep the country safe for everybody.
Also, many of the most famous soldiers of the othoman empire were Christians I very much doubt that they were taxed.
Salaam
-
understood because a believe would not wrong people to cause a war or conflict.
-
Peace,
True. But often the other part causes the war because they cannot stand the truth even if no provocation from the believers.
God bless you
-
Probably you did not understand me earlier Bigmo. I was not talking about two parties of believers. I was talking about two parties one is sunni/shia, other may be Jews/Christians/atheist/hindu etc. You do know that, rulers from the past taxed people because of faith. Practiced oppression. They did that for political/other reasons, but they got support from hadiths. According to Quranic teaching, how should Jews/Christians/atheist/hindu etc treat these sunni/shia? And according to Quranic teaching, how should we, Quran aloner treat sunni/shia? Lets assume we have power to crush anybody standing on our way.
offtopic
I can remember a video where some talibans were stoning adulterous/adulteress. Clearly it is not a Quranic teaching. It is crime called "killing". Now lets consider I can spot everyone who carried out this heinous task and I have power over them. According to eye for eye law, can I carry out "recursive stoning" to everyone who stoned adulterous/adulteress?About "recursive stoning"
50 human(men,women) were the criminals who stoned. Lets separate one. This one is gonna die. And rest of 49 must stone him/her. one has gone to dogs. Grab another one. Remaining 48 must stone this new one. This process should go on and on. I am sure about the last one, though.
There is a reason for asking these disturbing questions History.
Well if the Quran said to fight off the aggressor even if they are believers than it means there is no reason not to fight off any form of aggression. However my understanding of Sunni/Shia jizya is that it is about 5% or so. So jizya itself is not the problem but its the offensive war (conquest) that Islamic authorities allowed. Its that belief that you can conquer another nation in the name of Islam even if the other party has no quarrel with you that is my problem.
As far as how we are to respond from the Quran just enough to stop the aggression and not any further. At least that my reading of it.
As far as stoning to death I think that this should be dealt in a criminal court since there are different kinds of murder charges. Its actually a hard question since the people stoning the other person believe they are doing Islamic law and that is what they are told by the clerics. Stoning was not that common in Islamic history but slavery unfortunately was and during the Ottomans some conquest took place especially in its early history (Selim, Suleiman etc reign).
The Islamic authoirties arguments all fall under one issue, abrogation. They are ashamed to say the hadith abrogated the Quran so they searched for whatever verse they can find and used that as the abrogating verse. But even a casual look at verse 9.5 we can clearly see its a defensive command.
Good article about abrogation
Look at the amount of verses that they claimed verse 9.5 abrogated. Over 100 verses. There arguments is a very weak one. But many Muslims do not know. Abrogation is the Islamic sects dirty little secret they rarely disclose and it was the most contentious issue between the Mutaziltes (who rejected all form of abrogation) and the Sunni activist especially Al Shafi.
The "Verse of the Sword" refers to Quran 95, and due to how many verses it abrogates (about 113) hypno, we will write "Verse of the Sword" in place of this verse
http//wikiislam.net/wiki/List_of_Abrogations_in_the_Qur%27an
Sunnis rely on the fact that many of the Muslims do not know about the extent of their abrogation.
http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naskh_%28tafsir%29
Another good article about abrogation. All in all 1/11 of the Quran was claimed to have been abrogated. Shocking.
-
Peace,
So, what about Solomon and Saba/Sheba? Solomon planned to attack them without any offensive threat.
The narration does not reveal if the queen of Sheba committed further atrocities in her delusions imposed by Satan. Perhaps she sacrificed humans or did other horrendous things.
The decree sent over to queen of Sheba told them to come "in Islam" which does not mean in submission but to harmonize themselves and not be arrogant. Refer to your own argument in the other thread about your beloved "peace". Solomon was likely not bound to attack a righteous civilization that did not do wrong and particularly oppressive things.
2724 ?And I found her and her people prostrating to the sun instead of God! And the devil had made their works appear good to them, so he kept them away from the path, for they are not being guided.?
2743 And she was prevented by that which she served besides God. She was of the people who were rejecters corruptors.
Comment Even Satan was a kafir. It does not mean to reject. Queen of Sheba and her people likely did something very unrighteous.
Even we can wage war on a community that transgresses and oppresses people. In the end you may be right that the recitation does not only recognize defensive war, if it is to save the weak and children in another community. Depending on how you see it it is still defensive war however. In defense of those that are suffering and cannot fend for themselves. Solomon was not after conquering new lands but making sure that a balanced community was established in the lands of Sheba.
I am not arguing for or against the 'UN' and such organizations but their work may be similar to that of a community such as Solomon's. Peace-fighting troops sent in to save people from oppression are just doing exactly what God wants to be delivered. They are not rushing in to conquer lands but to fight until there is no more oppression and secure the area. That they are believers or not does not matter and they fulfill like 50% of the faith straight away.
We can argue if that is to be called offensive or defensive warfare, but it is not to loot another community or conquer lands.
God bless you
-
"Quran only recognizes defensive war - no offensive war"
So, what about Solomon and Saba/Sheba? Solomon planned to attack them without any offensive threat.
Good point however I do not see enough information about that incident from the Quran. Plus when the Quran tried to establish something even though another prophet disobeyed it, it gave an explanation like Abraham's prayers to his father or Jonah's abandonment of his people etc. So there is no reason to do away with verses of the Quran that makes clear that fighting is only allowed for defensive purpose or to fight oppression.
-
Those under the orders of Suleyman. bering in mind the kind of terms used to name them might not be actual warriors or armies but other kind of things enlisted not to conquer but to convince with reason or proofs. Like winning something with the weapons of goodness and reason.
Salaam
-
They say Islam is a violent religion that commands Muslims to kill non Muslim.
The religion of Islam is a violent religion, like any other organized religion.
Do anything to extend power wealth and authority, that's why the religion was being invented in the first place.The verses clearly indicate that no forced conversion was there.
Without religion there will be no conversion.
Conversion was created to make people join the religion, and makes it's leader more powerful.There are standards that the Koran established for fighting.
The recommendation is clear since long time before the Quran, establish Justice!
Fight the oppression, oppression is much worse than murder.
The recommendation appeared hundreds of times in the Tanakh and Gospel and myriad of other books.And if you didn't established justice and become oppressor yourselves, be prepared to receive the fruit of your action.
The Quran told stories as example of how such God's law has being applied before.
From Egyptians who oppressed the Israelites... and how Egypt was destroyed.
Then the Israelites who in turned become an oppressor themselves.
And how their civilization was being destroyed.
The Quran mentioned twice, from historical fact we know that it refers to the Babylonian invasion and Roman invasion of Judea.The reader of the Quran was supposed to reflect on the example..
It's the goal of the action that matter, establish justice, ends the oppression.
Whether it's an offensive or defensive war doesn't really matter.If you're on side of the defensive and you witness that your side is the oppressor, then the recommendation is to join the offensive side if their goal is ending the oppression.
If none of the offensive or defensive parties are waging war to establish justice and ends the oppression and whomever wins shall become an oppressor themselves. Then don't join any of them and if you can, fight them all.All of these verses tell us how the prophets were persecuted for their religious propogation.
Minor correction
The prophets were persecuted by the religious for their idea propagation which is not inline with the religious ideas and posed a threat to the authority. The prophets never invented any religion and / or do dogmatic teaching.
Jesus never invented the religion of Christianity in the same manner as Muhammad never invented the religion of Islam.Salam / Peace
-
Verse 9-29 is the only verse in the Koran that is not explicit. It talked about the people of the Book, usually meaning the Israelites. Most of the Koranic verses about fighting was concerning the pagans. I believe this probably is a implicit verse (mutashabihat). Perhaps dealing with the Jews of Mecca who were a smaller group of Jews than Medina. We know from Quran there was some referencing to fighting Jews allied with the pagans of Mecca but they were not the main fighting party.
But it is important to note that verse 9-29 is the only verses where the context is not clear. However the Koran covered the issue of fighting and it's legal reasons in many other verses.
The Koran also spoke about fighting against oppressors.
And what is with you that you fight not in the cause of Allah and the oppressed among men, women, and children who say, "Our Lord, take us out of this city of oppressive people and appoint for us from Yourself a protector and appoint for us from Yourself a helper?" 4.75
Also the prevent two believing parties from fighting each other.
If two parties among the Believers fall into a quarrel, make ye peace between them but if one of them transgresses beyond bounds against the other, then fight ye (all) against the one that transgresses until it complies with the command of Allah; but if it complies, then make peace between them with justice, and be fair for Allah loves those who are fair (and just). 49.9