Books and Documents

Islamic Ideology (22 Apr 2015 NewAgeIslam.Com)


  • With regard to the quotes below: Hundreds of millions of Europeans would DISAGREE with that specific Muslim belief, given that Islam took over (through severe & endless warfare) almost ALL of OUR (non-Islamic) countries & territories throughout history. Furthermore, there is currently a Christian Genocide throughout ALL of the Middle East (with ISRAEL as the ONLY exception) & Africa (and wherever Islam exists), and Iran, as an eample, had over 1.4 million Christians 15-20 years ago; it now has less than 200,000... and other countries that had high percentages of Christians now have 50-2,000 remaining with everything stolen from them, their homes, money, jewels, clothes, taken in by ISRAEL, the only democracy in all of the Middle East.

    It is shocking the number of words (and ideas) you insert into 2:191 ("... Kill them wherever you find them..."). I am certain that IF Muhammad meant what YOU write, then HE would have written what you write and NOT what is in the Koran.

    Oddly enough, you did not try to rationalize the section where Islam instructs the Muslim to KILL NON-BELIEVERS after giving them a chance to CONVERT... and, if they don't, then kill the infidels. 

    By the way, we (those of us who live in the USA) can NO LONGER say whatever we wish; to the contrary, exclusively BECAUSE OF ISLAM, our "freedom of speech" has been heavily curtailed and (just like in Europe) any TRUTH we write (even direct quotes) are labeled as "HATE SPEECH"... just as they were in Nazi Germany before WWII began.

    What follows is simply a quote from this page to which I'd referred (followed by a brief comment).

    Thank you.

    "Imam Muhammad al-Ghazali writes his commentary on Surah 9:

    “Muslims are therefore basically opposed to war and are never the ones to start it. By the imperative of their own religion, they are taught not to impose their beliefs on others by force. Their mission is to impart and communicate God’s message, leaving people free to decide whether to believe or reject it. Those who refuse to believe are free to pursue their lives in peace as long as they do not pose any obstacle or threat to Islam and the Muslims, who perceiv..."

    I'm sorry, but this is a JOKE, given today's global Christian Genocide, the endless Islamic terrorism... and ALL of history.

    By Gabi - 3/13/2018 10:43:17 AM

  • Babar aur gazani par Hindu log akraman karne gaye the? 
    By Vithal Patel - 1/28/2018 8:56:21 AM

  • My ignorance is your bliss milord!
    By Manzurul Haque - 10/7/2016 11:09:00 PM

  • Haquesaab,
    I shall not take offence at your use of the word "doublespeak" because I don't think you know what it means.

    By Ghulam Mohiyuddin - 10/7/2016 1:56:43 PM

  • GM sb, fighting against evil is noble (the mantra) and when people shy away from such fights,  ignogble springs up (real Indian examples given). One cannot attach evilness to goodness without an inherent ability to doublespeak. 

    ISIS can have many sources of inspiration. How do we know that they are not pure evil and into doublespeaking? Are you very close to them to be able to know everything about them? 

    And what is the main thrust of the writer? Is it not important to consider that, while passing a comment on his views?

    By Manzurul Haque - 10/7/2016 7:19:40 AM

  • @Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia; I think secular logic refers the following versus. Sultan Sahin repeatedly says that 7th century contextual instructions do not apply to us any more in the 21st century

    • “I will instil terror into the hearts of the unbelievers: smite above their necks and smite all their finger tips off.” (Q.8:12)
    • “Whoso desires another religion than Islam, it shall not be accepted of him.” (Q.3:85)
    • “Slay the idolaters wherever you find them.” (Q.9.5)
    • “slay them wherever ye catch them.”  (Q.2:191)
    • “Humiliate them and impose on them a penalty tax if they are Christians or Jews,” (Q.9:29)
    • “Allah deceived and Allah is the best of deceivers” (Q 3:54)
    • “Muslims do not take Jews and Christians as your friends” (Q 5:51)
    • “Fight those who do not believe in Allah and the last day, and fight people of the book.” (Q.9:29)
    • “O people of the Book (Jews and Christians), do you find fault with us, except that we believe in Allah? Shall I inform you of him who is worse than this in retribution from Allah? Worse is he whom Allah has cursed and brought His wrath upon, and of whom He made apes and swine and he who served idols. Such are in worse plight and far more astray from the straight path” (Q.5:59-60)

    By Royalj - 10/7/2016 5:50:57 AM

  • Haquesaab,
    I do not understand what you are trying to say. You accuse me of doublespeak. What do you mean?

    By Ghulam Mohiyuddin - 10/6/2016 1:48:22 PM

  • GM saheb, we are much better off in india being peace-loving. In Saharsa area,  a beautiful daughter of a poor old couple was detrained and raped in one corner of a platform in public view by three local lanths. Nobody resisted because we abhor fighting. A judge is doing his best not to pass an order because he thinks the other side is mafia who are defiantly not appearing also. A shot was fired from the hills on our beloved Tiranga by a group of militants. Out armed contingent went out chasing the militants into the opposite hill. We hate confronting. USA drops only bombs but not boots on the land. Non-violent fighters, they are  as they don't have a mantra to die. Keep up your doublespeak.
    By Manzurul Haque - 10/6/2016 3:38:21 AM

  • The article cited above discusses 8:36 to 8:38 which are almost identical to 2:190 to 2:193 and shows how various translators have erred and misled the people. The error of these translators is verifiable by anyone who cares to learn the truth. It is a different matter that some of these are the major influencers of the various sects and have contributed in a large measure to the development of a theology which is against the clear meaning of the Quran. 

      The article cited above discusses the verses of Surah Taubah etc. and the commandments of Allah regarding fighting.

    These articles clearly bring out the meaning of fighting in the cause of Allah and show that fighting the Muslim oppressors (such as the ISIS) would be fighting in the cause of Allah and incumbent on rulers who are in a position to wage war against it. Kafir has been used for deliberate and willful deniers of the truth but in practical terms only for the oppressors. In practice therefore, only oppressors are kafirs who must be resisted/fought against irrespective of the faith that they profess with their mouths.

    In particular, there is no verse in the Quran that allows war because of the faith professed by the other party. Fighting is permitted against only the oppressors and none else. This is brought out clearly in both the articles.

    By Naseer Ahmed - 10/6/2016 12:58:54 AM

  • Ghaussaab quote Ghazali thus: “…Much as you dislike it, fighting has been prescribed for you. But you may despise something that is good for you, and you may love something that is bad for you. God knows, but you do not …” [2:216].

    This verse has become a mantra for the ISIS ideologues. It is perhaps best to consider it as valid only for a particular time and a particular situation.

    By Ghulam Mohiyuddin - 10/5/2016 1:05:13 PM

  • Thanks for drawing attention to this very well-written article which effectively puts the quranic texts in proper perspective.  
    By Manzurul Haque - 10/5/2016 12:13:23 PM

  • Mr Nilamani Tripathy,

    Thanks for reading this article. In your comment you asked me to explain the following verses of the Quran. But you did not mention the verses. Where are the verses? Please quote them.  

    By Ghulam Ghaus غلام غوث - 7/8/2015 2:57:24 AM

  • Mr. Ghulam Ghaus, Thanks. Islamic scholars should explain this to the illeterate muslims, so that the terrorist will know the true meaning of Jihad. Now all over world Islam has been badly reputed due the action of terrorists and 90% of violence is by them. The schola od moderates remain mum in fear of the terrorists. Certain ambiguous verses of Qyran are mis understood by the radicals as mentioned below. Every non Muslim country look Islam under suspicion even peaceful and moderate Muslims are also mis undeerstood. Even Noble prize winner Malala has also blamed the Islamic countries for violence and terrorism. As you appear to be a scholar and moderate please explain the following verses, which are truely misunderstood by nin muslims in the world.
    By Nilamani Tripathy - 4/23/2015 1:37:43 PM

  • Sultan Shahin – Editor – New Age Islam


    Please be kind to elaborate as to what “Secular Logic,” meant by stating that, Mohammad said enough evil things.


    Why not stretch your mind a little? Of course, “Secular Logic,” must have read something which made him to give his own verdict about the Prophet of Islam.


    After all, there has to be an end to the madness that goes on and on and on in the New Age Islam forum. Where is your “Self-Esteem,” Sultan Shahin Saheb? Are you mapping new agenda for Muslims in the 21st century, or are you conspiring to side with the Islam haters and Muslim bashers?


    Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia





    By Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia - 4/23/2015 1:41:37 AM

  • Hello Sultan Shahin Saheb,


    As-Salaam Alay-Kum


    Fanatically believing that the “Stretching Of Minds, can take place by reading the comments of “Secular Logic,” henceforth, I earnestly request you to take up the challenge of what this mysterious person demands, “You will have to reject a lot of the verses if you are to live in harmony with the world.Go ahead and make our day, Sultan Shahin Saheb.


    You, Naseer Ahmed, and also, Ziaur Rehman must now team up with “Secular Logic,” and write a book about which verses of the Holy Qur’an to reject. My mind points to one single fact, that is, the bigoted person is overwhelmingly obsessed with Islam. Why not just put his mind at ease? Therefore, before publishing the book, be sure to mention the person’s “Real Name.” Never mind, the jibber jabber of “Ex-Tablighi.” This “Tablighi Jamaat” man believes in “Hide & Seek, game, just like the rest of the bearded buffoons who are on a killing spree by hiding their real faces.    


    Let’s face it, this way, the question of “spiritually unclean,” and “jizya,” can permanently be settled. You should not have any problem, as you continue to encourage that such debates must go on with no end in sight. Carry on reading all the bigoted views. Keep in mind another one of the hidden person’s remarks: “The world doesn't have a hope of ever being free of this malicious ideology.” Yes, everything is allowed under the guise of “Freedom of Speech. Now, let’s see if you can help fulfill the dream of the so-called malicious person, Sultan Saheb.


    My pointed question to you is, “Hasn’t there been enough of Stretching of Minds’?” I say, it is high time for you, to co-author a book, in which, you should give guidelines to your fellow Muslims, as to what “Secular Logic,” desires. I say, take a bold step forward so that those who admire you will eventually be mighty proud of you to finally let the Muslims map the new agenda for the 21st century.   


    By the way, “Hats Off” and “Curious Traveler,” can also help in compiling the book. These two characters can most certainly help in pulling out plenty of references from the internet. Then again, let’s not forget that there can well be plenty of shady and unknown characters in your forum who can contribute in rejecting whatever Qur’anic verses which seems to be bothering them too. Why not? It is your fanatical belief that only by continuously reading viscous comments of those who engages in smearing Islam and insulting Qur’an will help the Stretching of Minds, for the Muslims. Go ahead and make our day, Sultan Shahin Saheb.       


    Very respectfully yours,


    Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia





    By Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia - 4/23/2015 1:27:40 AM

  • Conflict is a part of human life. There will always be occassions when Muslims come in conflict with non-Muslims, for political reasons. Take the example of Pakistan. When the new nation was carved out at the insistence of Muslims, there were people who were 'driven out of their homes' , on both sides of the border. Or take the case of Kashmir. Here, people were driven out of their homes, too . This time by the Muslims unilaterally. Does the Quran have any prescription for how this crime is to be dealt with? In my understanding, no. Take the case of Babri Masjid, in which first a Hindu place of worship was destroyed, an Islamic place of worship was built in its place, and which in turn was destroyed. Who is the criminal here, in the eyes of Allah? The first destroyer, or the second? Even if you try your best to contextualise these verses, there will always be other contexts in which you will find them applicable. What of the Muslim people who have settled in the west, and who hold aspirations of fighting with stealth towards a "Muslim Europe"? Will they not see the Western faith and culture as enemies of Islam and the fighting verses very much applicable even in the current context? Would they be wrong, from their perspective? Spreading Islam far and wide is, of course a recommended activity by the Quran. It can be done using migration and democracy as tools. The solution is not as easy as interpreting the Quran in seventh century context. You will have to reject a lot of the verses if you are to live in harmony with the world.
    By secularlogic - 4/22/2015 11:53:18 PM

  • There was a great need of such an article. Thanks New Age and and Thanks Ghulam Ghaus bhai 
    By Hamid Jmi - 4/22/2015 11:26:49 PM

  • I think part of the problem with consensus-building is that we have all these great interpretations but we rarely connect to the source.

    ISIS and Al-Queda have spent decades building their case for a militant Islam through foundational links to Ibn Taymiyyah and Ibn Kathir.  It would help our fellow Muslims if we could establish our own non-aggressive militant pathway from the source.

    We already have a narration from Sa'id ibn Jubayr (665–714) that contextualizes 2:193 as a fight against clear violent oppression (see www.usc.edu/org/cmje/religious-texts/hadith/bukhari/088-sbt.php#009.088.215)

    By Curious Traveler - 4/22/2015 4:03:59 PM

  • Sultan Shahin sahib, let us then write more about our rejection of "7th century contextual instructions". Is "rejection" too strong a word?

    By Ghulam Mohiyuddin - 4/22/2015 1:59:06 PM

  • Not if Muslims accepted and said loudly and repeatedly that 7th century contextual instructions do not apply to us any more in the 21st century. Do we have a choice, Ghulam Mohiyuddin Saheb, in the constantly degrading situation.

    However, we should accept the present inapplicability of the 7th-century contextual directives only if we really develop this conviction and come to believe this. It should not be part of a taqaiyya. Only with a well-thought out consensus in the community, we will be able to sustain this belief. However, since we don't have a consensus now, we should keep trying and keep expressing our thoughts from every available platform.

    By Sultan Shahin - 4/22/2015 1:28:24 PM

  • Good explanation! However there will always be people who will use these verses to justify violence. And there will always be Islamophobes  who will use these verses to vilify Islam.
    By Ghulam Mohiyuddin - 4/22/2015 1:03:31 PM

  • Great analysis on these verses (especially 9:29).

    By Curious Traveler - 4/22/2015 8:44:11 AM