Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Denying Islam's History [Democracy for the Middle East]
broadscapeventures.com ^ | December 10, 2002 07:08 AM | Andrew Bostom, M.D.,

Posted on 12/13/2003 12:28:20 PM PST by Destro

Denying Islam's History

In his critique of Stephen Schwartz' "The Two Faces of Islam" in NRO, Andrew G. Bostom observes that Schwartz' attribution of the problems of Islam to militant Wahabism obfuscates the violent and intolerant foundation of the religion. Bostom is right of course, and anyone still searching for the roots of the Middle East's problems need look no further. Today's genocide against Israel is the latest manifestation of a 1400 year old campaign of religious terror.

In his recent writings on NRO (here and here) and elsewhere, and in his new book, The Two Faces of Islam, Stephen Schwartz appropriately draws the attention of policymakers and the public at large to the dangerous, unsavory interactions between the Saudi royal family, Wahhabi Islam, and international terrorism. Unfortunately, however, Mr. Schwartz identifies Wahhabism as the source of all Islamic terror and injustice. He does not mention that the twin institutionalized scourges of Islam at the crux of the violent, nearly 1,400-year relationship between Muslims and non-Muslims — i.e., jihad and dhimmitude — were already well-elaborated by the 8th century, 1,000 years before Wahhabism arose in the 18th century.

Ibn Khaldun (d. 1406), perhaps the preeminent Islamic scholar in history, summarized five centuries of prior Muslim jurisprudence with regard to the uniquely Islamic institution of jihad:

In the Muslim community, the holy war is a religious duty, because of the universalism of the [Muslim] mission and [the obligation to] convert everybody to Islam either by persuasion or by force... The other religious groups did not have a universal mission, and the holy war was not a religious duty for them, save only for purposes of defense... Islam is under obligation to gain power over other nations.

In "The Laws of Islamic Governance," al-Mawardi (d. 1058), a renowned jurist of Baghdad, examined the regulations pertaining to the lands and infidel (i.e., non-Muslim) populations subjugated by jihad. This is the origin of the system of dhimmitude. The native infidel population had to recognize Islamic ownership of their land, submit to Islamic law, and accept payment of the poll tax (jizya). Some of the more salient features of dhimmitude include: the prohibition of arms for the vanquished non-Muslims (dhimmis), and of church bells; restrictions concerning the building and restoration of churches and synagogues; inequality between Muslims and non-Muslims with regard to taxes and penal law; the refusal of dhimmi testimony by Muslim courts; a requirement that Jews and Christians wear special clothes; and their overall humiliation and abasement. Furthermore, dhimmis, including those living under "enlightened" Turkish and Bosnian Muslim domain, suffered, at periods, from slavery (i.e., harem slavery for women, and the devshirme child levy for Balkan Christian males), abductions, deportations, and massacres. During the modern era, between 1894-96, the Ottoman Turks massacred over 200,000 (dhimmi) Christian Armenians, followed by the first formal genocide of the 20th century, in 1915, at which time they slaughtered an additional 600,000 to 800,000 Armenians. Contemporary accounts from European diplomats confirm that these brutal massacres were perpetrated in the context of a formal jihad against the Armenians who had attempted to throw off the yoke of dhimmitude by seeking equal rights and autonomy. For example, the Chief Dragoman (Turkish-speaking interpreter) of the British embassy reported regarding the 1894-96 massacres:

…[The perpetrators] are guided in their general action by the prescriptions of the Sheri [Sharia] Law. That law prescribes that if the "rayah" [dhimmi] Christian attempts, by having recourse to foreign powers, to overstep the limits of privileges allowed them by their Mussulman [Muslim] masters, and free themselves from their bondage, their lives and property are to be forfeited, and are at the mercy of the Mussulmans. To the Turkish mind the Armenians had tried to overstep those limits by appealing to foreign powers, especially England. They therefore considered it their religious duty and a righteous thing to destroy and seize the lives and properties of the Armenians…"

The scholar Bat Yeor confirms this reasoning, noting that the Armenian quest for reforms invalidated their "legal status," which involved a "contract" (i.e., with their Muslim Turkish rulers). This …breach…restored to the umma [the Muslim community] its initial right to kill the subjugated minority [the dhimmis], [and] seize their property…

Schwartz extols the ecumenism and tolerance of Sufi Islam. Sufism was derivative from Hinduism, in addition to strains of mysticism borrowed from Judaism and Christianity. However, Sufi Islam as practiced in the Indian subcontinent was quite intolerant of Hinduism, as documented by the Indian scholar K. S. Lal (The Legacy of Muslim Rule in India [1992], p. 237):

The Muslim Mushaikh [Sufi spiritual leaders] were as keen on conversions as the Ulama, and contrary to general belief, in place of being kind to the Hindus as saints would, they too wished the Hindus to be accorded a second class citizenship if they were not converted. Only one instance, that of Shaikh Abdul Quddus Gangoh, need be cited because he belonged to the Chishtia Silsila considered to be the most tolerant of all Sufi groups. He wrote letters to the Sultan Sikandar Lodi, Babur, and Humayun to re-invigorate the Shariat [Sharia] and reduce the Hindus to payers of land tax and jizya. To Babur he wrote, "Extend utmost patronage and protection to theologians and mystics... that they should be maintained and subsidized by the state... No non-Muslim should be given any office or employment in the Diwan of Islam... Furthermore, in conformity with the principles of the Shariat they should be subjected to all types of indignities and humiliations. They should be made to pay the jizya...They should be disallowed from donning the dress of the Muslims and should be forced to keep their Kufr [infidelity] concealed and not to perform the ceremonies of their Kufr openly and freely… They should not be allowed to consider themselves the equal to the Muslims."

Sadly, both Schwartz's recent NRO contributions and his book reflect two persistent currents widespread among the Muslim intelligentsia: historical negationism and silent hypocrisy. To these two trends, Schwartz adds a third: misleading reductionism. If we would only neutralize "Wahhabism," he claims — presumably by some combination of military means, promoting the "true Islam," and perhaps having the world switch to a hydrogen-based fuel economy — all Islamic terror and injustice will disappear. But the reality is that, for nearly 1,400 years, across three continents, from Portugal to India, non-Muslims have experienced the horrors of the institutionalized jihad war ideology and its ugly corollary institution, dhimmitude. Post hoc, internal disputes among Muslim scholars, including Sufi scholars, about the theological "correctness" of "lesser" versus "greater" jihad are meaningless to the millions of non-Muslim victims of countless jihad wars: Christians, Jews, Zoroastrians, Hindus, and Buddhists. What is important is that after well over a millennium, Muslims finally acknowledge the suffering of these millions of victims of jihad wars, as well as the oppressive governance imposed on non-Muslims by the laws of dhimmitude. Thus far this brutal history has been completely denied, and even celebrated, as "enlightened" conquest and rule.

Moreover, it is critical to understand that there were never organized, mass progressive efforts within Islam comparable to the philo-Semitic movement by European Christendom that lead to the emancipation of European Jewry, or the European Judeo-Christian movement that led to the abolition of slavery. Indeed, it took European military (primarily naval) power to force Islamic governments, including the Ottoman Empire, to end slavery at the end of the 19th century. Beginning in the mid-19th century, treaties imposed by the European powers on the weakened Ottoman Empire also included provisions for the so-called Tanzimat reforms. These reforms were designed to end the discriminatory laws of dhimmitude for Christians and Jews living under Muslim Ottoman governance. European consuls endeavored to maintain compliance with at least two cardinal principles: respect for the life and property of non-Muslims, and the right for Christians and Jews to provide evidence in Islamic courts when a Muslim was a party. Unfortunately, the effort to end the belief in Muslim superiority over "infidels," and to establish equal rights, failed. Indeed, throughout the Ottoman Empire, particularly within the Balkans, emancipation of the dhimmi peoples provoked violent, bloody responses against any "infidels" daring to claim equality with local Muslims. Enforced abrogation of the laws of dhimmitude required the dismantling of the Ottoman Empire. This finally happened only after the Balkan Wars of independence, and in the European Mandate period after World War I.

Today, the Muslim intelligentsia focus almost exclusively on debatable "human-rights violations" in the disputed territories of Gaza, Judea, and Samaria, while ignoring the blatant and indisputable atrocities committed by Muslims against non-Muslims throughout the world. The most egregious examples include: the genocidal slaughter, starvation, and enslavement of south Sudanese Christians and animists by the Islamist Khartoum government forces; the mass murder of Indonesian Christians by Muslim jihadists, with minimal preventive intervention by the official Muslim Indonesian government; the imposition of sharia-sanctioned discrimination and punishments, including mutilation, against non-Muslims in Saudi Arabia, Iran, Sudan, and northern Nigeria; the brutal murders of Copts during pogroms by the Muslim Brotherhood and other Islamists, as well as official Egyptian government-mandated social and political discrimination against the Copts; murderous terrorist attacks and the return of such heinous institutions as bonded labor, and punishment for "blasphemy," directed against Pakistani Christians by Pakistani Muslims.

There is a dire need for some courageous, meaningful movement within Islam that would completely renounce both dhimmitude and jihad against non-Muslims, openly acknowledging the horrific devastation they have wrought for nearly 1,400 years. Nothing short of an Islamic Reformation and Enlightenment may be required, to acknowledge non-Muslims as fully equal human beings, and not "infidels" or "dhimmis." It is absurd and disingenuous for Schwartz to pretend that Islam's problems are centered solely within Wahhabism.

— Andrew Bostom, M.D., an associate professor of Medicine at Brown University Medical School, has spent the past 15 months researching the history of jihad and dhimmitude. He has written for NRO previously, coauthor of a piece with dhimmi historian Bat Yeor.


TOPICS: Editorial; Foreign Affairs; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: balkans; islam; middleeast
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-33 next last
STEPHEN SCHWARTZ'S STENCH
1 posted on 12/13/2003 12:28:21 PM PST by Destro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: *balkans
KNOW YOUR ENEMY: List of must read books exposing Islam
2 posted on 12/13/2003 12:29:14 PM PST by Destro (Know your enemy! Help fight Islamic terrorism by visiting www.johnathangaltfilms.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Destro
Use original article titles only. If you wish to add your personal opinion, put in ( ) or [ ] or " ".
3 posted on 12/13/2003 12:58:25 PM PST by Admin Moderator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Destro
He does not mention that the twin institutionalized scourges of Islam at the crux of the violent, nearly 1,400-year relationship between Muslims and non-Muslims — i.e., jihad and dhimmitude — were already well-elaborated by the 8th century, 1,000 years before Wahhabism arose in the 18th century.

------------------------

George Islam is the religion of peace Bush should have brought this up within two days after 9/11.

4 posted on 12/13/2003 1:24:07 PM PST by RLK
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Destro
A PROPOSAL

For Islam to be considered "moderate" and a "religion of peace" Muslims need to:

1 - Renounce violence as a means to spread their faith
    a - Now and forever
    b - In all circumstances
    c - Apologize for the use of violence in the past

2 - Renounce violence as a means to keep followers from converting
    a - Now and forever
    b - In all circumstances
    c - Apologize for the use of violence in the past

3 - Renounce violence against other faiths that practice wihin predominately Muslim societies
    a - Now and forever
    b - In all circumstances
    c - Apologize for the use of violence in the past

4 - Renounce the use of non-religious discriminatory practices
    a - Now and forever
    b - In all circumstances
    c - Apologize for their use in the past

5 - Condemn by name Islamic terrorist groups

6 - Accept the ability of other religions to pratice their faith

7 - Proclaim that Muslim women have equal rights with men

8 - Renounce the goal of an Islamic Theocracy

pardon me if I don't hold my breath
5 posted on 12/13/2003 5:37:33 PM PST by polemikos (This Space for Rant)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RLK
George Islam is the religion of peace Bush should have brought this up within two days after 9/11.

I disagree. Shall we fight all Islamic nations at once with a Clintonized military?
Or do we fight them one at a time, at the time and place of our choosing, with some Muslims offering aid? The end goal is the same, but the latter path offers more potential for success.
6 posted on 12/13/2003 5:46:03 PM PST by polemikos (This Space for Rant)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: polemikos
I disagree. Shall we fight all Islamic nations at once with a Clintonized military?

--------------------------------

We ARE fighting all Islamic nations at once. There are adversaries in Afghanistan and Iraq from all over the planet. Wake up!

7 posted on 12/13/2003 7:29:17 PM PST by RLK
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: RLK
Oh please. When did expatriate muslim mercenaries become "Islamic nations".
8 posted on 12/13/2003 7:49:12 PM PST by polemikos (This Space for Rant)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Destro
Agreed.
9 posted on 12/14/2003 12:30:11 AM PST by lainde
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: polemikos; RLK
The point is that there is no Islamist concept of the nation state as we understand it, there is an ideology hellbent on establishing a global caliphate run by the Sharia. Look at my personal page for a better understanding.

Every Islamist jihadist nut case has rejected the entire concept of the modern nation state, and is busy trying to establish Islamist rule in their own countries. The more nations that succumb to this, the closer they get to their ultimate goal.

This is another ideology whereby the state is supposed to ultimately wither away and die.

10 posted on 12/14/2003 10:23:01 PM PST by Mortimer Snavely (Comitas, Humanitas, Gravitas, Firmitas, Industria)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Mortimer Snavely; RLK
The point is that there is no Islamist concept of the nation state ...

Well understood but beside the "point".

RLK apparently wants to take on all of Islam simultaneously.
There are multiple reasons to approach each situation separately.
11 posted on 12/14/2003 11:59:11 PM PST by polemikos (This Space for Rant)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: polemikos; Mortimer Snavely
There are multiple reasons to approach each situation separately.

-------------------------

The main reason is to defend the incompetence of George Bush in an attempt to create an all-knowing perfect high school hero for the desperate to believe in.

Islam is a movement based upon the words of a psychotic known as Mohammed. It does not recognize national boundaries and more than does and epidemic of influenza or plague. None of the people in the 9/11 attack were Iraqis. On the other hand mohammedism kills thounds of people per year in many countries throughout the world.

Mohammedism throughout the world is at war with us. Subject to opportunity groups and individuals throughout the world would hit us with a 9/11 once a week, if they had the capability.

Islam is presently at total war with us. It's a matter of being realistic and whether we have determination to survive as to whether we admit and act upon it.

12 posted on 12/15/2003 1:23:21 PM PST by RLK
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: RLK
The main reason is to defend the incompetence of George Bush

LOL! Keep on believing that, please.

Islam is a movement based upon the words of a psychotic known as Mohammed. It does not recognize national boundaries..

Yet, how do you explain all those separate nations, eh? They talk of "one nation" but not a one of them is willing to give up their perks. They're much too tribal to act as "one".

The facts on the ground trump the fantasy of Mohammedian thinking.

Mohammedism throughout the world is at war with us.

Regardless, it is still more effective to take on our enemies one at a time. Really, we have no other choice.
13 posted on 12/15/2003 10:32:34 PM PST by polemikos (Liberalism - A Disease of the Mind)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: polemikos
Yet, how do you explain all those separate nations, eh?

---------------------

It must be a myster to you how all those people from those separate nations training in those separate nations accidenttally got togethr to fly airplanes into the World Trade Center.

As you would say, LOL.

14 posted on 12/15/2003 10:39:44 PM PST by RLK
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: polemikos
Thank yoy. I found your answer to be fascinating.
15 posted on 12/15/2003 10:51:42 PM PST by RLK
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: polemikos
Thank you. I found your answer to be fascinating.

LOL

16 posted on 12/15/2003 10:52:33 PM PST by RLK
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: RLK
Mohammedism throughout the world is at war with us.

Nothing going on in the world supports that statement. The vast majority are all turban and no jihad. There are some hotheads with whom we are dealing. The rest will get in line....... eventually.

17 posted on 12/15/2003 10:57:48 PM PST by squidly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: squidly
Nothing going on in the world supports that statement.

--------------------------

Perhaps we aren't living on the same planet, or could it be you are unfamiliar with recent events?

18 posted on 12/15/2003 11:04:20 PM PST by RLK
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: RLK
The things you're saying suggest that the entire Islamic world is at war against us, and that simply isn't true. They may not like us, and they may be pulling for the other guy, but they're not all at war with us. As I stated, the vast majority of them are all turban and no jihad.
19 posted on 12/15/2003 11:06:10 PM PST by squidly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: squidly
You are repeating yourself as if you think re-presenting the same bullcrap will make it true. Do you watch the news presentations of continuing anti-American demonstrations or anything.
20 posted on 12/15/2003 11:13:31 PM PST by RLK
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-33 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson