Some thoughts on Islam…

…or or Fun and Frolics with the Fatwa Fraternity

As we are in the first few days of Ramadan, and as part of a desperate attempt to get my mind on something other than the dreaded lurgy that is currently filling our world, I’m going to lay before you some info and observations on Islam. I do not claim to be an Islamic scholar, but I have read widely about Islam and I grew up in a town with a large Moslem population, (over 25% today, maybe 15/20% when I was a kid back in the ’80s). Islam has been there throughout my life and while I do have grave concerns about it and its growing influence in the world (I have been called an Islamophobe by Guardian reader types), I’m also genuinely interested in it. I will be making statements that are my own opinion and comparing what Islam says about Islam with what history says. If you take issue with anything, or I’m unclear, do please post in the comments, it would be great to discuss this vital subject.

There’s far too much for one post, Islam has 1.8 billion followers, has existed for 1,400 years and altough it is often seen as a simple monotheist faith, has plenty of different sects and cultural variety. Therefore, I’m going to post different pieces looking at different things, hopefully the ones to come will be rather shorter than this one. I’ve  tried to use reasonably simple spellings of Islamic names and words, you will see other versions elsewhere. I use the old school spelling Moslem, rather than Muslim, for two reasons, firstly. I am old school, and secondly, it annoys lefties and Islamists. I’ve tended to use the word God rather than Allah beacuse I want to convey some sense of how Moslems see their faith, please don’t mistake this, or anything I’ve written, for agreement with their position.

The Beginnings

As I’m sure you’re all well aware, Islam was started by Mohamed in early 7^th century Arabia. In 610 AD, when he was around 40, he claimed to have received a revelation from God via the Angel Gabriel (Jibreel). Until his death in 632 AD he continued to receive these revelations. They are gathered together in the Quran (the Recitation).  

Simply put, the Quran claims to be the final and authoritative revelation of the God of Abraham, Moses and Christ. Mohamed is claimed to be not just the last, but the final prophet of that faith and his life is regarded as the template for human behaviour. As the literal word of God, the Quran is unalterable and unquestionable. Many of the difficulties we see today have their origins in these absolutist concepts.

It’s an idea to take a step back and look at the context. Often the story of the origins of Islam is told as if it happened in a vacuum. Although there were Jews and Christians in 7^th century Arabia Mohamed was not one of them. He knew Jews and Christians, but he never practiced either faith. He himself was born into a prominent family in Mecca, like most Arabians at the time they were polytheists who worshiped various gods and goddesses. I would argue that this means Islam is not really continuation of the Abrahamic tradition as is usually stated. It is certainly a monotheist faith but at best it’s a semi-detached part of the Abrahamic tradition.

Mohamed gathered some converts in Mecca and saw Jews and Christians as natural allies. However, his message was by no means popular with Jews, Christians or Pagans. Moslems say he was persecuted, other sources claim it he was more mocked than attacked. Either way he took himself and his followers to the city of Medina (the Hijra or Departure). Here they sustained themselves by raiding trading caravans heading to and from Mecca. Success in these raids led more people to join Team Mohamed and his power and influence grew. His raids led to open warfare with Mecca. The Moslems won this conflict and conquered the city in 630 AD. Mohamed in the last two years of his life started to expand the reach of his message and authority, again by physical force. For the most part Jews and Christians rejected, and even opposed, his teachings. This opposition was seen as a betrayal by Mohamed. This goes some way to explaining the rather dissonant attitude to Jews and Christians in Islam. On the one hand they are the People of the Book, who can live and keep their faith in Islamic society (under restrictions of course), on the other hand they are seen as enemies of the faith.

This is a highly simplified rendition of the story, but it lays out the Mecca/Medina periods, something that it’s necessary to understand, which brings us to…

The Quran

To understand Islam, it is essential have some understanding of the Quran. Not so much what it says, but its history, status and structure. Like the Bible it is divided into chapters (114 of them, called surah, plural suwar) and verses (ayah, plural ayat). It is a little shorter than the New Testament and is usually regarded as the greatest example of Arabic literature. It contains everything a Moslem needs to be a Moslem, instructions on how to worship, how to live life and how society should be run. Some Moslems believe it is all they need; however, most Moslems also refer to the Haddith (collected stories of the life and sayings of Mohamed) and the Sunnah (the body of interpretation of the Quran and Haddith).

As stated earlier, but it bears repeating, Moslems believe the Quran to be the literal word of God, dictated to Mohamed and as such it is unalterable and unquestionable. This means it occupies a place in Islam not just comparable to the Bible in Christianity, but somewhat beyond it. I have been assured by those who can read it in its original language that it is a miracle of poetry and that it cannot really be understood through translation.

I first came across this concept during a late-night debate on religion and politics with some members of an extremeist group called Hezb ut Tahrir. We were in a kebab shop in west London, we’d got talking and wanted to continue the conversation. As they knew the owner, he let us sit down and chat into the small hours after he had closed. Whenever I mentioned the Quran they would insist I couldn’t use any argument based on a translation for the reasons given above. A similar purist argument is used by some Marxists; they’ll refuse to answer for anything done by actual Marxist governments as it isn’t “real” Marxism. The Hezb ut Tahrir lads took the same line with existing “Moslem” governments, whom they despised. Don’t fall for this, always debate like with like.

Think about the implications of this suspiciously convenient argument on translation. If you allow this point, effectively you need to spend years learning 7^th century Arabic just to have an opinion. Not easy to do that without spending years being instructed by Moslem scholars. Maybe it’s just me, but I suspect this could reduce your objectivity somewhat. I would also point out that an all powerful God that could produce the “poetic miracle” of the Quran in Arabic must’ve have been rather off his game if he didn’t also make it intelligible in translation. The majority of Moslems around the world cannot really know the Quran, as most of them do not understand the original language. If God really created the Quran we can only assume it was intended for a purely local market.

In Mohamed’s lifetime the Quran was preserved bit by bit, different verses being written down by followers of Mohamed on various objects, like palm stalks and shards of pottery, or memorized and passed on orally. It was the first Caliph of Islam, Abu Bakr, that ordered these different elements be brought together in one volume by scholars led by Zeyd ibn Thabit. The third Caliph, Uthman bin Affan, noticed discrepancies in different versions in circulation. Not surprising as the realm of Islam by this point (c. 650 AD) had grown to include all of the Holy Land, Syria, Iraq, Iran, much of Egypt and eastern Libya as well as Arabia. The Caliph ordered Zeyd to again lead a committee to produce a single, authorised version. Needless to say the other, unauthorised, versions were destroyed.

So, the Quran was preserved in various fallible human memories and went through not one but two committees over twenty years before the single, final, unalterable and unquestionable version was produced. Islamic scholars say that the differences were small and that the book that exists today is true to the message dictated to Mohamed. One can only assume they have never sat on a committee. You really do need faith to believe Islams claims about the Quran, but if you have any regard for history these claims are laughable.

It is also worth remembering that even the version we have today is subject to debate over the details. The 72 virgins/raisins controversy being a wonderful example. It is commonly, and erroneously, stated that Moslem martyrs are promised 72 virgins in paradise. Some have suggested that this is a mistranslation and that the word translated as virgins really means raisins. The word in question is houri, being the plural of hur. They are certainly not dried fruit but “fair ones, with wide dark eyes” and are indeed mentioned in the Quran as one of the rewards of the Islamic paradise (Jannah) in suwah 44:54, 52:20, 55:72 and 56:22. No number is mentioned, and they are part of the reward for all of the faithful that go to Jannah, not just martyrs. They are usually assumed to be female, but the language is ambiguous, a few scholars do assert they can be male or female. The number of 72 comes from one single hadith, not the Quran and that hadith is one regarded as weak by most Islamic scholars. So, we can see when it comes to the meaning of the Quran, the devil really is in the detail.

One last point on the Quran, and one that is vital when discussing the various egregious actions of some Moslems today, is how Zeyd ibn Thabit’s committee put it together.

One might be forgiven for assuming that the chapters would appear in the order they were dictated, but this is not the case, the Quran as we know it is not compiled chronologically. This is important as the Quran is divided into two parts, not unlike the Bible. Instead of Old and New Testaments, there are the verses from when Mohamed was in Mecca and those from after the move to Medina.

While the Bible certainly has many passages that people find difficult or even objectionable, these are mostly in the Old Testament and are contradicted and effectively overwritten by the New Testament. The situation with the Quran is similar; but reversed. The verses that are gentle, conciliatory and pacific come from the earlier Meccan period, when Mohamed and his followers were a weak minority. The verses used to justify the actions of groups like ISIS, the Taliban, Al Qaeda, Boko Haram etc. etc. are mostly in the later Medina chapters, written when Mohamed was in control and could enforce his will on others.

For example, the oft quoted Verse of the Sword is the 5^th ayah of the 9^th surah.

“But when the forbidden months are past, then fight and slay the Pagans wherever ye find them, and seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem (of war); but if they repent, and establish regular prayers and practise regular charity, then open the way for them: for Allah is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful.”

(Yusuf Ali translation)

The 9^th surah is early in the Quran as compiled but chronologically comes near the very end, 113 out of 114.

This is crucial because when verses contradict each other the chronologically later verse is considered the valid one. This is the Doctrine of Abrogation (Naskh) which comes from two Quran verses, 2:106 and 16:101. Every accepted school of thought in Islam holds to this doctrine. The only group of Moslems that do not, the Ahmadi, number only around 20 million worldwide and are regarded as heretics by most Moslems. So, if decent Moslems of good faith want to tackle the difficult parts of the Quran (and I think many do) they must first drop the Doctrine of Abrogation. To do this they must effectively contradict the Quran, which they believe to be the unalterable and unquestionable word of God. I do not envy them.