Truth revealed

FITNA ?! Yes or No?!

The RESULTS

Indeed we now live in an age where Islam is being continuously and viciously attacked from all sides. The attacks now range from everything we Muslims believe in, from the Noble Quran, to the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) and to the Islamic law.

So what should the Muslim do in the face of such assaults and attacks against the true and mighty religion of Islam? Well for starters we should remain calm, and not give in to the provocations because that is one of the intended goals of these people. They want the Muslims to become very angry and do something foolish; therefore we should not give into this and must remain calm at all times. Let your rationality overcome your anger.

As the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) taught us Muslims:

Saheeh Bukhari

Volume 8, Book 73, Number 135:

Narrated Abu Huraira:

Allah's Apostle said, "The strong is not the one who overcomes the people by his strength, but the strong is the one who controls himself while in anger."

So a Muslim should always keep his anger in check. I know it is hard, but when we become angry we lose our senses and this makes us unfit to defend Islam as we are not thinking properly.

So what should we do in the face of such attacks against our religion? The answer is extremely logical; we must study our religion so that we will be able to defend it. How can we defend our religion when we do not even know much about it? Thus, if Muslims want to do something about it then they should start learning about their faith.

So the answer in such times is not anger, it is wisdom. It is not shouting and burning things down. Truth will always crush the falsehood and lies, as the Quran says:

017.081
YUSUFALI: And say: "Truth has (now) arrived, and Falsehood perished: for Falsehood is (by its nature) bound to perish."

021.018
YUSUFALI: Nay, We hurl the Truth against falsehood, and it knocks out its brain, and behold, falsehood doth perish! Ah! woe be to you for the (false) things ye ascribe (to Us).

So all we need is the truth and we do have the truth. All we must do is reveal the truth against the lies and the lies shall crumble and fall apart.

These points are crucial for a Muslim to understand because if there is no wisdom in defending the religion, then the religion shall never be defended and the lies shall continue to be spread against the true religion of Islam.

The goal of this booklet is to apply the correct method of responding against falsehood, and that is by employing the truth. As many of you might know, one of the most recent attacks against Islam was the new documentary titled ?Fitna'. The documentary's goal was to try and show that the Quran is an evil and fascist book and that the Quran is a book that incites violence and terrorism. The maker of the documentary was a right wing Dutch MP named Geert Wilders.

What we shall do in this booklet is bring up the verses he produced in his documentary and examine the verses in light of their textual and historical context. We do this for the sake of Allah in order to defend His noble religion and His noble speech, which is the Quran. We are also doing this for the Muslims so that they shall be equipped with the truth and knowledge to respond to such claims in the future. I hope you all shall find this work beneficial and helpful.

We will separate this booklet into 5 parts, for the 5 verses he has brought up.

Surah Al-Anfal Verse 60

The first verse that Wilders produced in his documentary was that of Surah 8, which is titled Surah Al-Anfal, verse 60. The verse reads like this:

008.060
YUSUFALI: Against them make ready your strength to the utmost of your power, including steeds of war, to strike terror into (the hearts of) the enemies, of Allah and your enemies, and others besides, whom ye may not know, but whom Allah doth know. Whatever ye shall spend in the cause of Allah, shall be repaid unto you, and ye shall not be treated unjustly.

So from this verse Geert wants to assert that the Quran advocates violence and terrorism against the non-Muslims. As the verse says, the Muslims should prepare our strength and power so we can fight against the enemies, as well as casting terror in their hearts.

Without a doubt when one reads this verse by itself it can paint the picture that Geert is trying to assert. Yet, as we all know this is not how it works in the field of literature and understanding the content of a book. In the field of literature or in any other field when one wants to examine a statement one must be aware of the statement's CONTEXT. One cannot simply choose one statement and verse while ignoring the rest. In fact this form of argumentation being used by Geert, which is taking a verse out of its proper context is very unscholarly and cheap. It is amazing that this man is a member of the parliament! You would think a member of the government would adhere to the proper scholarly principals of argumentation, yet Geert completely ignores this basic rule.

So let us now quote the verse in its proper context, so the reader will get the true meaning of what the passage is actually saying:

60 Against them make ready your strength to the utmost of your power, including steeds of war, to strike terror into (the hearts of) the enemies, of Allah and your enemies, and others besides, whom ye may not know, but whom Allah doth know. Whatever ye shall spend in the cause of Allah, shall be repaid unto you, and ye shall not be treated unjustly.61 But if the enemy incline towards peace, do thou (also) incline towards peace, and trust in Allah: for He is One that heareth and knoweth (all things).

So notice what verse 61 says right after verse 60, verse 61 tells the Muslims that if the enemies want to make peace, then we Muslims should make peace as well. How could Geert intentionally leave this verse out? How can those who support Geert have the audacity to say he is a great man and a hero?

We are still not done with the context, let us now quote the verses that come before verse 60 so the entire context of this situation can be known, and made clear to the reader. So here is verse 60 put in its proper context:

They are those with whom thou didst make a covenant, but they break their covenant every time, and they have not the fear (of Allah.. If ye gain the mastery over them in war, disperse, with them, those who follow them, that they may remember. If thou fearest treachery from any group, throw back (their covenant) to them, (so as to be) on equal terms: for Allah loveth not the treacherous. Let not the unbelievers think that they can get the better (of the godly): they will never frustrate (them). Against them make ready your strength to the utmost of your power, including steeds of war, to strike terror into (the hearts of) the enemies, of Allah and your enemies, and others besides, whom ye may not know, but whom Allah doth know. Whatever ye shall spend in the cause of Allah, shall be repaid unto you, and ye shall not be treated unjustly. But if the enemy incline towards peace, do thou (also) incline towards peace, and trust in Allah. for He is One that heareth and knoweth (all things). (56-61)

So here is the proper context starting from verse 56. As you can see the context first starts with mentioning the non-Muslims who BREAK their covenants, which they have made with the Muslims and fighting breaks out as a result of this. The context of the verse continues to verses 59-60, which is warning the non-believers to not attempt to INSTIGATE against the Muslims and then it commands the Muslims to make themselves ready for such treacherous people. Then we get to the ending of the context with verse 61, which tells the Muslims that if these people want to eventually make peace then we Muslims should also make peace.

As you can see there is nothing within this context that advocates violence nor terrorism, Wilders has unscholarly twisted a verse out of its proper and clear context to paint a very false picture. The verses are all about wars in which the Muslims are on the DEFENSIVE reacting against an enemy who instigates and begins the war.

Now that we have seen the context of the passages, what about the historical context? Well the 8^th Surah of the Quran (Al-Anfal) was revealed during a time in which the Muslims began to fight back against the Pagans of Makkah. This was a period of war and the meaning of Al-Anfal itself means the spoils of war.

Now why is its historical context important? The historical context of this Surah is extremely important because one must know what was happening around the Prophet (peace be upon him) at the time. By knowing such things it allows for a better evaluation of the verses in question. As we said, the historical context of this time was a time of war between the Muslims and the Pagans. It was a war in which the Pagans had instigated and the Muslims were now finally fighting back. By not giving the historical context of the verses Wilders yet again twists the verse completely out of its proper usage and meaning.

So let us summarize what we have so far:

- Surah Al-Anfal was revealed during a time of war between the Muslims and the Pagans

- It was a war in which the Muslims were fighting back against Pagan oppression and attacks.

- The Muslims were ordered to prepare themselves against non-Muslims who seek to instigate a war against the Muslims

- If the non-Muslims who instigated the war wanted to make peace, then the Muslims were to accept it and make peace as well

So the case is closed. There is nothing within these verses that advocate any violence or terrorism. Wilders should be ashamed of himself for intentionally twisting the Quran to give a false image and for this he is a liar because no one could possibly do what he did when they read the context of these passages.

Wilders knew exactly what he was doing. It was calculated and precise. It was meant to deceive his people and the non-Muslims who have no knowledge of Islam or the Quran. He was simply playing on their fears and he knew that all he had to do was quote verse 60 all alone and he would manage to dupe them into believing his false arguments.

So that is one down, four more to go.

Surah An-Nisa Verse 56

The next passage Wilders brings up is from the 4^th Surah of the Quran, verse 56.

Let us now quote the verse that Wilders has brought up, which is verse 56, and it reads:

56. Those who reject our Signs, We shall soon cast into the Fire: as often as their skins are roasted through, We shall change them for fresh skins, that they may taste the penalty: for Allah is Exalted in Power, Wise.

I really fail to see the argument here. The verse is clear; if you reject the signs of God, and remain a disbeliever then the hell-fire awaits for you. This is the sad truth, however you must accept the truth of God and His prophets if you want salvation and to be safe in the Hereafter.

I don't see why non-Muslims are complaining, the Quran is WARNING the disbelievers about the consequences that awaits them in the Hereafter. The Quran is warning them so they make the right choice and come to Islam and be saved in the Hereafter.

As the Quran says:

25. But give glad tidings to those who believe and work righteousness, that their portion is Gardens, beneath which rivers flow. Every time they are fed with fruits therefrom, they say: "Why, this is what we were fed with before," for they are given things in similitude; and they have therein companions pure (and holy); and they abide therein (for ever).

This is from Surah Al-Baqara, which is the 2^nd Surah of the Quran, verse 25. As you can see Allah tells mankind that those who believe and work righteous deeds will be saved and that they will be granted paradise.

Allah has told you to come to Islam, therefore why do you complain when Allah warns you of punishments? If someone warns you of a punishment and a way to avoid that punishment for something much better would you not listen to the advice so you can avoid the harm? Off course you would, therefore if non-Muslims have a problem with Surah 4 verse 56 then they should become believers and become saved and have the glad tidings of Surah 2 verse 25!

As the Quran says in Surah 2 verses 38-39:

We said: "Get ye down all from here; and if, as is sure, there comes to you Guidance from me, whosoever follows My guidance, on them shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve. "But those who reject Faith and belie Our Signs, they shall be companions of the Fire; they shall abide therein."

As you can see Allah tells us to follow His guidance and then we shall be saved, but He gives us a warning that if we do not follow His guidance then there is a harsh punishment awaiting us.

There is nothing hateful with Surah 4 verse 56, it is the harsh reality. On the contrary, it indicates a message of love. If Allah did not love that His creation earns eternal salvation then why would He warn them?

Now having said that how does Surah 4 verse 56 advocate violence or terrorism? Is Wilders trying to say that the verse is what Muslims will do to non-believers? We will quote the verse again:

Is Wilders trying to say that the word ?We', which is mentioned here is referring to the Muslims? That it is the Muslims who will do such a thing?

For starters incase he is arguing that then I have a simple question for Geert, unless Muslims are so advanced in skin operations then how in the world is it possible for us to burn someone completely and then replace his skin with a new set of skin?! Secondly, I challenge Wilders to bring up one case in Islamic history where Muslims have burned people and then replaced the burnt skin with new skin.

The ?We' who is referred to in this verse is referring to Allah, to God, it is He who will burn the disbelievers in the Hereafter and it is He who will replace the skin with new skin. He is our Creator and the All Powerful and that shouldn't be difficult for Him.

Now there are some people who will say why does Allah say "we"? Is Allah made up of more than one persons or is Allah referring to Himself and the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) or is Allah referring to Himself and the angels?

It is neither of the above. The "we" that Allah uses is His way of signifying His Majesty and this is something for very common in languages including English. Often times you will even hear the queen of England referring to herself as WE. It is a very common usage of language, which is used by royalty and leaders.

Furthermore, Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) forbade that someone be burnt as a punishment:

Saheeh Bukhari

Volume 9, Book 84, Number 57:

Narrated `Ikrima:

Some Zanadiqa (atheists) were brought to `Ali and he burnt them. The news of this event, reached Ibn `Abbas who said, "If I had been in his place, I would not have burnt them, as Allah's Apostle forbade it, saying, 'Do not punish anybody with Allah's punishment (fire).' I would have killed them according to the statement of Allah's Apostle, 'Whoever changed his Islamic religion, then kill him.'"

Before this order was issued, the Prophet (peace be upon him) did initially order that specific individuals be burnt as a punishment. However, it is totally prohibited now. Also, when the Prophet (peace be upon him) did initially apply this punishment it wouldn't have anything to do with Surah 4:56, since he obviously did not have the ability to reattach the skins of those being punished and having them burnt over again.

Now what makes this more interesting is that the Bible teaches that disbelievers will go to hell as well, so why doesn't Wilders argue against that? And why do the Christian fans of Wilders have no problems with the Bible condemning people to hell, but have a problem with the Quran when it does so? Here is the Bible condemning people to the hellfire:

¹¹And I saw a great white throne, and him that sat on it, from whose face the earth and the heaven fled away; and there was found no place for them. ¹²And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works. ¹³And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works. ¹⁴And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death. ¹⁵And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire. (Revelations 20:11-15)

So as you can see non-believers according to the Bible will be thrown into the lake of fire. So if the Quran is evil for such a teaching, then so is the Bible and every Christian fan of Wilders must now disregard their Bible or show the world that they are hypocrites preaching from two mouths.

Surah Muhammad verse 4

The third verse that Geert cites in his bankrupt documentary comes from the 47^th chapter of the Noble Quran, Surah Muhammad. The Islamophobe cites verse 4 which reads as follows:

047.004
YUSUFALI: Therefore, when ye meet the Unbelievers (in fight), smite at their necks; At length, when ye have thoroughly subdued them, bind a bond firmly (on them): thereafter (is the time for) either generosity or ransom: Until the war lays down its burdens. Thus (are ye commanded): but if it had been Allah's Will, He could certainly have exacted retribution from them (Himself); but (He lets you fight) in order to test you, some with others. But those who are slain in the Way of Allah,- He will never let their deeds be lost.

It is truly shocking that one could try to use this verse to try to prove that Islam advocates terrorism. The verse explains itself quite properly, and the other two main English translations of Shakir and Pickhtal have translated it more properly:

PICKTHAL: Now when ye meet in battle those who disbelieve, then it is smiting of the necks until, when ye have routed them, then making fast of bonds; and afterward either grace or ransom till the war lay down its burdens. That (is the ordinance). And if Allah willed He could have punished them (without you) but (thus it is ordained) that He may try some of you by means of others. And those who are slain in the way of Allah, He rendereth not their actions vain.

SHAKIR: So when you meet in battle those who disbelieve, then smite the necks until when you have overcome them, then make (them) prisoners, and afterwards either set them free as a favor or let them ransom (themselves) until the war terminates. That (shall be so); and if Allah had pleased He would certainly have exacted what is due from them, but that He may try some of you by means of others; and (as for) those who are slain in the way of Allah, He will by no means allow their deeds to perish.

The verse is referring to a battle! Has Geert never witnessed a battle in his life before? Does Geert believe that when battles take place the opposing armies trade jokes with each other while serving tea and biscuits to one another? When there is a battle between two opposing armies they fight each other to the death unless one of them decides to retreat or surrender.

Secondly, the Quranic passage that is cited here was referring specifically to the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) and his fellow Muslims, and back then when they would battle they would use swords. Hence the Quran is giving logical instructions on how to fight in a battle, which is to aim for the neck as to get an instant blow and to nullify your enemy. Also, as we all know after a battle there will always be prisoners to be taken, and these prisoners will usually be ransomed off later.

So what exactly is the problem here? It is very strange that when Islamophobic haters view Quranic passages dealing with battles and wars they some-how use very strange logic which they never apply to other battles and wars that have been waged throughout man's history.

It is very sad that people are actually praising Geert for ?exposing' the Quran with such weak arguments.

Three down, two more to go.

Surah An-Nisa verse 89

The Islamophobe Geert goes back to the 4^th chapter of the Quran, this time he brings verse 89 which reads:

004.089
YUSUFALI: They but wish that ye should reject Faith, as they do, and thus be on the same footing (as they): But take not friends from their ranks until they flee in the way of Allah (From what is forbidden). But if they turn renegades, seize them and slay them wherever ye find them; and (in any case) take no friends or helpers from their ranks;-

Geert is guilty of taking another passage out of its proper context, as well as its historical context. Since he was not scholarly enough to follow the proper forms of argumentation, we shall have to do the work instead. So let us see this passage in its proper context, this will give us a better understanding of what the passage means:

88 Why should ye be divided into two parties about the Hypocrites? Allah hath upset them for their (evil) deeds. Would ye guide those whom Allah hath thrown out of the Way? For those whom Allah hath thrown out of the Way, never shalt thou find the Way.89 They but wish that ye should reject Faith, as they do, and thus be on the same footing (as they): But take not friends from their ranks until they flee in the way of Allah (From what is forbidden). But if they turn renegades, seize them and slay them wherever ye find them; and (in any case) take no friends or helpers from their ranks;-

So Geert conveniently forgot to mention verse 88, the one right before 89. As you can see the command of verse 89 is very specific, and it is specific to the hypocrites mentioned in verse 88. Geert had intended to show that verse 89 was a general command for Muslims to carry out on all non-Muslims, yet thanks to the context of verse 88, we see the command is referring to the hypocrites amongst the Muslims.

Secondly, the historical context comes into the equation now. The hypocrites that are mentioned in verse 88 are referring to the hypocrites who were alive during the time of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him). What these men would do was disguise themselves as Muslims, to basically act like infiltrators in order to cause confusion and chaos. They wanted to break the Muslim community from within.

So due to this fact Allah gave the Muslims the permission to fight these hypocrites. However it is important to take note that since Allah is very merciful He still gives these hypocrites a chance as He says:

But take not friends from their ranks until they flee in the way of Allah (From what is forbidden).

Notice if these hypocrites stopped behaving the way they did and had a pure heart, then they would have been forgiven and no war would have been waged upon them. However, if they persisted then the Muslims would have a legitimate reason to fight these people.

These hypocrites are no different than an army who sends an infiltrator to an opposing army to act like one of them as to get information, basically like a spy, as well as carrying out sabotage acts to break the opposing army.

The Muslims were forced to act on these hypocrites because that is exactly what they were.

Therefore to summarize:

1-The Quranic command is specifically referring to HYPOCRITES who infiltrate the Muslim community and act like Muslims only to spy on them and to break the community from within.

2-The hypocrites are still to be given a chance to repent before war is waged upon them, hence war is not the first option. The hypocrites are given a chance as Allah is merciful.

3-The passage was revealed in a historical period when there were hypocrites who were infiltrating the Muslim community during the lifetime of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him).

Of course Geert ignored all of this.

So with four verses down, only one remains now.

Al-Anfal verse 39

The Islamophobe Geert goes back to 8^th chapter of the Quran and this time he quotes the 39^th verse of the chapter which says:

008.039
YUSUFALI: And fight them on until there is no more tumult or oppression, and there prevail justice and faith in Allah altogether and everywhere; but if they cease, verily Allah doth see all that they do.

This verse proves that Islam is a religion of peace, rather than a religion of violence. The passage calls on the Muslims to fight against oppression, and to make sure that justice prevails. Is this not a noble cause that all humans should strive for?

The non-believer may claim the passage says that Muslims should fight to convert people because it says:

And fight them on until there is no more tumult or oppression, and there prevail justice and faith in Allah

However so when we read the ending of the passage we know that this is not the exact cause of fighting:

And fight them on until there is no more tumult or oppression, and there prevail justice and faith in Allah altogether and everywhere; but if they cease

Notice the passage says that we should fight until there is no more oppression, and then the verse ends by saying "but if they cease", obviously this refers to them ending their oppression.

Thus, Muslims are commanded to fight against oppression to make sure justice stands. Notice the verse says to fight them to stop oppression and does not say "fight them to convert them to Islam".

The reason why the Quran mentions that we should also make people believe in Allah is very simple. Muslims do not fight under the banner of nationalism, we fight for God. This is why when Muslims go out to fight oppression we should also try to make the people living under the oppression see the truth of Islam. It is not an ultimatum, for it is up to them, but the Muslim must still try to bring Islam to them as we fight against oppression in the cause of Islam.

Here is the passage again:

008.039
YUSUFALI: And fight them on until there is no more tumult or oppression, and there prevail justice and faith in Allah altogether and everywhere; but if they cease, verily Allah doth see all that they do.

No where does it say that we should fight them until they all convert to Islam or that we should fight them because they aren't Muslims. The command to fight them is because of the oppression they are inflicting.

It is important to take the historical context as well, which is something that Geert has not done. Remember the 8^th chapter of the Quran was revealed in a time of war, a war against the brutal oppressive Qurayshi pagan regime, who would not allow Muslims the right of freedom of religion. The Quraysh committed several oppressive acts, not only in the area of freedom of religion, but also in their treatment of women and the poor. So the Muslims were fighting back now and were commanded to fight against this oppression that the Quraysh were committing.

If the Muslims were all about fighting the pagans because they were not Muslims then how was it that at the same time the Muslims were living side by side with the Jews of Medina? Not only were the Muslims living side by side with the Jews of Medina, there was a written constitution between both parties, which was initiated by the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him), which allowed the freedom of religion in Medina, meaning no one was forced to convert to any religion and could follow their own!

This historical importance of this refutes any claim that Surah 8 verse 39 was a command to fight the pagans just because they were not Muslims and to force them to Islam. If that was the case then the Muslims first victims would have been the Jews of Medina, they would have forced them to convert, yet that was never the case.

The fact is Surah 8 verse 39 is all about the pagan oppression and it is as simple as that.

Conclusion

We have read and analyzed the Quranic passages that Geert has raised. We have seen from both their textual context, as well as their historical context that none of these verses advocate terrorism.

All we have seen is that Geert abused the Quranic text by taking passages out of their context to paint a false picture and to benefit his right wing agenda.

One positive note we can say is that Geert is doing Allah's work. Thanks to Geert's documentary it has given so much attention to the Quran and has caused it to sell out in the Netherlands, as well as giving it the spot light to the rest of the world. People will be very eager to read the Quran now and they will see the truth and the beauty of it, as well as Geert's wicked distortion.

As Allah has said, while they plan, He too is planning.

And Allah Knows Best!

Blog Archive

My FAVORITE Links

Followers

AddThis

Blog Archive

Subscribe via email

Refute FITNA Movie