Engineering an Illusion of Superiority

There is a lot of misunderstanding, fear, and confusion surrounding Islam in the West. If there wasn’t, it would mean a centuries long propaganda effort, that currently costs billions of dollars every year, was not working. But this extended smear campaign which stretches back before the Crusades has been and continues to be quite effective.

One of the latest variations on this propaganda is the notion that Western countries are somehow less violent than Muslim societies. This idea stems not only from disproportionate coverage of violence in the Muslim world. It also comes from a trick of media sleight of hand I call ‘externalization.’ It operates on the same principle as ‘misdirection,’ which is a key element of magic. This is a major trend that consistent in many aspects of the Western worldview. Following are a few examples.

Externalizing Social Violence with Prisons

The United States is an incredibly violent country. In researching the Egyptian revolution and the ensuing chaos, I wanted to find out the death toll resulting from all of the associated events, including the overthrow of Mubarak, the election of Morsi, the coup, the Sinai insurrection and all of the bombings, including the downing of the Russian airliner. After tallying all of this up, the total number killed in the 6 years after Mubarak left power was between 7,000-8,000.

This number was somewhat surprising, because I distinctly recalled that the average annual number of gun killings in the US totals around 10,000-11,000. Of course, the US has a much larger population than Egypt.

Egypt’s murder rate is .8 per 100,000 people, which means there are between 700 and 800 homicides in the whole country. The number of killings has spiked during the revolution and the insurgency/low level civil war happening now, and if we average out all that violence, and add it to the normal murder rate, we get a number close to 2000 murders per year, rounding up. Egypt’s population is estimated at 91 million, while the US is 321 million, so there are 3.5 more people in the US than in Egypt.

Dividing America’s rate of killings by 3.5 and comparing it to Egypt’s, even in a time of violence, revolution, massacres, and armed insurrection against the government, we find that America has approximately 50% more annual killings per capita. In other words, Egypt in a time of war is still half as violent as America in a time of peace.

These aren’t just statistics. Living in Egypt, I could really feel this. In all of my interactions and from the general social atmosphere, it was simply much more tranquil and relaxing.

The actual statistics on violence don’t really reflect how violent America is, either, because a huge amount of the violence is prevented through imprisonment. This is what I mean by “externalizing.” A lot of very disturbed and violent people are locked in boxes in remote and rural areas where no one sees them.

No one denies that this system is basically ineffective in actually changing people’s behavior— rates of recidivism are very high. All this does is effectively kicks the can down the road, not dealing with the problem, but simply hiding it away. Inside of these prisons, the same behaviors and mental illnesses are intensified by creating an artificial peer group composed of criminals and the mentally ill, so these tendencies bounce off of each other in a sort of echo chamber and intensify. There is a huge cost to this, with yearly maintenance per prison inmate averaging about $50,000 a year.

In Egypt there are an estimated 100,000 people in prison, compared to over 2 million in the US. This means that at least .6% of the population is in prison, though most estimates put the number closer to 1%. In Egypt, only .001% of the population is in prison. If the prison population of the United States were the same proportion as the prison population of Egypt, it would mean releasing over one and a half million inmates. Since many of these inmates would most likely be mentally ill and very difficult to employ, it would probably lead to a sharp increase in violence. When we try to imagine these numbers, and consider what America would be like if America’s budget for law enforcement was as constrained as Egypt’s, we get a feel for just how much more violent American society is than Egyptian society.

This general pattern holds true across many Muslim countries— in fact, with a few exceptions, like Iraq, Egypt is one of the most violent Muslim countries, and has a large prison population relative to other Muslim countries.

Prison is not only a form of social externalization, whereby violent elements of society are hidden from view without addressing the real problem. It’s also a form of individual externalization. While in medieval Europe punishments were public and often extremely violent (due in large part to a limited budget), prison is not really any less violent when we look at the psychological effect. Instead of outright physical damage, it disfigures and mutilates people’s minds, which then passes for being more humane, since it is not as easy to quantify the damage done.

So we don’t have public discipline like hangings or canings in the US anymore, but we are doing similar damage in order to achieve social control, but it is hidden in two ways;

violent people are quarantined and hidden from view, and

Disciplinary violence is hidden on a more subtle level.

This approach is more pleasant in the short run, and more unpleasant in the long run, because it relieves a symptom while doing nothing about the root cause. Really, it actually aggravates the root cause, because the source of violence is more often than not an individual’s inability to integrate smoothly into society. Spending time in prison results in an even more damaged mind which makes it even more difficult to integrate into society, which leaves the individual unable to fulfill their needs, and thus more likely to be violent.

Geopolitical Externalization of Violence

NATO is an example of externalization on the international level. By means of specialization, European states are able to maintain extensive social systems, thus providing satisfactory conditions for a higher number of citizens, which translates to lower rates of violence. The United States carries the bulk of the military burden, which allows European nations to focus more on social programs.

If NATO were to break apart, Europe would be left in a very vulnerable state. This is unlikely to happen, because by means of economic ties, Europe contributes heavily to the American economy.

This is how a military alliance can allow projecting an image of peacefulness, when in reality they are partners in quite extreme violence.

Environmental Externalization

There is much talk in Europe and the US about environmental regulation, and sustainability. At the same time, these markets are utterly economically dependent on a range of imports from China, where environmental regulation is comparatively lax. In China, labor law and health regulations are such that people suffer under tremendous burden of stress, and many people develop cancer and other diseases as a result of being exposed to toxic chemicals during manufacturing processes.

This is what makes the Chinese exports so cheap, and these low prices are essential to both the happiness of individuals and the success of corporations located in Europe and the US. Thus, outsourcing the poisoning of the environment allows the West to reap the benefits of this destruction while outwardly preaching to others about environmental consciousness.

Externalizing Human Rights

Besides just the importing of cheap manufactured goods from countries with no protections for workers, violence is externalized by support for a number of dictators who routinely use torture, completely disregard due process and civil liberties, and often engage in indiscriminate and extra-judicial killings. Some examples would be the foreign aid from the US to governments like Pakistan, Egypt, Jordan, Morocco, Uzbekistan, paramilitary groups in Colombia, the Suharto massacres in Indonesia, just to name a few.

In this way the West is able to reap the rewards that come with violent totalitarian regimes while being conveniently insulated, allowing the creation of a narrative of moral superiority.

Temporal Externalization

If moving atrocities, injustice, and cruelty to locations that are out of view is one means of creating an illusion of moral superiority, it would follow that to do so temporally would also be a means of cultivating this illusion. This is evidenced by the extreme short term perspective.

It is the national perspective that allows Europe and the US to claim superiority— they can point to the lower pollution levels, infant mortality, or life expectancy within their own borders, ignoring the impact that their lifestyle has on other countries in affecting these same indicators. They can even use the damage that they do to other countries as proof that those societies and their ways of life are inferior and in need of ‘development aid,’ or salvation by European cultures.

This reinforces an inferiority complex essential to continued dominance. Anyone who has ever been a competitive fighter, whether in boxing or wrestling or any other martial art, knows that if you mentally accept the superiority of your opponent, you have lost before the fight has even begun.

If we move the level of analysis to the global level, however, this narrative rapidly falls apart as the interdependencies become clearer. This is spatial externalization.

Examples of temporal externalization are the models of corporate profit that do not consider environmental costs, planned obsolescence, or industrial scale medicine for profit.

Corporate Profit

Corporate profit only focuses on the bottom line within a limited time period. Just as a territory like the United States is cordoned off with a border, a fiscal year or a quarter is cordoned off, and one measure of success is emphasized; overall profit. Never mind that IKEA may have had to pay fines for purchasing wood that was illegally logged from protected forest lands in Siberia— if the profits gained from the furniture that was sold with this wood are enough to counterbalance the fines that had to be paid, it was a successful venture.

This doesn’t factor in other sources of value, and particular sources of value to future or past generations, including:

the biodiversity of the earth’s last remaining virgin forests,

the genetic resources of the plants that grow in it with unresearched medical value,

the intangible value of the cultural traditions of the native people of those forests and their traditional knowledge,

the long term benefit that those forests could have had in offsetting and absorbing pollution,

the wind force that those trees would have absorbed, and the damage caused by extra windforce that now sweeps over plains rather than being absorbed by trees

the loss of topsoil that could have produced higher quality food over a longer period of time.

If you were to calculate the value of what is lost, and compare it to the profits gained, the equation would look very different than it does by focusing on a narrow temporal and spatial field of analysis.

Planned Obsolescence

Planned obsolescence is another example of temporal externalization, where resources are abused in order to achieve higher profits, eventually leading to major costs for society.

In planned obsolescence, goods are intentionally produced with design flaws that will cause them to fail after a determined period of time or use. This forces the buyer to purchase new goods and throw away the old ones, thereby increasing profit for the producer.

The spiritual effects of this circumstance include ingratitude, which is a form of disbelief. It is disbelief in Allah, because it is a refusal to acknowledge his blessings. When we purchase a product which is designed to fail, this will generally cause us to feel resentment toward the manufacturer of the product and the product itself.

Subtle emotional effects include developing an attitude towards material objects as being disposable, which leads to a general attitude of wastefulness that can also affect interpersonal relationships. This is because our method of interacting with the natural world will invariably affect our way of thinking about human beings, as we are very much a part of the natural world. Furthermore, it shapes our overall habits and personality.

Aside from the spiritual and emotional consequences, planned obsolescence also leads to acceleration of the depletion of non-renewable resources, as the rate of consumption accelerates to accommodate an unnecessarily high rate of production.

Viewed outside of the customary narrow temporal perspective, efficiency can indeed become very inefficient. Especially when we consider that much of humanity’s industrial production is directed towards producing goods that are pure luxuries and not at all necessary for living a meaningful, fulfilling, and good life.

Ibrahim Ludwick

Beste broeder, je zegt dat alleen Allah takfir mag doen. Goed, nu een serieuze vraag: als Jan de Wit morgen om de hand van je dochter komt vragen en uit niets blijkt dat hij moslim is, zul je dan toch je dochter aan hem uithuwelijken? Want misschien is hij wel moslim in zijn hart en wie ben jij om te oordelen… toch?
In de islamitische fiqh staan erg veel onderwerpen die duidelijk maken dat ook mensen takfir moeten doen wanneer ze koefr zien. Vandaar dat een kaafir niet als leider mag worden aangesteld over de moslims, dat moslims niet achter een kaafir mogen bidden, dat een moslima niet met een kaafir mag trouwen, dat een moslim niet erft van een kaafir en een kaafir niet van een moslim, dat men geen djanaazah mag bidden over een kaafir, dat een kaafir niet begraven mag worden bij de moslims, etc. Deze regels zouden niet mogelijk zijn als wij niet op een bepaald punt een moslim onderscheiden van een kaafir.

Abdul-Jabbar van de Ven

De titel van dit artikel is iets wat bepaalde ‘moslims’ roepen wanneer een van hun niet-moslim-idolen overlijdt.

Maar dit argument kun je ook op anderen toepassen, slechte mensen zoals Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Ariel Sharon, etc. Deze lui wil je liever niet in je team hebben, is dat de reden waarom je hen liever niet islamiseert na hun dood?

Daarom dienen we ook geen smoesjes te verzinnen en zeggen we dat zij allen als kuffar gestorven zijn totdat het tegendeel bewezen is en men ons kan laten zien waar zij de sjahada hebben uitgesproken of claimen moslim te zijn. Tot die tijd moet je niet mensen tegen hun wil na hun dood gaan islamiseren, terwijl toen ze leefden zij nooit hadden aangegeven moslim te zijn.

Veel moslims lijken niet te begrijpen dat het bovenstaande oordeel over de dunya (het wereldse leven) gaat. Als hij daadwerkelijk de sjahada heeft uitgesproken op zijn sterfbed, dat is dan tussen hem en Allah, het oordeel van het hiernamaals ligt volledig bij God. Daarnaast is het bekend dat de sjahada uitspreken op je sterfbed niet altijd wordt geaccepteerd, ook daar zijn weer bepaalde voorwaarden aan verbonden, maar dat is voor een ander artikel.

Conclusie: ons treft geen blaam als we hen kafir blijven noemen, want zij hebben nooit Islam aan ons getoond. Sterker nog, er zitten een paar tussen die zelfs militant atheïsme hebben getoond tijdens hun leven, en nog willen sommige wappies hen islamiseren omdat ze zich niet kunnen neerleggen bij waar hun idolen terechtkomen in het hiernamaals.

Bewust of onbewust zijn we geneigd om ons leven te plannen op de wijze zoals wij dat graag zouden willen, maar het leven zit vol met verrassingen en die verrassingen zijn niet altijd even welkom en geliefd.
Het aanvaarden dat het nu eenmaal zo is, is ontzettend moeilijk, maar het is wel het beste wat je kunt doen. Aanvaarden dat wijzelf geen directe controle hebben over ons leven en de beproevingen die wij moeten meemaken. Wij hebben echter wel controle over de wijze waarop wij met deze ongeliefde verrassingen omgaan. Want de ongeliefde verrassingen zijn niet zozeer het probleem, maar de houding die wij aannemen ten opzichte hiervan.
Het geloof in de Voorbestemming zorgt er namelijk voor dat het niet nodig is om langdurig te treuren. Het is niet nodig om langdurig verdrietig te zijn over hetgeen je wel of niet overkomen is. Het is niet nodig om dag en nacht te piekeren over het verleden dat niet meer gewijzigd kan worden. In tijden van beproevingen en moeilijkheden – in tijden dat alles duister lijkt te zijn – vraag je jezelf af of je dit alles niet had kunnen voorkomen. Droefheid, spijt en zelfverwijten vullen de harten, bittere tranen raken de lippen en je weet niet welke kant je uit moet. Maar dan zegt Allāh de Alwetende in de Luisterrijke Qurān (interpretatie van de betekenis):
“En Wij zullen u voorzeker beproeven door iets van vrees en honger en verlies van vermogen en levens en vruchten. En geef goed nieuws aan de geduldigen, die – wanneer een tegenslag hen overvalt – zeggen: “Waarlijk wij behoren tot Allāh en tot Hem zullen wij wederkeren.” Dat zijn degenen op wie de zegeningen en genade van hun Heer rusten. En dat zijn de volgelingen van de Rechte weg.” {Qs 02:155}
Zoals je in het bovenstaande vers kunt lezen zijn deze beproevingen ons beloofd en Allāh komt Zijn beloften altijd na. Op momenten dat je het moeilijk hebt, neem dan die verrekijker en zorg dat je deze altijd bij je hebt. Vooral op de momenten dat je beproefd wordt met moeilijkheden en tegenslagen. Wat is deze verrekijker? De verrekijker is de mogelijkheid om je blik te richten op het Hiernamaals, zodat al deze wereldse beproevingen – en het eventuele leed wat hierbij komt kijken – verdwijnen als sneeuw voor de zon. Bij de gedachte aan het eeuwige geluk zijn al deze beproevingen jouw verdriet en zorgen niet meer waard. Bij de gedachte aan het eeuwige plezier, wordt het gemakkelijk voor jou om deze moeilijkheden te dragen.
Treur niet en wees daarom niet terneergeslagen. Onderwerp je aan Allāh en vertrouw op Hem. Beantwoord de beproevingen die jou op je pad ontmoeten met Sabr en aanvaarding. Kijk niet achterom en voel geen wroeging om hetgeen dat je overkomen is. Keer je tot Allāh en vraag Hem om jou te begeleiden naar het goede. Wees hoopvol en sterk, en wandel met een gerust hart dat zich onderworpen heeft aan jouw Heer verder op het pad des levens. Behoor tot diegenen die zeggen: “De ogen tranen, het hart is bedroefd, maar de tong zegt alleen wat Allāh behaagt.”
Onze geliefde Profeet (vrede en zegeningen zij met hem) zei hierover (interpretatie van de betekenis):
“Een sterke gelovige is beter en meer geliefd bij Allāh dan een zwakke gelovige. Verlang van alle goede dingen dat wat je baat. Blijf Allāh om hulp vragen en geef niet op. Als je door iets getroffen wordt, zeg dan niet: “Had ik dit maar gedaan, dan was het zo – en – zo,” maar zeg: “Allāh heeft het zo bepaald zoals Hij wilde”, en voorwaar, het woord ‘als’ opent de weg naar het werk van de shaytān.” [Muslim]
Ten slotte willen we een dialoog aanhalen tussen imām Ahmad en zijn zoon ‘Abdullāh (moge Allāh tevreden met hun beide zijn) tijdens een leven van armoede, tegenslagen en beproevingen. ‘Abdullāh vroeg op een dag aan zijn vader, imām Ahmad:
“Mijn vader! Wanneer zullen we rust hebben?”
Zijn vader keek hem aan en zei:
“Wanneer we de eerste stap zetten in het Paradijs.”
O ongeduldige ziel! Wacht daarom nog even op het moment dat de Omroeper zal omroepen:
“Waarlijk! Voor jullie is er een eeuwige gezondheid en dat jullie nooit ziek zullen worden. En dat jullie eeuwig zullen leven en nooit meer zullen sterven. En dat jullie jong zullen blijven en nooit oud zullen worden. En dat jullie altijd zullen genieten en nooit meer droefenis of spijt zullen voelen.” [Muslim]

Moslims In Dialoog [MID]

De titel van dit artikel tweette Peter R. de Vries op 11 juni 2021, iets meer dan een maand voor zijn eigen dood (zie onderaan). Het wereldse leven is kort en kan zo voorbij zijn. Je neemt niets mee behalve je (goede) daden.

Het echte leven, eeuwigdurend, begint in het hiernamaals. Het wereldse leven (dunya) is waar mensen getest worden. De wereld is een plaats van kwelling en beproeving (الدنيا دار بلاء واختبار). Hoe zeer je ook geluk en blijheid nastreeft, het blijkt uiteindelijk een utopie te zijn.

Betekent dit dat je geen geluk en blijheid dient na te streven in het wereldse leven en als een monnik dient te leven? Nee, God heeft namelijk het volgende aangegeven:

But seek, through that which Allah has given you, the home of the Hereafter; and [yet], do not forget your share of the world. And do good as Allah has done good to you. And desire not corruption in the land. Indeed, Allah does not like corrupters.”
Bron: https://legacy.quran.com/28/77

Met andere woorden, je mag ook genieten van je leven, maar vergeet niet dat dit het tijdelijke leven is, en niet het eeuwigdurende leven.

Echt geluk zal je pas in het paradijs ervaren. De sleutel daarvan is om op z’n minst de islamitische getuigenis (geloofsbelijdenis) te accepteren. Ik nodig dan ook eenieder die dit leest uit om de sjahada op te zeggen en zo de islam binnen te treden: “Ik getuig dat er geen godheid is dan alleen Allah en ik getuig dat Mohammed de gezant van God is.”

De Schepper der hemelen en aarde, Allah, heeft namelijk alle mensen het volgende opgedragen:

And Abraham instructed his sons [to do the same] and [so did] Jacob, [saying], “O my sons, indeed Allah has chosen for you this religion, so do not die except while you are Muslims.”
Bron: https://legacy.quran.com/2/132

“O mensen! Voorwaar! De belofte van Allāh is waar. Laat daarom het wereldse leven jullie niet verleiden en laat de verleider [shaytān] jullie niet van Allāh weghouden.”
Bron: https://legacy.quran.com/35/5

Journalist Peter Wijnans (71) is overleden. In 1978 kwam ik als 21-jarige leerling-journalist bij hem op de stadsredactie van De Telegraaf/Nieuws van de Dag. Hij was mijn leermeester. Heel veel dank voor alles, Peter, je was een journalistieke vakman en een fijn mens. RIP.

— Peter R. de Vries (@PeterRdeV) June 11, 2021

The National Institute of Statistics and Economic Studies (INSEE) estimates that every year in France, more than 200,000 people are victims of rape, attempted rape or sexual assault, and that most are minors.

It is notoriously difficult to obtain data, but some researchers believe that in nine out of 10 cases, the aggressor was a family member or a close friend of the victim.

The International Association of Victims of Incest (IAVI) says that 6.7 million people in France—10% of the population—declared themselves to be victims of incest. The figure is based on a survey of 1,033 people carried out for the IAVI by the French polling organization Ipsos.

It is even harder to make statistical comparisons with other countries. The latest World Population Review, produced by an independent U.S.-based organization, says South Africa has the world’s highest incidence of rape, at 132 cases per 1,000 people. Sweden ranks sixth with 63.5 cases, while the United States has 27.3 and France 16.2.

The launch of #IncesteMeToo has encouraged large numbers of people to speak out. The French media have reported dozens of cases in recent weeks, with many victims referring to Kouchner’s book. Kouchner herself has said she felt free to write after the publication of a similar book, entitled “Consent,” last year.

Bron: https://news-decoder.com/in-france-breaking-the-code-of-silence-on-incest/

Een Amerikaanse kreeftenvisser zegt dat hij is opgeslokt door een bultrug en vervolgens is uitgespuugd. Hij is slechts lichtgewond geraakt. Experts spreken van een wonder, schrijven Amerikaanse media.

“Ik was aan het duiken naar kreeften toen een bultrug me probeerde op te eten”, schrijft Michael Packard (56) op sociale media. “Ineens werd het pikkedonker.” In eerste instantie dacht de visser dat hij was aangevallen door een haai, maar hij voelde geen scherpe tanden en had geen verwondingen.

“Toen dacht ik: o mijn god, ik zit in de bek van een walvis en hij gaat me doorslikken”, vertelt Packard. “Ik dacht dat ik doodging. Ik heb wat blauwe plekken, maar geen gebroken botten”, zegt hij.

Hij kon ademen door de persluchtfles die hij nog meedroeg. Packard denkt dat hij 30 seconden in de bek vastzat. “Ik zag licht en toen begon hij met zijn kop te schudden en voordat ik het wist, lag ik weer in het water.” Hij werd gered door zijn collega’s. Een van hen zegt dat hij zag dat de walvis Packard uitspuugde.

Jooke Robbins van het Centrum voor Kuststudies in Provincetown doet onderzoek naar bultruggen. Zij zegt niet te twijfelen aan het verhaal van Packard. “Ik denk niet dat hij het verhaal verzon, want ik ken de mensen die erbij betrokken waren”, zei ze tegen persbureau AFP.

Ze zegt dat ze niet eerder over zo’n ongeluk heeft gehoord. “Maar het zou kunnen dat Packard gewoon op de verkeerde plek op het verkeerde moment was.”

Volwassen bultruggen kunnen 16 meter lang worden met een gewicht van 30 ton. Bultruggen zijn niet agressief. Ze eten vooral kreeftachtigen en vissen.

Mensen staan niet op het menu van de dieren. “Hun bek is vrij breed maar hun keel is tamelijk smal. Een walvis kan op geen enkele manier iets groots als een mens doorslikken”, aldus Robbins. Daarom denkt ze dat de visser niet opzettelijk is opgeslokt.

Bron: https://nos.nl/artikel/2384679-visser-zegt-te-zijn-opgeslokt-en-uitgespuugd-door-walvis

Story of Jonah
The mission of Prophet Yunus is a timeless story that tells us there is a way out, if only we have faith.

Almighty Allah called Yunus to preach to the people of Nineveh. Nineveh was a great city, the capital of Assyria, and it had become a very wicked place.

Yunus went to the people there and told them to give up their bad ways and to turn, instead, to Allah. But they wouldn’t listen to him and so Yunus left them, calling down Allah’s wrath on them.

His preaching failed, so he stormed off. This is the first very human touch in the story of Yunus. Even though he was a prophet, Yunus was still a man and he stormed off out of the city when he didn’t get what he wanted.

Having left the city behind, Jonah boards a ship. He has had enough of preaching Allah’s message and he sets sail far away from the scene of his failure.

Once at sea, though, a storm grows up and the crew are terrified. These pagan sailors feel that the gods of the sea must be displeased with them, so they draw lots to throw one man overboard to calm the storm.

Jonah draws the short straw, not once but three times, and the terrified crew throw him overboard to protect themselves and their ship.

Once in the water, something extraordinary happens. Allah sends a great fish, some describe it as a whale, to swallow Yunus whole.

Once in its belly, Jonah descends to the bottom of the sea, filled with total despair. How can he possibly survive this disaster? What way out of his situation could there possibly be?

He is engulfed by darkness: the darkness of the deep; the darkness of the creature’s stomach; and, worst of all, the darkness of despair.

Even though he was a religious man, called to be a prophet, he experiences doubt and despair, and it is when he is in the depths of despair that things change for him.

In the Holy Quran, we read that Yunus “cried through the darkness.” He realized that Almighty Allah, not he, was in control of things. He cries out, “there is no god but you,” and asks for help. In asking for help, his prayer is heard.

Just as Allah had used it to save Yunus from the storm and from drowning in the sea, so He also uses it to bring Yunus safely to land again. And there is more.

Yunus is feeling sick and sore as he lies on the sand in the scorching heat, still not knowing what will become of him. Allah takes even more care of him and causes a plant to grow up over him and to cover Yunus with its shade.

Once he has recovered from his ordeal and his skin has stopped smarting from the acids in the creatures stomach, he decides to return to Nineveh, his travels over, and to see what has become of the city and its people.

When he arrives there, to his great surprise he sees that the city and its people have not been destroyed, but have all turned to Allah. His message had got through to them.

Perhaps when they saw the terrible storm as it grew up in the distance, they saw in it an image of what would happen to them if they did not repent. Who knows why they turned back to Allah, but they did. Yunus, then, after all his adventures, is finally content that his mission has been accomplished.

There is so much that the story of Jonah can teach us.
First of all, read it yourself in the Quran. You will find it in the following places: 4:163; 6:86; 10:98; 21:87; 37:139-148; and 68:48-50.

Ponder over the meaning of the words and listen to what they say to you. The story of Jonah is timeless. It is for the whole world and it is for each one of us.

Allah is in Control
Nineveh, for example, the great city and the capital of a great empire, doesn’t even exist anymore. Scholars say it lies in Iraq on the other side of the river from the city of Mosul, but its temples and monuments have gone. All worldly power will go the same way.

Even today’s superpowers, who behave as though they are Allah, and believe that everyone just obey them, will one day wither and fade and, like all great empires before them, cease to exist.

Remember, Allah is in control, not this country or that. Allah will decide the course of events.

Another lesson from the story of Jonah is that we never know the effect our deeds will have on others.
What we must never do, though, is to think that we are in control or that it is we who call others to Islam. Allah is in control and He, alone, calls others to Himself. We shouldn’t get down-hearted or angry when our efforts seem to fail.

Misschien ligt het wel aan geo-politieke redenen? Er woeden allerlei oorlogen in verschillende moslimlanden, en in sommige van deze landen is het Westen ook militair actief. Waarom wordt er bij geweld altijd van uitgegaan dat religie de oorzaak is, waarom worden politieke redenen amper genoemd? Ten derde valt het door God gesanctioneerd geweld in het niet bij al het andere geweld op de wereld. Zo heeft de Amerikaanse professor Juan Cole uitgerekend dat er in de 20ste eeuw 102 miljoen doden zijn gevallen door politiek geweld van allerlei staten. Vergelijk dit maar met de 6.644 doden die er gevallen zijn door toedoen van de “religieuze terreur” van de meest gewelddadige terreurgroepering van 2014, Boko Haram, volgens een onderzoek van The Global Terrorism Index.

Bron: https://www.republiekallochtonie.nl/blog/opinie/niet-alle-salafisten-zijn-terroristen-en-ook-niet-alle-terroristen-zijn-salafisten

Vrijwel alle niet-Moslims, alsook helaas veel Moslims, denken bij de term “Shari’ah” meteen aan het afhakken van handen van de dief of zweepslagen voor dronkenschap. Sterker nog: veel van deze mensen denken dat “Shari’ah” en “lijfstraffen” synoniemen zijn.

Nu de werkelijkheid: je Fadjr-gebed is Shari’ah, het vasten tijdens Ramadaan is Shari’ah, het afstaan van zakaat aan armen is Shari’ah, bankieren zonder rente is Shari’ah, gastvrij zijn tegenover je gasten is Shari’ah, opstaan tegen onrecht is Shari’ah, het spreken van de waarheid is Shari’ah, het tonen van nederigheid is Shari’ah, het vermijden van roddelpraat en laster is Shari’ah, kuisheid is Shari’ah, reinheid van de ziel, lichaam, kleren en omgeving is van de Shari’ah… In de Shari’ah is geen plek voor zaken als racisme, onzedelijkheid, corruptie, dronkenschap, leugens en bedrog.

Kortom: ieder voorschrift in het leven van een Moslim maakt onderdeel uit van de Shari’ah. En al die onderdelen zijn als de verschillende organen van het menselijke lichaam en staan direct met elkaar in verband en vormen samen een lichaam. Net zoals het menselijke lichaam veel meer is dan een hand, zo is de Shari’ah veel meer dan alleen maar “lijfstraffen”. Al die onderdelen zouden ons eigenschappen bij moeten brengen als zelfdiscipline, barmhartigheid, beleefdheid, eerlijkheid, wijsheid en geduld. Diegene die dat niet inziet, heeft erg weinig begrepen van de Shari’ah.

Ja, de Shari’ah bevat aan de top van de pyramide ook enkele straffen, maar dat is niet meer dan 5% van het hele systeem, wellicht zelfs minder. En pas nadat alle fundamenten en voorwaarden zijn doorlopen. Zo kun je bijvoorbeeld niet een dief straffen voor diefstal als de staat sterk tekort schiet in het voeden van de armen. ‘Oemar ibn-oel-Khattaab (radiyallaahoe ‘anhoe) zag dat in en schafte de straf dan ook (tijdelijk) af tijdens het jaar van de hongersnood.

Te stellen dat de Shari’ah gelijk staat aan het uitdelen van zware lijfstraffen, is als degene die beweert dat de democratie gelijk staat aan de elektrische stoel. En die vergelijking is wellicht nog correcter dan te stellen dat de Shari’ah gelijk staat aan lijfstraffen. Want terwijl de Shari’ah alle wegen naar een zonde of een misdaad probeert te blokkeren en de oorzaken ervoor probeert weg te nemen, wordt in de Amerikaanse samenleving geweld verheerlijkt, is er volop alcohol en drugs voorhanden in combinatie met wapens, en heerst er grote ongelijkheid tussen de klassen.

Laat jezelf dus niet meesleuren door dit soort propaganda-praatjes.

Abdul-Jabbar Van de Ven

Bron: https://www.facebook.com/abduljabbar.vandeven.5/posts/3056935651296661

Praise be to Allah.

Allaah has commanded us to refer matters to His judgement and to establish Sharee‘ah, and He has forbidden us to rule with anything else, as is clear from a number of aayaat in the Qur’aan, such as the aayaat in Soorat al-Maa’idah (5) which discuss ruling according to what Allaah has revealed, and mention the following topics:

The command to rule according to what Allaah has revealed: “And so judge between them by what Allaah has revealed . . .” [aayah 49]

Warning against ruling by other than what Allaah has revealed: “. . . and follow not their vain desires . . .” [aayah 49]

Warning against compromising on any detail of Sharee‘ah, no matter how small: “. . . but beware of them lest they turn you far away from some of that which Allaah has sent down to you . . .” [aayah 49]

Forbidding seeking the ruling of jaahiliyyah, as is expressed in the rhetorical question “Do they then seek the judgement of (the Days of) Ignorance?” [aayah 50]

The statement that nobody is better than Allaah to judge: “. . . and who is better in judgement than Allaah for a people who have firm Faith?” [aayah 50]

The statement that whoever does not judge according to what Allaah revealed is a kaafir, a zaalim (oppressor or wrongdoer) and a faasiq (sinner), as Allaah says: “. . . And whoever does not judge by what Allaah has revealed, such are the kaafiroon.” [aayah 44]; “. . . And whoever does not judge by that which Allaah has revealed, such are the zaalimoon (polytheists and wrongdoers)” [aayah 45]; “. . . And whoever does not judge by what Allaah has revealed (then) such (people) are the faasiqoon (rebellious or disobedient).” [aayah 47].

The statement that it is obligatory for the Muslims to judge according to what Allaah has revealed, even if those who seek their judgement are not Muslim, as Allaah says: “. . . And if you judge, judge with justice between them. . .” [aayah 42]

Judging or ruling according to other than what Allaah has revealed is contrary to faith and Tawheed, which are Allaah’s rights. It may be counted as kufr akbar (greater kufr) or kufr asghar (lesser kufr) according to circumstances. Kufr akbar will make a person no longer a Muslim in cases such as the following:

If he issues laws and regulations other than those revealed by Allaah, because the right to issue laws belongs to Allaah alone, Who has no partner, and whoever “competes” with Him in a matter which is His alone is a mushrik, because Allaah says: “Or have they partners with Allaah (false gods), who have instituted for them a religion which Allaah has not allowed?” [al-Shooraa 42:21]

If the one who rules by other than that which Allaah has revealed denies the right of Allaah and His Prophet to rule, as is mentioned in Ibn ‘Abbaas’s comment on the aayah:“. . . And whoever does not judge by what Allaah has revealed, such are the kaafiroon.” [al-Maa’idah 5:44]. Ibn ‘Abbaas said: “Whoever rejects what Allaah has revealed is a kaafir.”

If he prefers the rule of falsehood to the rule of Allaah, whether this is in absolute terms or just in a few matters. Allaah says: “Do they then seek the judgement of (the Days of) Ignorance? And who is better in judgement than Allaah for a people who have firm Faith?” [al-Maa’idah 5:50]

If he regards the rule of Allaah and the rule of falsehood as equal. Allaah says: “. . . Then do not set up rivals unto Allaah (in worship) while you know (that He Alone has the right to be worshipped).” [al-Baqarah 2:22]

If he thinks that it is permissible to rule by something that contradicts the rule of Allaah and His Messenger, or he believes that it is not obligatory to rule according to what Allaah has revealed, or that the matter is optional. This is kufr which is contradictory to faith. Allaah revealed: “O Messenger! Let not those who hurry to fall into disbelief grieve you, of such who say: ‘We believe’ with their mouths but their hearts have no faith. And of the Jews are men who listen much and eagerly to lies – listen to others who have not come to you; they say, ‘If you are given this, take it, but if you are not given this, then beware!’ . . .” [al-Maa’idah 5:41]. He says: “Go to Muhammad (peace be upon him), and if he tells you that the ruling is lashes, accept it, but if he commands stoning, ignore what he says. Then Allaah revealed “. . . And whoever does not judge by what Allaah has revealed, such are the kaafiroon (disbelievers)” [al-Maa’idah 5:44].

If he does not rule according to what Allah has revealed out of stubbornness and arrogance, he is a kaafir and has left Islaam, even if he does not deny the rule of Allaah. Stubbornness and arrogance may mean negligence and turning away, as Allaah says: “Have you seen those (hypocrites) who claim that they believe in that which has been sent down to you, and that which was sent down before you, and they wish to go for judgement (in their disputes) to the Taaghoot (false judges, etc.) while they have been ordered to reject them. But Shaytaan wishes to lead them astray. And when it is said to them: ‘Come to what Allaah has sent down and to the Messenger,’ see they hypocrites turn away from you (Muhammad) with aversion.” [al-Nisaa’ 4:60-61]

Among the things that may be counted as ruling by other than that which Allaah revealed and kufr akbar is what Shaykh Muhammad ibn Ibraaheem said about man-made laws and ruling by them: “This is the worst, the most obvious and comprehensive opposition to sharee‘ah and rejection of Allaah’s laws. This is competing with Allaah and His Messenger, contradicting His laws in their preparation, support, structure, ruling and references.

The above is a summary of the things that may imply that ruling by other than that which Allah has revealed is a form of shirk akbar (major shirk):

(1) Ruling by other than that which Allaah has revealed.

(2) Denying the right of Allaah and His Messenger to rule.

(3) Preferring the rule of falsehood to the rule of Allaah, whether this is complete or only in a few matters.

(4) Regarding the rule of Allaah and the rule of falsehood as equal.

(5) Thinking that it is permissible to rule by something that contradicts what Allaah has revealed, or believing that ruling by what Allaah has revealed is not obligatory or is optional.

(6) Refusing to rule by what Allaah has revealed.

By examining this topic from different angels, it becomes clear that what is counted as kufr akbar is the following:

Abolishing sharee‘ah as the law governing a country, as Mustafa Kemal (“Ataturk”) did in Turkey, as he abolished the book Majallah al-Ahkaam al-‘Adliyyah which was based on the Hanafi madhhab, and replaced it with man-made laws.

Abolishing sharee‘ah courts.

Imposing man-made laws, such as Italian, French, German law, etc., to judge between the people, or mixing these laws and Sharee‘ah, as Genghis Khan did in his book al-Yaasiq, which combined laws from different sources; the ‘ulamaa’ (scholars) ruled that he was a kaafir.

Confining the role of sharee‘ah courts to so-called “civil” matters, such as marriage, divorce and inheritance.

Setting up non-sharee‘ah courts.

Discussing sharee‘ah in parliament and voting on it; this indicates that implementing sharee‘ah is conditional upon a majority vote.

Making sharee‘ah a secondary or main source, along with other sources of law. Even when they say that sharee‘ah is the primary source of legislation, this is still kufr akbar, because it means that they are allowing the adoption of laws from other sources too.

Stating in the clauses of legislation that reference may be made to international law, or stating in treaties that in the case of dispute, the matter may be referred to such-and-such non-Islamic court.

Criticizing sharee‘ah in public or in private, such as saying that it is rigid, incomplete or backward, or suggesting that it is incompatible with our times, or expressing admiration for non-Islamic laws.

As regards the question of when ruling by other than what Allaah revealed is kufr asghar, which does not exclude a person from the ummah of Islam:

the answer is that this may be the case when a ruler or judge passes judgement according to other than what Allaah revealed out of disobedience or on a whim, or as a favour to someone, or because he was bribed, and so on, although he believes that it is obligatory to judge according to what Allaah has revealed, and that what he has done is a sinful and haraam deed.

As regards the one who is governed by a non-Islamic law, if he refers to it out of choice, then he is a kaafir whose kufr akbar means that he has left Islaam. But if he has no choice but to refer to this law, and does so reluctantly, then he is not a kaafir, because if he had been able to resort to sharee‘ah, he would have done so, and he believes that this non-Islamic law is false.

And Allaah knows best. May Allaah bless our Prophet Muhammad.

Written by: Sheikh Muhammed Salih Al-Munajjid

Bron: https://islamqa.info/en/answers/974/the-kufr-of-one-who-rules-according-to-other-than-what-allaah-revealed