[Readers, please note: the original author of this ‘Book’ sent me the draft for a review and commentary. Having carefully reviewed and having made some minor corrections/alterations of the draft , I felt compelled to circulate this basic book on ‘Real Islam’ in the Internet, so that anyone who is interested in ‘Real Islam’ and Islamic Terrorism may benefit from its rich content. The original author prefers to remain anonymous at this stage, until possibly when a publisher agrees to publish this book at an appropriate time. Due to its prolix nature, I have divided this ’Book’ into 15 parts. This is part 1/15; the remaining parts will be posted as they become available. Please feel free to comment on this ‘Book.’ All comments should be sent to abul88@hotmail.com. Happy reading—Abul Kasem, the reviewer.]  

Please send an e-mail to islam_undressed@yahoo.com if you want to have a copy of the latest electronic version of this book.

An Introduction to Real Islam and Jihad

 (November 2003)

Introduction

            The war we are engaged in, we are told, is a war against 'terror'. But terror is a method, not an enemy. Those who limit their thought process to the constraints of the politically-correct ‘thought police’ seem content to believe that we are not really fighting individuals or nations, but rather an abstraction, … as if somewhere there are soldiers with "Republic of Terror" embroidered on their uniforms marching lock-step to attack us. Terrorist acts are simply the weapon of choice deployed by the true enemy. So in reality we are no more in a war against terrorism than we were engaged fighting the scourge of Machine guns in WWI, Zeros in WWII, or the plague of Soviet Tanks in the Cold War.  Though such vague, loose nomenclature may be reassuring in our society obsessed with political correctness, it prevents rational evaluation of the true threat behind the terrorist weapon deployed against us.

            The gentle reader should be forewarned that his work delves much deeper into the cultural, spiritual, and religious roots of the current conflict than many others dare to go. This is not for the faint hearted, but is presented for the benefit and enlightenment of all lovers of truth, knowledge, and freedom. It should be noted that this work is likely to be tagged by some as Islamophobic or racist.  It may appear, and some will undoubtedly charge, that the facts and views presented herein are extreme. But the data is in fact genuine, accurate, and fair, as is the context.  It seems inevitable these days, that perspectives based on traditional values are quickly tagged as politically ‘incorrect’, and more often than not are judged as coming from the extreme far right.  Contrary to the reviews of the ‘morally-core challenged’ elite that are sure to follow, this author does not lean heavily to the far right. Those all the way ‘Right’ have no concept that the absolute (and unalterable) demands of Justice can be satisfied by mercy through spiritual change, repentance, and true reform.  I will however, admit to ascribing to political, social, and religious philosophy centred much more on personal responsibility than is currently interpreted as ‘politically correct’ by the far-left.

            There is Far-Left, Left, Middle, Right, and Far-Right. Be careful not to limit and ascribe correct behavior and judgment to any one political philosophy. Within all these leanings are valuable perspectives, truth, and wisdom. I look at them all as incomplete sources of information and ideas. Because the Left often seeks to void personal responsibility by circumventing justice with mercy, without the process of repentance, they err. Because the Right often says ‘Lock them up and throw away the key’, or ‘hang-em high’, and operate from a merciless platform of pious superiority, they err. Then there is the Middle... Within the Middle there are good people who are intelligent and try to take the best and wisest approaches from both spectrums depending on current realities, but unfortunately large numbers are simply people without deep moral convictions or strong values which our society has traditionally depended on for its strength and prosperity. Those with no convictions are dangerous because, with no compass of their own, they can be easily manipulated through misinformation and spin. Stalin referred to these as “the convenient masses”.

            There are two very practical pieces of advice upon which one can base fair judgment of other people, religions, and governments. In fact those who fail to embrace this advice completely will remain forever as lost as ‘old’ Europe is today.  I believe my source is a good one. The first litmus test to use in judgment is, … "Only through a mans works is his true nature exposed". The other is "By this we can know if man has truly repented, … he will confess and forsake the bad behavior”. By these two pieces of advice, one can fairly judge the value of individuals/groups actions, and also gauge the progression of an individual/group if and when they realize their actions lead to bad fruit, and make claim to be reformed. Until then, it would be stupid to call the kettle anything other than 'black', even when speaking from a pot that is less than white.

            The West looks forward to Islam taking full responsibility for the bad fruit being produced in their name, and out of a sense of principal and humanity actually doing something to change it, without having to be pressured by others.  But we must also be realistic and realize we can expect only more of the same, … a little ‘hand wringing’ is probably all we will ever see from their regional and world leaders, along with more finger pointing at Israel and the West. The reasons for such pessimism will become clear later. In the mean time, until we see effective action and hear convincingly from this supposed vast silent majority of peace-loving Muslims, it is expedient for the rest of the world to live with both eyes wide open.

Chapter 1

The Enemy at the Gates:

     On September 11, 2001, Self-described devout Muslims carried out an act of brutal terrorism and murdered some 3000 people in America. They hijacked 4 planes, slit the throats of stewardesses, and destroyed the World Trade Center and part of the Pentagon. America and other nations responded and went after culpable Muslim terrorist groups in Afghanistan. Their various cells, networks, and organizations stretch far and wide, and elsewhere in the world some governments arrested others associated with Islamic terrorist organizations, all claiming to be good devout Muslims.

     Following September 11th, most Muslims living in the West defended Islam and stated that Islam is a religion of peace, while many other Muslims living in the Islamic world and even some Muslims in America (living in predominately Muslim communities) as well as Muslim students on American campuses, openly celebrated the deaths and destruction wrought upon us. Many others throughout the Islamic world were observed rejoicing and calling for the continuing destruction of America shouting "Death to America", and "America is the Great Satan".  Huge numbers openly or quietly rejoiced, with the absence of sincere and coherent outrage palpable. In the West Muslim spokesmen were much more muted, some proclaimed that the Muslim terrorists have hijacked their faith and that real Islam is a kind, tolerant religion not associated with terrorist individuals or events. A claim oft repeated in defense of Islam was that “Islam’ is a word which literally means ‘Peace’”.  In response it was pointed out that the Arabic word for peace is salaam, and that Islam is Arabic for surrender or submission, quite a different concept than peace, and that even Muslim means one who submits.   Now the official line from Islam is that “Islam’ means Peace through submission to Allah’s will”, but the opposite camp points out that the newly created definition is illusory in that it does not mention what ‘Allah’s will’ is with respect to Jihad and its role in the advancement of Islam. The two camps often seem to completely contradict each other. Obviously, they both cannot be correct. Those in the West are left to divine, what’s the bottom line according to real Islam? Out of an overabundance of prudence, it would be wise to first fortify ourselves with knowledge. If we fail to thoroughly investigate what Islam is truly all about, there is a danger we might inadvertently invite even more horrific sequels to the disasters that have already been perpetrated upon us.

     Since that dastardly attack the topic of Islam seems always in the news and there has been much more discussion around terms like “Jihad”. One question commonly asked is "why are so many associated with this religion so violent?" Giving the benefit of the doubt to a poorly understood religion, and to secure the support of the Islamic world, the American political machine has gone out of its way to stress that America and her allies are not fighting Islam, but rather, they are fighting Muslim terrorists who have perverted the true teachings of Islam. On the other hand, other voices have raised concerns that indeed there is a violent component within the religion, and that Islam itself is part of the problem. Thus far those expressing concerns about fundamental Islam have been largely muted, out of an overabundance of political correctness and liberal social concerns. But this overwhelming desire to view the Islamic world through rose-colored glasses has led to a resistance of critical analysis of Islamic writings, practice, and history.

     For us to truly understand "Jihad" and Islamic violence in today’s time frame, we must start by examining the Islamic texts in some detail.  A sixty-second sound byte from an "expert" (be they Muslim, Christian, Hindu, or otherwise) is not sufficient. To gain a knowledge base sufficient for fair judgment one must more deeply investigate the three sources of religious philosophy related to Islam in their holy texts, … the Qur’an, Hadith, and Sira.  But quoting a verse is not enough, we also have to acquaint ourselves with other sources of history surrounding the period to understand the context, background, scope, and applicability of the various passages related to Jihad and violence in Islam. Otherwise, one would be left with many passages that seemingly contradict each other, and be no closer to truly understanding "Jihad", and the application of Islamic violence today. A complete picture must be drawn. A mere phrase such as "Islam means peace", or "Jihad is an internal struggle against internal, sinful desires", or, "Islam is violent" has little support if one does not know the actual teachings of Islam.

     Since the death of thousands of Americans has occurred at the hands of self-proclaimed devout Muslims, and since scores of similarly disposed Muslims have vowed to continue to murder Americans, be they men, women, or children, it is incumbent upon us to examine the fundamental teachings of Muhammad, found in their texts, and see how they are being applied or misapplied today. This investigation and study has become all the more urgent because of what is at stake.  It is not only American lives (and way of life), which may be at risk, but the lives of anyone living in a free, democratic society. Therefore, readers should understand that when "America", or "American" is referenced, we are also including Britons, Mexicans, French, Germans, Japanese, Brazilians, Russians, Poles, Chinese, Australians, Canadians, Brazilians, and so forth. It is not just Americans who may be at risk; all non-Muslim peoples are at issue.

     For a start, the sometimes-elusive Islamic concept of Jihad must be clearly understood. In particular, we need to determine exactly how violent Jihad is understood, accepted and supported by a majority (or a large minority) of Muslims today.  If it is accepted and supported as it is practiced my many militant groups today, then it would really be incorrect to call Islam a religion at all by western standards; rather it would represent more a military, political and cultural threat. These hard questions need to be asked to know if the actions of the many devoted murderous Muslims in various organizations and lands today can be identified as truly Islamic and if their violent acts are done in the spirit of real Islam, or if they (and their active and passive supporters) represent a fringe minority.  Many prefer to believe that the threat to America comes not from Islam itself, but from an extremist form of the religion espoused by terrorists and their small but vocal band of supporters.  If they are a tiny insignificant minority, they may be manageable by typical diplomatic, military, and law enforcement methods designed to marginalize, isolate, discredit, and destroy.  But a majority or even a large minority from a population of billions is still a huge number of people virtually impossible to manage by those methods, because if millions or billions intend to kill and destroy a particular people or nation, there is very little that society can do to protect itself short of extreme protective self-defense and even offensive measures.  For ourselves, and our future, we need to answer the following three questions:

1) What are the teachings of real Islam found in the Qur’an, Hadith, and Sira with respect to the use of violence, call it Jihad if you like, to aggressively spread it’s power over non-Muslims, and are these teachings valid and applicable today?

2) Is real Islam behind and does it condone the murder of 3000 Americans and the destruction of the WTC, or were those Muslim terrorists doing something well outside Muhammad’s religion?

3) What does the future hold for Islam and America, Britain, Western Europe, Japan, Australia, Russia, China, and so on?

Chapter 2

Real Islam and the Religious Texts:

            "Real" Islam is the Islam Muhammad practiced and taught, as it is read and understood by the majority of Muslims today. Further, the most applicable part of Real Islam is based more heavily upon Muhammad’s final teachings and deeds than earlier writings. These final teachings are recorded in the Qur’an, Hadith (Hadith are the traditions and sayings of Muhammad), and Sira (Sira is comprised of Muhammad’s biographical material).  

     These foundational texts of Islam contain Muhammad’s words and deeds over a 23-year period, the Qur’an being dominant in Islamic theology.  In studying the scripts, it needs to be remembered that many of his words that are understood apply only to a specific people for a specific time or event.  It appears that as Muhammad’s circumstances changed, his words, teachings, commands, and attitudes also sometimes changed. Thus, as situations changed over time and Muhammad’s words and teachings morphed to accommodate them, real Islam changed over time. In the end, at Muhammad’s death, the philosophy and conduct of Islam and its followers solidified to a more stable and recognizable form. Therefore, to determine what real Islam teaches regarding Jihad and violence, we must examine these text’s chronology, context, scope, and applicability. It is either mistaken or dishonest to take one passage out of context and apply it to a set of circumstances for which it was not meant.  

      What we are going to do is examine a number of Qur’anic passages related to Jihad and violence. Citations from related Islamic texts, i.e., the Hadith and Sira are provided to provide the context, chronology, and background. Additionally, references from various early Islamic scholars’ commentary are presented (tafsir). When appropriate, quotations from other books written by scholars or experts on Islam are presented, be they Muslim, Christian, or secular.  

      After this, we are going to go a step further. We are also going to examine Muhammad’s actions. Actions ever speak louder than words; therefore, let us lend an ear to hear what it is that his deeds speak about the man.  A wise sage said, "A man is defined by what he does." Thus, Muhammad’s works must be thoroughly scrutinized, for surly they truly portray his heart and show us who he truly was and what he truly believed. We will also briefly review what Muhammad’s closest "companions" understood to be his final wishes, which they understood to be the commands of God as to His messenger or apostle. We will refer to the four "rightly guided" Caliphs: Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman, and Ali. These four hold a special place in Islamic theology and history. If anyone knew what Muhammad truly wanted, they did. Following Muhammad’s death, they continued to fulfil and obey his commands, as they understood his final clear directions and wishes. They loved Muhammad, obeyed his commands, and put their lives on the line for him time and again. Hence their actions depict their understanding of how Muhammad wanted them to carry on Islam into the future (i.e. real Islam).  

      Now then, if Muhammad’s calls to violence found within the texts were only for a specific period of time, against a specific people, for an understandable cause such as self defence, or to alleviate the oppression of an oppressed people, then the critics of Islam could not honestly say that Islam is a religion that condones aggressive violence and terrorism. On the other hand, if it can be shown that Muhammad’s final intentions for Islam were to attack, conquer, and rule all other peoples, and that the use of violence, in various forms including terrorism, were justified towards installing Islam as the dominant power, and that philosophy is being extended to today by a significant number of believers, then it would be a deliberate deception to call Islam a religion of Peace.  

            In light of the long, often-violent history of Islam’s expansion, and the many more recent terrorists attacks in the world, it would be foolish to rely on carefully crafted statements, in English, from prominent Muslims regarding the true nature of Islam.  Westerners are inclined to believe religious leaders are normally honest and pious, and we want desperately to believe that all Muslim clerics and Imams are similarly disposed, but that is an assumption fraught with peril. Unfortunately, as will be shown, dishonesty and deception towards non-believers are also a part of accepted Islamic practice and doctrine, and success at such deliveries in the advance of Islam is celebrated and rewarded.  

So, Let’s start this investigation.

Chapter 3

ABROGATION:

            Understanding the application of Abrogation as it is used in interpreting the Qur’an is critical to this study.  This unusual application is an important principal and facet of Islamic studies.  We must start with the Qur’an because the Qur’an is one of the foundations of Islam. Islam is built upon the Qur’an and "Sunnah", or lifestyle of Muhammad. Many Western readers will probably be inclined to apply traditional methods of logic and study of Biblical Scriptures to their study of the Qur’an. They will be tempted to take various Qur’anic verses at face value, mistakenly thinking that all the verses in the Qur’an are applicable today. They may reason that since the Qur’an in one place says, "there is no compulsion in religion"; it must mean that Muslims are not to force people into Islam. This approach, however, is erroneous. One of the odd facets of the Qur’an is that some verses "abrogate" other verses, or in other words they cancel them, rendering them null and void and no longer applicable.  "Abrogation" means the cancelling or replacement of one Qur’anic passage by another. Things changed during the 23-year period that Muhammad spoke the Qur’an. As circumstances changed, Muhammad’s directions and precepts found in the Qur’an changed accordingly, sometimes quite dramatically. Thus the Qur’an abrogates or cancels itself in various passages and presents seemingly conflicting statements. Muslims do not view these abrogations as contradictions, but rather, as improvements to better suit the varying circumstances or needs, or to fit Muhammad’s religious concepts. For example, many Islamic scholars consider that the verse reference above "there is no compulsion in religion", found in 2:256, has been abrogated by the passage found in 9:5, (more on this later).  This is widely understood because the more tolerant verse in chapter 2 was spoken about 7 - 8 years earlier than the one spoken in Chapter 9.  

            The "Dictionary of Qur’anic Terms and Concepts", pages 5 and 6, [2], state: "Qur’anic injunctions themselves may be abrogated, as has happened in a few cases. An example of this abrogation is 24:2 which abrogates the punishment of adultery, (q.v.) stated in 4:15-16. A study of the Qur’an shows first, that only a limited number of Qur’anic verses have been abrogated, and second, that the abrogation pertains to legal and practical matters only, and not to matters of doctrine and belief."  

     In "Islam: Muhammad and His Religion", page 66, [3], the great Islamic scholar Arthur Jeffery wrote: "The Qur’an is unique among sacred scriptures in teaching a doctrine of abrogation according to which later pronouncements of the Prophet abrogate, i.e.: declare null and void, his earlier pronouncements. The importance of knowing which verses abrogate others has given rise to the Qur’anic science known as "Nasikh wa Mansukh", i.e.: "the Abrogators and the Abrogated"."  

     The Encyclopedia of Islam, [4], states on abrogation:

Rather than attempting to explain away the inconsistencies in passages giving regulations for the Muslim community, Kuran scholars and jurists came to acknowledge the differences, while arguing that the latest verse on any subject "abrogated" all earlier verses that contradicted it. A classic example involves the Kuranic teaching or regulation on drinking wine, where V, 90, which has a strong statement against the practice, came to be interpreted as a prohibition, abrogating II, 219, and IV, 43, which appear to allow it.  

      So, as a result of changing circumstances, various Qur’anic passages were abrogated, and it is normal that, as a philosophy and doctrine, Islamic doctrine changed over time. As such, rules that apply at one point in time may not necessarily apply at a later date.  This concept is unusual by Western religious standards in its scope, and there are even minor disagreements within Islam regarding which teaching or doctrine abrogates another.  But in general, Muslims recognize more recent passages and writings as the most applicable, abrogating earlier references on the same subject matter.  

      Therefore, when discussing Islam and Jihad, what must be considered most applicable are Muhammad’s final teachings and the commands that he wanted obeyed. What were his last wishes and instructions regarding Jihad and violence?  Which Qur’anic passages are still in force today for the Muslim and the Muslim community, and which are not? Earlier statements related to peace may or may not have been abrogated by later statements related to violence, or visa versa.  We will have to carefully examine the context of the texts to know which are acceptable and in force today for Muslims.

  ____----****O****----____

An Introduction to Real Islam and Jihad 

(Part 2/15)

Chapter 4

Definitions of "JIHAD":

     What follows are several classical definitions of Jihad. Thereafter, we will examine passages from the Qur’an, Hadith, and Sira related to Jihad and violence in Islam. "Jihad" or other forms of the word occur in the Qur’an about 35 times. Additionally throughout the Qur’an there are other words used for various other forms of violence. 

      From the "Concordance of the Qur’an", by Hanna Kassis, published by University of California Press, Los Angeles, CA, 1983, [6] comes a definition, which is probably the simplest, most straightforward found. Kassis essentially derived it from the Qur’anic context of the word: 

JIHAD = JAHADA (verb). To struggle, strive, fight for the faith.  

     The following is a more detailed definition of Jihad from the Shorter

Encyclopaedia of Islam, page 89, [7]:

DJIHAD, holy war. The spread of Islam by arms is a religious duty upon Muslims in general. It narrowly escaped being a sixth "rukn", or fundamental duty, and is indeed still so regarded by the descendants of the Kharidjis. The position was reached gradually but quickly. In the Meccan Suras of the Kur’an patience under attack is taught; no other attitude was possible. But at Madina the right to repel attack appears, and gradually it became a prescribed duty to fight against and subdue the hostile Meccans. Whether Muhammad himself recognized that his position implied steady and unprovoked war against the unbelieving world until it was subdued to Islam may be in doubt. Traditions are explicit on the point; but the Kuranic passages speak always of the unbelievers who are to be subdued as dangerous or faithless. Still, the story of his writing to the powers around him shows that such a universal position was implicit in his mind, and it certainly developed immediately after his death, when the Muslim armies advanced out of Arabia. It is now a "fard ‘ala ‘l-kifaya, a duty in general on all male, free, adult Muslims, sane in mind and body and having means enough to reach the Muslim army, yet not a duty necessarily incumbent on every individual but sufficiently performed when done by a certain number. So it must continue to be done until the whole world is under the rule of Islam." 

      Many Westerners have wondered in amazement at the number of men leaving safe and relatively comfortable lands to undertake a perilous journey and face a certain death to fight superior forces in Afghanistan, Chechnya, and Iraq.  Clearly, those who do so, do it out of a strong sense of religious duty, fully expecting to be rewarded for their sacrifice.  The "Dictionary of the Qur’an", op cit, defines Jihad as: 

 "The literal meaning of Jihad is "to strive". Technically, Jihad is any endeavor that is made to further the cause of God, whether the endeavor is positive (e.g. promoting good) or negative (e.g. eradicating evil) in character, takes the form of social action or private effort, involves monetary expenditure or physical struggle, or is made against the enemy without or the enemy within (i.e. against "the bidding self"). The reduction of Jihad to "war" is thus unjustified, though war is an important form of Jihad, and a number of Qur’anic verses about Jihad (e.g. 8:74, 75, 9:44) refer primarily to fighting. The comprehensive nature of Jihad is evidenced by such verses as 29:69: "Those who strive in Us (= Our way), We guide them to Our ways." When Jihad takes the form of war it is know as qital ("fighting"). 

      Regarding Jihad, the "Tafsir of Ibn Kathir", volume 2, pages 116, 117 on verse 2:191, [8], states: 

As Jihad involves death and the killing of men, Allah draws our attention to the fact that the disbelief and polytheism of the disbelievers, and their avoidance of Allah’s path are far worse than killing. Thus Allah says, "And Fitnah is worse than killing." This is to say that shirk (Polytheism) is more serious and worse than killing. 

      The "Reliance of the Traveller, (the Classic Manual of Islamic Sacred Law)", page 599, [9], is one of the more respected, classical works in Islamic theology. This 1200+ page voluminous book on Sharia contains fundamentals of Islamic jurisprudence compiled by "the great 13th century Hadith scholar and jurisprudent", Imam Nawawi, and others (like Ahmad ibn Naqib al-Misri). This work was not written with a Western audience in mind. They wanted to produce a book on Islamic Laws that was precise, and accurate; one that taught true and correct Islamic values. There are additional statements regarding the rules of Jihad found in "Reliance of the Traveller", but we quote only the relevant statements that portray Jihad’s scope and application:

o9.0 JIHAD 

"Jihad means to war against non-Muslims, and is etymologically derived from the word mujahada, signifying warfare to establish the religion. And it is the less Jihad. As for the great Jihad, it is spiritual warfare against the lower self, (nafs), which is why the Prophet said as he was returning from Jihad.

‘We have returned from the lesser jihad to the greater jihad’

The scriptural basis for Jihad, prior to scholarly consensus is such Koranic verses as:

1) Fighting is prescribed for you (2:216)

2) Slay them wherever you find them (4:89)

3) Fight the idolaters utterly (9:36)

and such Hadiths as the one related by Bukhari and Muslim that the Prophet said:

"I have been commanded to fight people until they testify that there is no god but Allah and that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah, and perform the prayer, and pay zakat. If they say it, they have saved their blood and possessions from me, except for the rights of Islam over them. And their final reckoning is with Allah"; 

and the Hadith reported by Muslim, 

     ‘To go forth in the morning or evening to fight in the path of Allah is better than the whole world and everything in it.’” 

o9.1 OBLIGATORY CHARACTER OF JIHAD 

     Jihad is a communal obligation. When enough people perform it to successfully accomplish it, it is no longer obligatory upon others  (O: the evidence for which is the Prophet’s saying (Allah bless him and give him peace). 

“He who provides the equipment for a soldier in jihad has himself performed jihad,” 

and Allah Most High having said: 

 Those of the believers who are unhurt but sit behind are not equal to those who fight in Allah’s path with their property and lives. Allah has preferred those who fight with their property and lives a whole degree above those who sit behind. And to each Allah has promised great good" (Koran 4:95). 

o9.3  Jihad is also (O: personally) obligatory for everyone  (O: able to perform, male or female, old or young) when the enemy has surrounded the Muslims.  

  o9.8   The Caliph makes war upon the Jews, Christians, and Zoroastrians, provided he has first invited them to enter Islam in faith and practice, and if they will not, then invited them to enter the social order of Islam by paying the non-Muslim poll tax Jizya…in accordance with the word of Allah Most High:

 "Fight those who do not believe in Allah and the Last Day and who forbid not what Allah and Hiss messenger have forbidden – who do not practice the religion of truth, being of those who have been give the Book – until they pay the poll tax out of hand and are humbled." 9:29

The Caliph fights all other peoples until they become Muslim…. 

     Finally, from Sahih Muslim,Book 1, Hadis  #0033, and Sahih Bukhari, Volume 1, Book 8, Hadis #387, comes a telling insight on the true meaning and scope of Jihad:

Muhammad said, "I have been ordered to fight against people until they say that "there is no god but Allah", that "Muhammad is the messenger of Allah", they pray, and pay religious taxes. If they do that, their lives and property are safe." 

     The Qur’an says Jihad receives the highest reward and is the surest way to paradise if the “fighter” dies: “Think not of those who are slain in Allah’s way as dead … they live … in the presence of their Lord” (Qur’an 3:169). “… To him who fighteth in the cause of Allah … soon shall we [God] give him a reward” (Qur’an 4:74). 

      Based upon many Islamic scholars writings, it appears undeniable that violent Jihad is permitted in Islam for both offensive and defensive purposes. It was commanded by, and praised by Muhammad as being one of the greatest forms of true Islamic spirituality.  Further, some of the final direction from Muhammad was that it (Jihad) is to continue until all people are subjected to Islamic rule.  Aggression toward non-Muslims is allowed, but prior to attacking, the Muslims are to offer them a choice: 1- Become Muslim; 2- do not become Muslim but pay the extortion (jizya) tax; 3- defend yourselves unto death.

For reference, some verses in the QUR’AN that contain the word, or form of the word "JIHAD": 3:136,142; 4:95,97; 5:35,54,59; 8:72,74,75; 9:16,19,20,24,41,44, 73,74,81-82, 86,87,88; 16:110-111; 22:77-78; 25:52; 29:5,6,7,8,69; 31:14-15; 47: 31,33; 49:15; 60:1; 61:11; 66:9.

Chapter 5 

Chronology and Abrogation in the QUR’AN:

     Now we will review the general CHRONOLOGY of the QUR’ANIC listings, with respect to their violent Jihadi passages. As stated earlier, we must explore both the context and chronology of the Qur’an’s passages. This is challenging because the Qur’an is not arranged chronologically, and in fact, no one knows for certain its complete chronology. There is no standard chronological agreement among scholars, be they Muslims, Christians, or secular, as to when chapters or even portions of chapters were revealed during Muhammad’s life. Some of Muhammad’s words, spoken as the Qur’an near the end of his life, were folded into passages he spoke near the beginning of his declared prophethood. Therefore, the Qur’an is a jumbled chronological hodgepodge. In and of itself, the Qur’an is practically worthless when it comes to determining its chronology. The only corroborating references that are able to provide us a guide as to when certain passages were spoken are the Sira and Hadith. Sometimes they provide chronological details behind the Qur’an’s verses. However, as a whole, scholars are unable to completely determine the Qur’an’s chronology. Consequently, they only offer their best, educated, opinions. In our study, we are most interested in the opinions accepted by the majority of Muslims today. 

    A Qur’anic chronology is very important because what Muhammad said earlier in his life did not necessarily apply to later events (due to "abrogation" mentioned above). By any standard of evaluation, it appears he was always prepared to change his mind, vows, and rules. (See the selection of Hadiths from Sahih Muslim, [10], book 15, #s 4044 – 4062). If we are to understand true Islamic Jihad as it is understood and taught today, then we need to establish his final position with respect to Jihad and aggression. Hence the importance of the last few chronological passages of the Qur’an, and the subsequent actions of his closest companions and followers. 

    Note that the majority of various Qur’anic passages relative to "Jihad" or violence come from chapter nine (ie Sura 9). Most scholars agree that chapter nine is from a very late period - near the end of Muhammad’s life. The great Muslim historian Tabari, in volume 8, (who wrote a 39 volume Islamic history and an extensive commentary on the Qur’an), [11], shows that the conquest of Mecca occurred in 630, and Ibn Ishaq documented in his "Sirat Rasulallah", page 617, [12], (this work is the most authentic biographical material still extant today), states that the main Jihad section of chapter 9 was revealed in AH 9, i.e. 631. Muhammad died in 632. Therefore, chapter 9 was revealed during Muhammad’s last two years, if not in the last year. Chapter 5 is usually thought to be the last chronological chapter, but it does not have many references to Jihad. 

     The following is a quote from the Encyclopaedia of Islam, op cit, with respect to the problems of Qur’anic chronology. At the end of the quote are its chronological lists taken from several different scholars of Islam. 

     The Kuran responds constantly and often explicitly to Muhammad's historical situation, giving encouragement in times of persecution, answering questions from his followers and opponents, commenting on current events, etc. Major doctrines and regulations for the Muslim community, which are never stated systematically in the Kuran, are introduced gradually and in stages that are not always clear. There are apparent contradictions and inconsistencies in the presentation of both the beliefs and the regulations, and the latter are sometimes altered to fit new situations. Thus it is essential to know the approximate dates or historical settings of some passages, and at least the chronological order of others, if they are to be understood fully. This problem was recognized by early Muslim scholars who devoted much attention to it in the first few centuries, until a fairly rigid system of dating was established and given the imprimatur of orthodoxy. In modern times the study of the chronology of the Kuran has been almost exclusively a domain of Western scholars, who have not however been able to reach a consensus on a dating system, or even on the possibility of establishing one.

The Egyptian standard edition gives the following chronological order of the Suras, with the verses said to date from a different period given in parentheses: XCVI, LXVIII (17-33, 48-50 Med.), LXXIII (10 f., 20 Med.), LXXIV, I, CXI, LXXXI, LXXXVII, XCII, LXXXIX, XCIII, XCIV, CIII, C, CVIII, CII, CVII, CIX, CV, CXIII, CXIV, CXII, LIII, LXXX, XCVII, XCI, LXXXV, CVI, CI, LXXV, CIV, LXXVII (48 Med.), L (38 Med.), XC, LXXXVI, LIV (54-6 Med.), XXXVIII, VII (163-70 Med.), LXXII, XXXVI (45 Med.), XXV (68-70 Med.), XXXV, XIX (58, 71 Med.), XX (130 f. Med.), LVI (71 f. Med.), XXVI (197, 224-7 Med.),XXVII, XXVIII (52-5 Med., 85 during Hijrah), XVII (26, 32 f., 57, 73-80 Med.), X (40, 94-6 Med.), XI (12, 17, 114 Med.), XII (1-3, 7 Med.), XV, VI (20, 23, 91, 114, 141, 151-3 Med.), XXXVII, XXXI (27-9 Med.), XXXIV (6 Med.), XXXIX (52-4 Med.), XL (56 f. Med.), XLI, XLII (23-5, 27 Med.), XLIII (54 Med.), XLIV, XLV (14 Med.), XLVI (10, 15, 35 Med.), LI, LXXXVIII, XVIII (28, 83-101 Med.), XVI (126-8 Med.), LXXI, XIV (28 f. Med.), XXI, XXIII, XXXII (16-20 Med.), LII, LXVII, LXX, LXXVIII, LXXIX, LXXXII, LXXXIV, XXX (17 Med.), XXIX (1-11 Med.), LXXXIII Hijrah II (281 later), VIII (30-6 Mec.), III, XXXIII, LX, IV, XCIX, LVII, XLVII (13 during Hijrah), XIII, LV, LXXVI, LXV, XCVIII, LIX, XXIV, XXII, LXIII, LVIII, XLIX, LXVI, LXIV, LXI, LXII, XLVIII, V, IX (128 f. Mec.), CX. 

      The Encyclopaedia of Islam, op cit, also details three Western Islamic scholars chronology of the Qur’an. (Noldeke was one of the greatest Qur’anic scholars from the West). This is the chronological order of the last Medinan Suras listed in their work:

Weil: 2, 98, 62, 65, 22, 4, 8, 47, 57, 3, 59, 24, 63, 33, 48, 110, 61, 60, 58, 49, 66, 9, 5.
Noldeke and Blachere: 2, 98, 64, 62, 8, 47, 3, 61, 57, 4, 65, 59, 33, 63, 24, 58, 22, 48, 66, 60, 110, 49, 9, 5.

[NOTE, traditional Western dating breaks the chronological order of the Qur’an up into 3 or 4 groups. The last group (sometimes called "late Medinan") is presented above. There are earlier Suras in both lists above, however, for space’s sake, and editing time, only the last Sura grouping is presented. Note that Sura 9 is the second to last in all these three scholar’s groupings.] 

      Canon Sell in "The Historical Development of the Qur’an", page 204, [13], details that Jalalu-d-Din as-Suyuti (a great Muslim Qur’anic scholar) lists Chapter 9 second to last, and Sir William Muir (a great Western Islamic scholar) lists chapter 9 as last. All of the above mentioned references also list Chapter 5 near the chronological end, if not at the very end. 

      The Hadith of Sahih Bukhari, volume 6, book 60, # 129 (or 5.59.650), [14], Hadith states that "The last Sura that was revealed was Bara’a…"  so Sura 9 was considered by him to be one of the last, if not the last revealed chapters of the Qur’an. 

     Therefore, the works of six top scholars, (3 of them Muslim, 3 Western), all agree that Chapter 9 is either the last or the second last chapter to be spoken or revealed by Muhammad. Consequently, since this chapter contains the largest amount of violent passages, this is our focus, because as a result of being the last Chapter revealed, Sura 9 would dominate, or abrogate, conflicting Qur’anic passages from earlier periods. That being said, to be thorough and fair we will also review other relevant passages on Islamic violence and Jihad found in the Qur’an. 

     In “Milestones, Ideologue of Fundamentalist Islam in Egypt”, Syed Qutb argues strongly for Jihad from some select Qur’anic verses (Qur’an 4:74-76; 8:38-40; 9:29-32). These passages alone, he states, suffice to justify the universal and permanent dimensions of Jihad (pp. 53-76). 

____----****o****----____
3

Chapter 6

The QUR’AN and JIHAD: Offensive and Defensive Verses:

     Historically Muhammad and his movement did not initially use force to induce the Jews, Christians and pagans to accept Islam; however force was justified for defence. Later, when he began to gather an army to himself and was able to go on the offensive, he did so. Then when people or circumstances turned against him he told his followers that the latest "revelations from Allah" instructed him to: "Prophet, make war on the unbelievers and the hypocrites and deal rigorously with them. Hell shall be their home." (9:73). Thus Muhammad’s career of warring in the name of Allah began as soon as it became a viable option, and then did not cease. Those defeated by Muhammad’s military actions were offered protection if they would submit to the dictates of Islam or pay tribute (ie Jizya tax or protection money). Those that refused those options had no "choice" but to be put to death. Non-Muslims were Dhimmis (the people of obligation) and, as such, were to be "utterly subdued". Such a recipe guaranteed the expansion of Islam. 

   Encarta Encyclopedia ‘99’ states: "The remarkable speed of [Islam’s] religious expansion can be attributed to the fact that it was accomplished primarily through military conquest. Muhammad drew Arabs of the Arabian Peninsula to Islam by his forceful personality, the promise of salvation for those who died fighting for Islam, and the lure of fortune for those who succeeded in conquest. The caravan raids of the early years of Islam soon became full-scale wars, and empires and nations bowed to the power of this new religious, military, political, economic, and social phenomenon." 

     Below are some of the many Qur’anic verses that reference violence and Jihad. At the end of each passage of selected verses, comments and reference material will be added. Qur’anic passages, unless otherwise noted, are taken from The Noble Qur’an, [15]. Note that for clarification the translators sometimes added words in parenthesis.

PASSAGE ONE: SURA 22:39 – 41 and 2:193

22:39 Permission to fight is given to those (i.e. believers against disbelievers), who are fighting them, (and) because they (believers) have been wronged, and surely, Allah is Able to give them (believers) victory.

22:40 Those who have been expelled from their homes unjustly only because they said: "Our Lord is Allah." - For had it not been that Allah checks one set of people by means of another, monasteries, churches, synagogues, and mosques, wherein the Name of Allah is mentioned much would surely have been pulled down. Verily, Allah will help those who help His (Cause). Truly, Allah is All-Strong, All-Mighty.

22:41 Those (Muslim rulers) who, if We give them power in the land, (they) order for Iqamat-as-Salat. [i.e. to perform the five compulsory congregational Salat (prayers) (the males in mosques)], to pay the Zakat and they enjoin Al-Ma'ruf (i.e. Islamic Monotheism and all that Islam orders one to do), and forbid Al-Munkar (i.e. disbelief, polytheism and all that Islam has forbidden) [i.e. they make the Qur'an as the law of their country in all the spheres of life]. And with Allah rests the end of (all) matters (of creatures).

2:193. And fight them until there is no more Fitnah (disbelief and worshipping of others along with Allah) and (all and every kind of) worship is for Allah (Alone). But if they cease, let there be no transgression except against Az-Zâlimûn (the polytheists, and wrong-doers, etc.) [Same verse from Dawood’s Koran [16] 2:193 states: “Fight against them until idolatry is no more and God’s religion reigns supreme. But if they desist, fight none except the evil doers.”] 

     The context and background of the above passages can be found in Ibn Ishaq’s and Tabari’s work. What follows is from the biographical work of Ibn Ishaq’s "Sirat Rasulallah", op cit, pages 212, 213. [NOTE: two passages from the Qur’an are referenced: [a] Sura 22:39-41, and [b] Sura 2:193].

     "THE APOSTLE RECEIVES THE ORDER TO FIGHT

     The apostle had not been given permission to fight or allowed to shed blood before the second Aqaba [a place where a pledge was made between Muhammad and his followers from Medina]. He had simply been ordered to call men to God and to endure insult and forgive the ignorant. The Quraysh [a leading group of Meccans] had persecuted his followers, seducing some from their religion and exiling others from their country. They had to choose whether to give up their religion, be maltreated at home, or to flee the country, some to Abyssinia, others to Medina.

     When Quraysh became insolent towards God and rejected His gracious purpose, accused His prophet of lying, and ill treated and exiled those who served Him and proclaimed His unity, believed in His prophet and held fast to His religion, He gave permission to His apostle to fight and to protect himself against those who wronged them and treated them badly.

     The first verse which was sent down on this subject from what I have heard from Urwa b. Al-Zubayr and other learned persons was: "Permission is given to those who fight because they have been wronged. God is well able to help them, --- those who have been driven out of their houses without right only because they said God is our Lord. Had not God used some men to keep back others, cloister and churches and oratories and mosques wherein the name of God is constantly mentioned would have been destroyed. Assuredly God will help those who help Him. God is Almighty. Those who if we make them strong in the land will establish prayer, pay the poor-tax, enjoin kindness, and forbid iniquity. To God belongs the end of matters [a]. The meaning is "I have allowed them to fight only because they have been unjustly treated while their sole offence against men has been that they worship God. When they are in the ascendant they will establish prayer, pay the poor-tax, enjoin kindness, and forbid iniquity, i.e., the prophet and his companions all of them." Then God sent down to him: "Fight them so that there be no more seduction," [b] i.e. until no believer is seduced from his religion. "And the religion is God's,", i.e. Until God alone is worshipped."

     When God had given permission to fight and this clan of the Ansar had pledged their support to him in Islam and to help him and his followers, and the Muslims who had taken refuge with them, the apostle commanded his companions, the emigrants of his people and those Muslims who were with him in Mecca, to emigrate to Medina and to link up with their brethren the Ansar. "God will make for you brethren and houses in which you may be safe." … 

     Ibn Ishaq’s work details the chronological and historical context of the above verses. Generally, Muhammad is now going to fight in self-defence. But, if we look closely, we find that Muslims will be allowed to a) "fight them so that there be no more seduction" – i.e., others trying to dissuade Muslims from Islam, and b) "the religion is God’s, i.e. Until God alone is worshipped." The seeds for future aggression to further Islam by using violence were now planted. 

     Tabari also documents this event. (Note: Tabari often used Ibn Ishaq’s work as a basis for parts of his history). Below is an except from Tabari, op cit, volume 6, page 137, on the time of the revelation of the above passage.

     The seventy representatives chiefs of those who had accepted Islam, came to the Messenger of God from al-Madinah met him during the pilgrimage, and swore an oath of allegiance to him at al-Aqabah. They gave him their pledge in the following words: "We are of you and you are of us; whoever comes to us of your Companions, or you yourself if you come to us, we shall defend you as we would defend ourselves." After this the Quraysh began to treat them harshly and the Messenger of God commanded his Companions to go to al-Madinah. This was the second trail, during which the Messenger of God told his Companions to emigrate and himself emigrated. It was concerning this that God revealed:

     And fight them until persecution is no more, and religion is all for God. [Note: This verse (8:39) was probably not revealed until after the battle of Badr. The almost identical verse 2:193 seems not to have been revealed until shortly before the conquest of Mecca.]

Tabari adds on page 138:

     Those members of the Aws and the Khazraj who took the oath of allegiance at the second al-Aqabah took the pledge of war, when, in contrast to the terms of the first al-Aqabah, God permitted fighting. The first was the pledge of women, as I have mentioned above on the authority of Ubadah al-Samit. The second pledge of al-Aqabah was to wage war against all men [Note: That is, on anyone who attacks Muhammad.], as I have mentioned above on the authority of Urwah al-Zubayr.] 

Regarding 2:193, the Tafsir of Ibn Kathir, op cit, page 117, 118, states 

     Then Allah orders Muslims to kill the disbelievers "until there is no more Fitnah." According to Ibn Abbas and others, "Fitnah" means polytheism, "And religion (worship), is for Allah" meaning Allah’s religion should stand supreme and overshadowing the rest of the religions. In the Sahihayn, it is reported that the Prophet said: "I have been ordered (by Allah) to fight the people till they say: "None has the right to be worshipped by Allah, and whoever says it will save his life and property from me except on breaking the law (rights and conditions for which he will be punished justly), and his accounts will be with Allah"". 

     Therefore, PASSAGE ONE provides us with the allowance of fighting and the works of history and Sira provide us with their chronology – early during Muhammad’s time in Medina. These verses are primarily defensive, but there is also a component of aggression in "And fight them until persecution is no more, and religion is all for God."  It appears that Muhammad envisioned that there would come a time when he would no longer be on the defensive, but on the offensive. Thus, his early words depict his later actions. 

PASSAGE TWO: SURA 2:216 & 217

2:216 Jihad (holy fighting in Allah’s Cause) is ordained for you (Muslims) though you dislike it, and it may be that you dislike a thing which is good for you and that you like a thing which is bad for you. Allah knows but you do not know.

 2:217 They ask you concerning fighting in the Sacred Months (i.e. 1st, 7th, 11th and 12th months of the Islamic calendar). Say, "Fighting therein is a great (transgression) but a greater (transgression) with Allah is to prevent mankind from following the Way of Allah, to disbelieve in Him, to prevent access to Al-Masjid-al-Haram (at Makkah), and to drive out its inhabitants, and Al-Fitnah is worse than killing. And they will never cease fighting you until they turn you back from your religion (Islamic Monotheism) if they can. And whosoever of you turns back from his religion and dies as a disbeliever, then his deeds will be lost in this life and in the Hereafter, and they will be the dwellers of the Fire. They will abide therein forever." 

     So it appears that not only death in this life, but the classical Hollywood eternal damnation in a lake fire will face those who abandon the faith, … pretty severe. Helmet Gatje in "The Qur’an and its Exegesis", page 213, [18], presents a quote from Baidawi’s Tafsir on this verse. Baidawi was one of the greatest early commentators on the Qur’an. Gatje’s words are in parenthesis.

     "They will question thee concerning the holy month": It is related that, in the month of Jumada l-Akhira, which was two months before (the battle of) Badr, the Prophet sent out his paternal cousin Abd Allah ibn Jahsh with an expeditionary force, in order to be on the look-out for a caravan of (the tribe of) Quraish in which were Amr ibn Abd Allah al-Hadrami and three (other) men. They killed Amr, took two of his men captive, and drove away the caravan, which contained the goods of trade from at-Taif. This happened at the beginning of (the month of) Rajab, while Abd Allah and his people believed it was (still) the (month of) Jumada l-Akhira. Regarding this, the (people of the tribe of) Quraish said: "Muhammad has (unlawfully) regarded the month in which raids and warlike acts are forbidden, so that the fearful can be safe and men can move freely everywhere for the sake of their livelihood, as permissible (for such forbidden acts). This fell hard upon the members of the expeditionary force, and they said: "We will not submit until compensation comes down for us." At this, Muhammad gave back the caravan along with the captives. According to Ibn Abbas (however it is related) that the Messenger of God accepted the booty when this verse came down. This is supposed to have been the first booty in Islam. Those who question (Muhammad about the holy month) were the unbelievers, who thereby sought to ascribe to him calumny and profanation (of a holy month). Others say (however) that they were the members of the expeditionary force (who asked Muhammad about the holy month)…. 

 "Say: Fighting in it is a heinous thing": that is, a heinous sin. For the most part, in opposition to Ata, it is held that this statement is abrogated by the following words of God: "If they do not leave you alone and offer you peace and stop hostilities, then take them wherever you find them and slay them" (Sura 4:91/93). In this case the more specific (that is, the prohibition against fighting during the month of Rajab) would be abrogated by the general order (that is, the general command to kill the unbelievers). However, there is a contradiction in this. It lies nearest (the truth) to reject (the interpretation that the present verse declares an absolute prohibition against fighting in the holy month. Although (the word) "fighting" is indefinite here, it is fixed in scope; and thus, (the fighting here) not (to be understood as fighting) in general…  

      These passages display clearly what Muhammad ordered at the time these verses were revealed.  Just after arriving in Medina, Muhammad issued commands and they attacked and stole other people’s possessions. His followers were also later justified when, during that process, they ended up murdering a man. 

     This action took place during a period of recognized "peace" within the Arab community. They had an understanding, a code of honor if you will, that all would honor the sacred months and not make war upon others. Muhammad’s men broke this code. And to justify this and other deeds, Muhammad received a timely "revelation" justifying the robbery and murder these men committed. Even with these few verses regarding Jihad and violence, duplicity is apparent. It appears that in the earliest stages of the movement, that as circumstances changed, Islam changed as needed to fit the new reality. 

     Also note how this passage contradicts or "abrogates" passage one. 2:216 and 217 allow offensive attacks but 2:190-194 primarily command defensive actions. Here, Muhammad’s actions were a raid upon some travelling merchants who had goods that were not from the city of Mecca. 

PASSAGE THREE:  SURA 4:94, 95

4:94  O you who believe! When you go (to fight) in the Cause of Allah, verify (the truth), and say not to anyone who greets you (by embracing Islam): "You are not a believer"; seeking the perishable goods of the worldly life. There are much more profits and booties with Allah. Even as he is now, so were you yourselves before till Allah conferred on you His Favors (i.e. guided you to Islam), therefore, be cautious in discrimination. Allah is Ever Well Aware of what you do.

4:95  Not equal are those of the believers who sit (at home), except those who are disabled (by injury or are blind or lame, etc.), and those who strive hard and fight in the Cause of Allah with their wealth and their lives. Allah has preferred in grades those who strive hard and fight with their wealth and their lives above those who sit (at home). Unto each, Allah has promised good (Paradise), but Allah has preferred those who strive hard and fight, above those who sit (at home) by a huge reward;  

     These two verses show how important Jihad and fighting are in Islam. Apparently Jihad is highly commendable, and those that fight are rated high in Allah’s eyes, and they will be greatly rewarded.  This also shows clearly the aggressive intentions of Jihad.  Ali’s Koran starts 4:94 with, "Oh you who believe, when you go abroad in the cause of Allah…"  From our chronological tables we see that this chapter was also revealed during the Medinan period. In Rodwell’s Koran, [19], the notes for chapter 4 state: "Most of the events alluded to in this Sura fall between the end of the third and the close of the fifth year after the flight to Medina."

      Now, let’s look at another Muslim scholar’s commentary. From the Tafsir of Ibn Kathir, op cit, pages 145 – 150, (not re-quoting the verses)

     Quoting Ibn Abbas: "Some Muslims chased a man for his booty, who said to them: "Assalamu Alaykum." They killed him and seized his booty. Consequently, the above verse was revealed. It is mentioned in a biography that his brother Fazzar emigrated to the Prophet in compliance with his father’s command to call on Fazzar people to embrace Islam. On his way, one of the Prophet’s brigades found him at night. He had already informed them that he was a Muslim, but they rejected his admission, and killed him. His father said: "I went to the Prophet and he gave me one thousand dinars and other compensation, and sent me back." Then, the above verse was revealed.

     Al-Bukhari narrated, on the authority of Ibn Abbas: "The Prophet said to Al-Miqdad: "When a believer conceals his Faith among a people who are disbelievers and he has disclosed his Islam, then you have killed him, didn’t you, too, conceal your Islam in Makkah before? (1). Narrated by Al-Bukhari in this way (summarized and Mu’allaq).

      Iman Ahmed quoted Ibn Abbas as saying: "A man from Banu Saalim who was herding his sheep, passed by a group of the Prophet’s companions, and greeted them. They said: "He only greeted us in order to seek our protection." They went to him and killed him. Afterwards, they brought his sheep to the Prophet and the above verse was revealed."" (2) 

      Note from Ibn Kathir’s quote. 1) Muslims were allowed to attack non-Muslims and plunder their possessions. It is quite clear that the poor shepherd was treated badly by any standard. He greeted them, poised no threat, but he was murdered because the Muslims thought he was not a ‘true’ Muslim. In other words, it was totally permissible to attack non-Muslims at this time in Islam’s history. The murdering Muslims were not then reproached for having attacking others of the same faith, instead they were reproached for attacking a person who greeted them – as a Muslim would do, but whom they thought was not a true Muslim. Had the shepherd not greeted them, Muhammad would have had less difficulty in justifying his murder, and it probably would not have merited mention of any kind at all. One wonders why it took the murder of a Muslim for Allah to "reveal" this Muslim-sensitive protective verse to Muhammad? Obviously it would have been better if Allah could have revealed this to Muhammad earlier so as to prevent a potential brother from being murdered.

 Let’s continue with Ibn Kathir’s commentary. Regarding verse 4:95 it says,

      "Al-Bukhari quoted Al-Barra as saying: "When the above verse was revealed, the Prophet called Zaid Ibn Thabit and ordered him to write it down. Ibn Umm Maktum came to the Prophet and explained to him his disability. Then, Allah revealed: "Except those who are disabled." 

     Note here that once again, it took an unforeseen change in human circumstances and predicaments for Allah to complete a revelation to answer it. Jihad was ordered for Muslims to be sanctified as good followers, but it was pointed out that some Muslims were unable to fight – such as blind men. Consequently, Allah had to modify his prior revelation to Muhammad with another revelation – exempting the disabled from Jihad. 

      Thus far, three Qur’anic passages have been considered. The first was revealed around the time Muhammad fled from Mecca to Medina; the second, just a few months after his arrival in Medina and the third, from between the 3rd and 5th year of Muhammad’s stay in Medina.

____----****o****----____