Expelling Christians and Jews from Arabia?

Question:

Assalamu alaykum! I found some ahadith: "I will expel the Jews and Christians from the Arabian Peninsula and will not leave any but Muslims" [Muslim]. Yahya related to me from Malik from Ibn Shihab that the Messenger of Allah (saw) said: "Two deens shall not co-exist in the Arabian Peninsula" [Muwatta].Both of them are saheeh. I was just wondering if you could explain this to me, because this sure looks like ethnic cleansing. It's seems hypocritical, because if the situation was in reverse (if the non-Muslims decided not to let any Muslims live in a certain area) surely the Muslims would be religiously obligated to wage war against them. How would Muslims expect peace from the other side if they did something like this? These ahadith and rulings show just how much unnecessary and disgusting hatred there is to anyone who's not a Muslim. Personally, I was born as a Muslim, but I left Islam a few months ago, and this right here is one of many reasons why I did that. Now I'm looking more deeply into Islam again. Islam is a very strange religion to me, because it has that wonderful concept of God that seems to be way better than anything any other religion has - but on the other side there are these horrible parts (intolerance, hatred, violence, discrimination against women) that I could never accept for the basic humanity in me.Thank you in advance!

Answer:

Salam dear sister,

Thank you for your question and for contacting Ask About Islam.

We are sad to read that you left Islam for things that seem to be contradictory.

First let’s agree that Islam is different from what Muslims do. Islam does not need beatification. Islam has a solution for all problems.

The problem with some Muslims is the way they understand Islam and the way they practice it. Islam is about simplicity and easiness. Islam is about religious freedom and freedom of expression.

We hope that the problem in question will be clarified and you will come back to the fold of Islam to feel the real happiness in this world and the world to come.

With reference to the hadiths you quoted, they should be understood within their proper and correct context.

The hadith reported in Muslim’s authentic collection of hadiths is talking about a specific region in the Arabian Peninsula. The Prophet (peace be upon him) used the terminology and the language that his companions understood and applied accordingly.

Umar Ibn al-Khattab (may Allah be pleased with him) relocated the Jewish tribes of Khaybar and Fadak and sent them to Tayma and Ariha. These two regions are considered part of the Arabian Peninsula, but still the Jewish tribes were allowed to settle there.

The scholars of hadith understood what Umar did to mean that the Jews and the Christians are not allowed in the region of al-Hijaz surrounding Makkah and Madinah.

Imam Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani maintains that:

“The pagans are not allowed to settle specifically in the Hijaz region, meaning Makkah, Madinah, al-Yamamah, and their environs. It does not apply to other regions that are considered part of the Arabian Peninsula. This is because everyone is agreed that they may live in Yemen, though it is part of the Arabian Peninsula. This is the opinion of the majority of scholars. (Fath al-Bari 6/198)

Here we should differentiate between expelling the Jews and Christians and killing them. In no way did the Prophet mean to kill them. Under no context, it is allowed for Muslims to kill the Jews and the Christians as long as they enter the Muslim countries with an official visa which is considered like a pledge of protection granted to non-Muslims.

Some scholars maintain that what is prohibited is to let the Jews and Christians have an independent state inside the Arabian Peninsula. They are allowed to stay there as workers and visitors. This stay is temporary and someday they will go home to their native lands.

The Prophet allowed the Jews to stay in Khaybar and he hired them to work in farming. The Prophet had good relations with the Jews to the extent that at the time of his death, he had no money and his shield was being held in mortgage by a Jewish man.

When Abu Bakr (may Allah be pleased with him) became the Caliph, the Jews were at Khaybar, the Christians were at Najran and the Jews of Yemen were at Yemen and are still there until today since they were never expelled by Muslims.

The above mentioned explains how the Companions understood the Prophet’s command to expel the Jews and Christians from the Arabian Peninsula. As you can see, sister, we have to know the background and context of each narration reported from the Prophet (peace be upon him). Generalization is not always recommended. Each case has its own circumstances and what can be applied in a certain area cannot be applied literally in another.

Finally, we ask you to reconsider the decision you have taken to abandon Islam for such issues. Please whenever you face a controversial or a thorny issue; try to consult people of knowledge who follow the moderate Islam which is based on the correct understanding of the Quran and the tradition (Sunnah) of the Prophet (peace be upon him).

I hope this answers your question. Please keep in touch.

http://www.onislam.net/english/ask-about-islam/islam-and-the-world/worldview/462074-hatred.html

Can Muslims take disbelievers as protectors? Part 2

Question:

What is meant by not taking the Jews and Christians as awliya? What were the reasons for these verses being revealed?

Answer:

You are referring to the verse in surat al-ma'idah: 5:1, it is best translated as follows:

"O you who believe, do not take Jews and Christians as your closest allies, for they are only the close allies of each other. Whoever among you turns to them (for alliances, in place of believers,) is one of them, for God doesn't guide corrupt people." (Qur'an: 5:51).

The verse in no way implies establishing normal friendly and amicable relations with either Christians or Jews or anyone else (who is not a Muslim). It specifically refers to siding with them against Muslims, or joining with them on causes that are clearly detrimental to the interests of Islam and Muslims.

The above interpretation is confirmed by a close study of the context of the revelation of the verse: It was revealed, as stated by the great mufassirin (exegists) such as Imam Ibn Jarir and others, in the context of the alliance of Jews with the pagans in waging war against Muslims. When the Jews of Madinah did this, some Muslims from Ansaar, who had been formerly allies of Jews, declared their innocence of them, while others (apparently the hypocrites) still persisted in their alliance--in clear violation of the interests of Islam and Muslims.

Therefore, the above verse is specifically forbidding Muslims against forming alliances with others against the interests of their own community as well as siding with them on causes that are immoral or considered as unjust.

Seen in this light, it does not in any way forbid Muslims from having normal friendly relations with members of these communities or cooperating with them on causes of mutual benefit. Not only these are permissible but also clearly recommended in Islam: Allah tells us,

"...And never let your hatred of people who would bar you from the Inviolable House of Worship lead you into the sin of aggression: but rather help one another in furthering virtue and God-consciousness, and do not help one another in furthering evil and enmity; and remain conscious of God: for, behold, God is severe in retribution!" (Qur'an: 5:2)

The Prophet (peace be upon him) said, "(In pre-Islamic times) I attended a pact of virtue in the house of Abd Allah b. Jud'an: If I were called in Islam by anyone to join a similar pact, I would never hasten to join it!" 
 
Furthermore, it is an incontrovertible fact that the Prophet (peace be upon him) turned his foes into his bosom friends by his mercy and friendly relations with them.

In conclusion: The word awliya in the verse referred to above means making them allies against Islam and Muslims.

http://askthescholar.com/AskTheScholar2.aspx?q=5625

What does Islam say about taking things to the extreme?

Question:

Asalamu-alikum warahmatullah Shiekh I have been called a fundamentalist meaning an extremist in their own religion. Why? I don't know what I have done! I am just worried about my religion this ummah. I was told that I shouldn't take islam in a serious way but I said "I fear my lord I want to pass this life time Why shouldn't I be worried about my religion". Then I was called a fundamentalist. Please help me

Answer:

If you know that you are not an extremist, then you don't need to worry about what people may think or say about you. You should, however, stay clear of all forms of extremism in your words, manners and actions. Islam you should know is all about moderation, balance and harmony; it teaches us to shun rigidity and extremism. The Prophet said, "Woe to the extremists (who make things difficult for themselves and others)." (Reported by Muslim). He also said, "this religion of ours is easy and simple to follow; whoever makes it hard upon him will only be defeating himself (by such an attitude)." (Reported by Nasa'i). If you know that you are not an extremist, and you adhere strictly to the sound beliefs and practices of Islam, then you need not worry about your reputation. The Prophet (peace be upon him) said, "whoever works to please Allah-even, though he may have to displease people by doing that- Allah will take care of people for him. If, however, someone is trying to please people by displeasing Allah, Allah will abandon him to people." (Reported by Timidhi)

http://askthescholar.com/question-details.aspx?qstID=14255

Can Muslims take non-Muslims as friends? Part 2

Question

is a Muslim allowed to have non Muslim friends or is it sinful. And also if you were to do sin such as go cinema with non Muslims is it kufr.

Answer

Having a non-Muslim friend is not prohibited but keeping the enemy of Islam as a close friend is prohibited. When choosing a friend, you should consider the benefits and harms of friendship. If you befriend good people then it is likely that you will do good things as well but if befriend bad people then it is likely that you will do bad things as well.

Sin and Kufr are two separate things. Some acts may be classified as sin but not Kufr. One only becomes Kafir if he/she commits and act of Kufr. By committing an act of sin, one is considered sinner and not a Kaafir. This does not mean that sinning is acceptable. A believer must stay away from sins as he would stay away from fire.

 And Allah knows best.

Mufti Ikram ul Haq

Fatwa Center of America

http://www.askamufti.com/Answers/ViewQuestion.aspx?QuestionId=3873

Does the Quran really say Ezra is the son of God?

Question:

I asked you a few days ago but I got no response and I really need one. I love the qur'an and I think it's a beautifully written book. I am also on the edge of converting to Islam. However I do not understand aya 9:30. It talks about the Jews taking Uzair as God's son. But I've neve met a Jew who believes that. Also it seems to speak illy of Chrisitans and Jews which I don't understand because in the other areas of the Qur'an it speaks highly of them. Please please please explain this to me because there is no one else who can. My parents are catholic and so they don't know much about Islam as you or another Muslim might. Thank you so much.

Answer:

In responding to your question, I cannot do any better than quoting Muhammad Asad's comment on the above verse. First, let me his rendition of the verse, followed by his note on it, for clarification. The late Muhammad Asad was a convert from Judaism to Islam, who spent decades to the study of the Qur'an.

9:30 (Asad) AND THE JEWS say, "Ezra is God's son," while the Christians say, "The Christ is God's son." Such are the sayings which they utter with their mouths, following in spirit assertions made in earlier times by people who denied the truth! ^[44] [They deserve the imprecation:] "May God destroy them!" How perverted are their minds!

Note 44 (Quran Ref: 9:30 )

 

This statement is connected with the preceding verse, which speaks of the erring followers of earlier revelation. The charge of shirk ("the ascribing of divinity [or "divine qualities"] to aught beside God") is levelled against both the Jews and the Christians in amplification, as it were, of the statement that they "do not follow the religion of truth [which God has enjoined upon them]". As regards the belief attributed to the Jews that Ezra (or, in the Arabicized form of this name, 'Uzayr) was "God's son", it is to be noted that almost all classical commentators of the Qur'an agree in that only the Jews of Arabia, and not all Jews, have been thus accused. (According to a Tradition on the authority of Ibn 'Abbas - quoted by Tabari in his commentary on this verse - some of the Jews of Medina once said to Muhammad, "How could we follow thee when thou hast forsaken our qiblah and dost not consider Ezra a son of God?") On the other hand, Ezra occupies a unique position in the esteem of all Jews, and has always been praised by them in the most extravagant terms. It was he who restored and codified the Torah after it had been lost during the Babylonian Exile, and "edited" it in more or less the form which it has today; and thus "he promoted the establishment of an exclusive, legalistic type of religion that became dominant in later Judaism" (Encyclopaedia Britannica, 1963, vol. IX, p. 15). Ever since then he has been venerated to such a degree that his verdicts on the Law of Moses have come to be regarded by the Talmudists as being practically equivalent to the Law itself: which, in Qur'anic ideology, amounts to the unforgivable sin of shirk, inasmuch as it implies the elevation of a human being to the status of a quasi-divine law-giver and the blasphemous attribution to him - albeit metaphorically - of the quality of "sonship" in relation to God. Cf. in this connection Exodus iv, 22-23 ("Israel is My son") or Jeremiah xxxi, 9 ("I am a father to Israel"): expressions to which, because of their idolatrous implications, the Qur'an takes strong exception.(Quran Ref: 9:30 ) (Muhammad Asad, the Meaning of the Qur'an, pp: 262-63).

Furthermore, the Qur'anic denunciations of the Jews for their acts of disobedience have parallels in the Bible: see, for instance, Psalms 109:17-20, 78:21-22, 69:27-28 and in Mathew 23:33 and 12:34 (cf. Yahya Emerick, The Meaning of the Holy Qur'an in Today's English, p.194).

http://askthescholar.com/AskTheScholar2.aspx?q=9239

Is it absolutely necessary to ask scholars for everything?

An excellent fatwa for those Islam QA lovers.

Question:

Asalam Alaikum. Do you think it is a disease of our ummah that Muslims consult scholars and imams about minute details of life? Sometimes I wonder if this is almost a permanent doubt we remain in - ambiguity unless someone else tells us something is right or wrong and it can encourage paranoia/OCD about very small factors of life. Do you think this is how we are supposed to operate? I think about this a lot because I know Islam is not supposed to be a burden and sometimes think there is a thin line between avoiding invention and being too robotic and not embodying your faith. After all Allah gave us all logic reasoning and intellect. What did people do before the Internet and before such easy access to information? I would be really interested to understand your point of view because I notice unlike some scholars you often present the facts within the Quran Hadith but then ask the person to judge for themselves. You also always present alternative views. Other scholars instruct people directly with very limited boundaries of choice even if the exact situation cannot be found within the Quran & Hadith. An example for me is vinegar which the Prophet said was good yet people ask details about different kinds of vinegar and interrogate waiters before consuming a meal instead of just thinking about the bigger picture of why we were told to avoid alcohol and how and why we are using vinegar. Do you understand my point?


Answer:

The point you have raised is highly appreciated. It is a sad fact that many Muslims today seem preoccupied with miniscule more like the Pharisees and Sadducees, and thus are losing the spirit and soul of religion. This was the same condition that Imam Ghazali was fighting. The reason for this is the scholars over emphasizing the form of religion as opposed to the inner dimensions. Many questions people ask do not need any specialized knowledge; even the common sense or our own moral conscience can help us decide on such matters. The Prophet himself said, consult your conscience, consult your conscience! Of course, he meant the sound moral conscience that is aware of Allah's judgement.

However, we cannot condemn genuine questions. The Qur'an and the Prophet's traditions exhort us to ask those who know when we cannot make up our minds in regards to the issues we face in life.

http://askthescholar.com/question-details.aspx?qstID=12408

A great article on the Covenant of Madinah

This covenant is often over looked and ignored. This is a great article by the Grand Mufti of Al Azher Dr. Ali Gomaa:

Islam has not only spread its teachings about human behavior and noble manners among its followers, but it has rather taught Muslims practical adherence to it and persistence in acting upon it. The Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) was the first to undertake practical application of the principles of tolerance toward non-Muslims as stated in the Glorious Qur'an. The earliest application of such a principle of tolerance occurred in Madinah since the Prophet's arrival to it in immigration from Makkah. Since his early stay there, the Prophet worked toward the establishment of the Islamic State, concluding in the first year of Hegira a covenant between Muslims and Madinah citizens of other religions. The covenant was the first political document ever concluded, and it included 47 articles regulating the relations between Muslims and non-Muslims. According to it, the scope of Muslims' interaction withhe reign of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him), on the basis of the principle of tolerance, which is elaborated on in many verses of the Glorious Qur'an and illustrated in the Prophet's biography, in word and deed. non-Muslims increased during the reign of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him), on the basis of the principle of tolerance, which is elaborated on in many verses of the Glorious Qur'an and illustrated in the Prophet's biography, in word and deed.

This covenant is considered the first document that contained articles maintaining rights of citizenship. Reviewing this constitutional document, we find that it recognized citizens' rights and duties, from the political, military, economic, and social perspectives. So, such bases can be perceived throughhe most important terms in the covenant, which run as follows: analyzing t

1. The Prophet's saying that they "are one nation distinguished from all other people" establishes the principles of national unity among the citizens of the one state, being the subjects or the people of the state at that time.
2. His saying that "anyone from among the Jews who joins us shall have our support and shall share equal rights with us and shall suffer no oppression and shall fear no alliance against them" states the necessity of supporting non-Muslim fellow citizens and taking sides with them in affirmation of their right to that support, being due on the part of Muslims, against any assault on them.
3. His saying "The Jews of Banu `Awf shall be treated along with the believers as one community, with the Jews having their own religion and the Muslims having their own religion; this shall apply to them and their freedmen [i.e., allies], with the exception of those who act unjustly or sinfully. By so doing, they wrong themselves and their families" is a clear declaration of national unity among the different sects in society, with justice — not injustice — set as its governing law and with the unjust bearing the consequences of their misdeeds.
4. His saying that "the Jews shall share expenses with the believers as long as they are at war [with others]" lays down the principle of equality among citizens, Muslims and non-Muslims, in economically supporting the state at times of war against enemies. It also accentuates the necessity of mutual support and assistance between the two parties against the enemy.
5. His saying that "the Jews shall bear their expenses and Muslims shall bear theirs" asserts the principle of economic solidarity when distributing economic responsibilities among the different groups in society.
6. His saying "The Jewish allies of the clans of An-Najjar, Al-Harith, Sa`idah, Jusham, Al-Aws, and Tha`labah shall enjoy the same rights as the Jewish allies of `Awf" involves a recognition of the principle of equality in rights and duties among Muslims and the rest of denominations in the territories under the rule of the Islamic State.

7. This pact constitutes an ideal example of citizenship, recognizing the rights of all citizens in the same homeland and indicating that there should be no difference among them regarding responsibilities.

   Also, his sayings "They shall render support against anyone who fights any party to this pact" and "They shall owe it to each other to give mutual sincere counsel. Fulfillment of the articles of this pact shall prevent any violation of it. No one shall be held responsible for a sinful action perpetrated by his of her ally" establish the priorities of mutual support among the parties to the covenant against the enemies fighting them, which is a military defense concept. It also illustrates the necessity of cooperation in mutual exchange of view, advice, and consultation, being an essential social concept of citizenship.
8. His saying "No unbeliever may take the property of Quraysh [the enemy] under his or her protection. Enemy’s property shall be surrendered to the State, and he may not be protected against a believer" prevents any cooperation between any group in society and the enemies of that society, be that related to protection of lives, honor, or property.
9. His saying "No one shall be held responsible for a sinful action perpetrated by his or her ally" explains the principle of personal accountability and recognizes the rights of both the individual and society alike. Every person is responsible only for what he has committed, and this is one of the principles of tolerance in Islam. Thus, society is not punished or held accountable for the misdeeds of an individual. This principle springs from Allah's (Exalted be He) Sayings, (And no bearer of a burden shall bear the burden of another) (Al-An`am 6: 164), (Every person is a pledge for that which he has earned) (At-Tur 52: 21), and (Every soul is a pledge for what it has earned) (Al-Muddaththir 74: 38), and thus, it constitutes the perfect form of equality.

10. His saying that "Yathrib [i.e., Madinah] shall be an inviolable [sanctuary] for the parties to this pact" is a clear-cut proof from the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) regarding delimitation of the concept of geographical citizenship and the citizen's belonging to his or her homeland.

11. His saying that "neither Quraysh nor their allies shall be given protection" indubitably interdicts any military cooperation with the enemies of homeland or their allies who assist them in their injustice.

12. Finally, his sayings "The parties to this pact are bound to help each other in the event of an attack on Yathrib" and "This document shall not [be employed to] protect one who is unjust or who commits a crime [against other parties to the pact]" represent a manifest declaration by the Prophet of an essential principle of citizenship, namely, the inevitability of defending homeland. These words also state that assistance is incumbent only in case of justice and equity and not in case of injustice or oppression. Hence, the right of citizenship does not give a free pardon to a citizen in case he or she commits an injustice or sin, because the religion of Islam maintains and takes sides with the right and forbids and encounters falsehood.

These are some of the provisions and articles established in the pact regarding rights of citizenship, as early as the lifetime of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him). They promulgated that all citizens (Muslims and non-Muslims) are to be treated on a clear basis of equality, as there is no first-class, second-class, or third-class citizens. Favoritism on the basis of the citizen's faith was nonexistent, and all citizens were equal before Shari`ah and the rule of law, and they were all fairly alike as regards duties, with no discrimination whatsoever.

This pact constitutes an ideal example of citizenship, recognizing the rights of all citizens in the same homeland and indicating that there should be no difference among them regarding responsibilities. Under it, no one was granted any distinction at the expense of another on a racial or denominational basis. Islam maintains that the only criterion for distinction and honoring is doing good deeds, serving society, and preserving its safety and security.

http://www.onislam.net/english/shariah/muhammad/manners/451032-covenant-of-madinah-a-road-map-for-coexistence.html

What does Islam say about coexistence?

By Sheikh Salman al-Oadah

It is a sad fact that the idea of coexistence is far removed from the conceptual reality of certain sectors of Muslim society. We do not even have to go so far as to discuss coexistence between Muslims and people of other faith – there is a lack of willingness for some groups of Muslims to coexist with other Muslim who happen follow a different school of jurisprudence, or are affiliated with a different group, or are from a different country… or in some cases who belong to a different Arab tribe. These divisions sometimes erupt into violence, causing us to ask: What has torn us apart like this?

Too many people see the idea of coexistence as merely a strategy to resort to in times of weakness. This is not true at all. What we see if we observe the world is that coexistence really comes into full flower and sets its roots deep when there is strength. The societies which have the power to promote coexistence and peace are the same ones who have the power to instigate and successfully conduct a war. By contrast, those who are weak can neither conduct war nor bring about peace. It is, indeed, at times of weakness and instability that we find the noble idea of coexistence to be most imperiled.

It shows strength to be able to accommodate disagreements and dissention, to be able to encompass various outlooks, social tendencies, and aspirations while not having any group’s vested interests spiral into discord or civil strife. Strength is not about imposing one particular view by force.

Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) said: “The strong person is not the one who can wrestle another to the ground; the strong person is the one who can restrain himself when he is angry.” [Sahîh al-Bukhârî and Sahîh Muslim]

When the Caliph `Umar b. al-Khattâb entered Jerusalem to receive the keys to the city, he was invited to pray inside the church, but he declined. He refused to do so, though he was in a position of strength and could do as he pleased. He refused, though he did not in any way disdain praying in the church. He said, showing great foresight and sensitivity: “I fear that if I pray inside, the Muslims of future times will wish to pray In the same spot and will cause discomfort for the church’s congregation.”

`Umar, instead, prayed outside the church and spoke a guarantee to the Christians for their lives and security.

Though Richard the Lionhearted had once killed 2,700 Muslim prisoners of war on a single occasion and hung their bodies around the walls of the city of Acre, breaking the agreement he had made with the Muslims, we see that Saladin, when he retook Jerusalem, guaranteed the lives of everyone, Jews and Christians alike, though he was more then capable of exacting revenge. He instead entered into the Treaty of Ramla with Richard on 2 September 1192, whereby the city would stay in Muslim hands but would remain open to Christian pilgrimages. This is one of the hallmarks of coexistence in medieval history.

Muslim history, which is full of periods of strength and victory, is at the same time a testament to coexistence in action. It is a history of peace treaties, agreements, and covenants with others.

Allah says: “O you who believe, uphold your covenants.” [Sûrah al-Mâ’idah: 1]

Allah says: “Keep the covenants. Lo! The covenant will be asked about.” [Sûrah al-Isrâ’: 34]

The Prophet (peace be upon him) said: “Whoever kills a person who is under a covenant, that killer will not smell the scent of Paradise, though its scent can be detected for the distance of a journey of forty years.”

We can witness that the Prophet (peace be upon him) saw a funeral procession pass by. He stood for it. When he was told that it was the funeral of a Jew, he replied: “Was he not a human soul?” [Sahîh al-Bukhârî and Sahîh Muslim]

Look at how Ibn Taymiyah addressed the King of Cyprus:

It has reached me of the Cypriot King’s devoutness, his grace, his love of knowledge, and his studiousness. I have seen how Sheikh Abû al-`Abbâs al-Maqdisî has shown thanks to the King for his gentleness, kindness, and hospitality, and equally extended thanks to the priests and their peers.

We are a people who love goodness for everyone, and it is our hope that Allah will to bring together for you all good in this world and the next.

Ibn Taymiyah called upon him not only to free the Muslim prisoners of war that he had, but also the Tatars, Jews, and Christians, saying:

We wish for all those who are with you who are Jews and Christians and who are under our legal protection, that you free them. We will not abandon any prisoner who is our citizen, whether he be Muslim or not. And likewise know that all the prisoners of war that we have who are Christians, they all know of our goodness to them and our mercy, which the Final Messenger had enjoined upon us.

Sadly, some people who are overwhelmed with a sense of defeat, cannot see in the language of coexistence anything other than a justification for and acceptance of their defeat. Others look towards an idealistic notion of coexistence that has no practical expression. A true appreciation of coexistence can bring an end to this confusion.

The success of coexistence depends upon the airing of rational voices willing to engage in fruitful dialogue, through which desired results can be achieved with ease. By contrast, the failure of coexistence is ensured when irrational and foolish voices take over, of people who care nothing but for the gratification of their own interests. Such people rely upon the discourse of strength and coercion in their understanding of the world and in their decision making. Such are people who see conflict as the key to dealing with others. They cannot look at things from the vantage point of our shared humanity, our universal values, and the common needs and interests that all people have.

Warmongers never think except in the context of war. Their discourse comes inevitably to one sorrowful conclusion.

The purpose of religion – contrary to what some people seem to think – is not to cause conflict between people, but rather to give a moral shape and harmonious order to human interaction and to ensure successful cooperation in developing our lives on this Earth.

Allah says about humanity: “It is He Who hath produced you from the Earth and settled you therein” [Sûrah Hûd: 61]

When Allah created Adam (peace be upon him) he created him to develop the Earth, to explore it and cultivate it.

The angels at first objected to the creation of the human being, saying: “Do you place therein those who will cause strife and bloodshed, while we glorify You with praise and exalt You?” [Sûrah al-Baqarah: 30]

The angels knew full well that Allah hates strife and bloodshed. Certainly, Allah did not create humanity and give us the scriptures so we could fight each other.

The duty the Muslims have to spread the Message of Islam requires winning over people’s hearts and minds. They need to know about Islam as it really is. We as Muslims need to exercise patience and forbearance. We need to respond to abuse with goodness, as Allah has commanded us on a number of occasions in the Qur’ân.

“The good deed and the evil deed are not alike. Repel evil with what is better, then lo! he, between whom and you there had been enmity, will become like a bosom friend.” [Sûrah Fussilat: 34]

This is how Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) won over the hearts of his enemies. He responded to their harshness and coarseness with kindness, until their hearts softened and they were receptive to hear the truth.

Kind treatment, genuine concern and friendship, treating others well in word and in deed – these are the ways to bring an end to hatred and reconcile people. Allah says: “And no one will be granted such goodness except those who exercise patience and self-restraint, none but persons of the greatest good fortune.” [Sûrah Fussilat: 35]

Coexistence preserves human life. It opens the doors to dialogue. It is the atmosphere in which the Message of Islam prospers, where it can present itself with the reason, evidence, and logic that so enriches the Qur’ân.

http://en.islamtoday.net/artshow-414-521.htm

Is the hadith "No man will be asked why he beat his wife" reliable?

HelloCan you tell me wether this hadith is sahih or not please"No man will be asked as to why he beat his wife"I find it very shocking. Genuine question as it makes me have a lot of doubts

This hadith is certainly deemed as weak and therefore, considered as unauthentic. It is also contradicted by the well-known principles of Islam as can be easily inferred from the Qur'an and sound tradition as no one can say a husband is allowed to beat his wife for no reason. The Prophet (peace be upon him) said, "There shall be no toleration of either inflicting of harm or reciprocating it." Allah orders men, in the Qur'an, that they must never inflict harm on their wives under any circumstances.
In order for a tradition to be considered as well attested, it must pass rigorous standards. A tradition must be deemed as sound in its chains of transmission as well as content. The former is called riwayah, and the latter is called dirayah. This tradition fails both tests: its chain of transmission is weak; its content is also contrary to the well-known principles as well as common sense.
In light of the above, we can easily conclude that the so-called tradition- you have referred to- should be rejected. We cannot ascribe words to the Prophet (peace be upon him) lightly. Let us remember the words of Imam Shafi'i about his teacher and mentor Imam Malik: Malik was an unsurpassed expert in judging traditions. In case of any doubts about a certain tradition, he would reject it outright. He did so because of his care not to tamper with the sources of Islam.

http://askthescholar.com/question-details.aspx?qstID=12009

72 virgins in heaven? What does Islam actually say?

I also want to add according to hadiths narrated by Aisha (RA) the good believing women of this world will be MORE BEAUTIFUL than those women in Paradise.

Here'a a hadith: "If any Muslim happens to look at a woman's beauties and then lowers his eyes, Allah will produce for him an act of worship whose sweetness he will experience."