Dr. John Andrew Morrow

SHAFAQNA – On November 7, just a few days before the Day of Arbaeen Hujjat El-islam Sheikh Abdul Mahdi al-Karbalai met with a foreign delegation hosted by Hussain, the International Love to discuss Imam Hussain’s legacy, and the impact his stand in Karbala had in shaping Shia Islam traditions and inspiring millions upon millions of pilgrims to commit to his banner during the pilgrimage of Arbaeen.

During the meeting Hujjat El-islam Sheikh Abdul Mahdi al-Karbalai welcomed personalities such as Dr John Andrew Morrow, prominent scholar and author of the Covenants of the Prophet Muhammad with the Christians of the World, US Congresswoman Cynthia McKeeney, film-maker Nader Talebzadeh and many others.

Sheikh Abdul Mahdi al-Karbalai stressed on the importance of compassion and tolerance when addressing world issues, highlighting the universality of Imam Hussain’s message and legacy.

“Once must ponder over the secret behind Imam Hussain’s message when millions upon millions continue to brave hardship and dangers to reunite with their Imam. What is that secret.”

Sophia Imaginalis: Journal of Visionary Art, Sacred Art, Traditionalism and Esoteric Studies

By Charles Upton

[This open letter has five themes: the present cultural and socio-political situation in the United State; the Covenants Initiative; the need to prevent metaphysics from devolving into ideology; the application of the doctrines of René Guénon to social analysis; and the plans of the globalist elites to weaken, control or virtually eliminate the world’s major religions.]

Dear Mr.Bannon:

Greetings. I believe that we may have certain things of serious import to discuss, so I have written you this open letter.I am a writer in a genre I call“metaphysics and social criticism”. I am associated with the Traditionalist or Perennialist School of comparative religion and traditional metaphysics, a school considered to have been founded by René Guénon, who I understand has also been a great influence on you.

My publisher, James Wetmore of Sophia Perennis is editor of the collective works of René Guénon and is almost single-handedly responsible for keeping them in print in English.Since 2013 I have been associated with an organization I conceived of called the Covenants Initiative, which has now become an international movement within Islam to counter radical Islamic extremism and defend persecuted Christians. Our movement is based on a truly ground-breaking book by Dr. John Andrew Morrow entitled The Covenants of the Prophet Muhammad with the Christians of the World[Angelico/Sophia Perennis, 2013].

The covenants of the Prophet with various Christian communities, which Dr. Morrow re‐discovered in obscure monasteries and collections and sometimes newly translated, also providing powerful arguments for their validity, uniformly command Muslims not to attack or kill peaceful Christians, rob them, damage their buildings, stop their churches from being repaired, tear down their churches to build mosques, or even prevent their Christian wives from going to church and taking spiritual direction from Christian priests and elders. On the contrary, the Prophet commands all Muslims to actively defend these communities “until the coming of the Hour”—the end of the world.Thus the Prophet Muhammad himself, whose commands are law to every Muslim on earth, declared that groups like the mad dogs of ISIS lay under the curse of Allah before they ever drew breath.

When ISIS burned St. Mary’s Cathedral in Mindanao, the Philippines, in May of this year, the Governor of the Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao immediately invoked the Covenants of the Prophet to prove that this action was “un-Islamic”. I can confidently state that this was due almost entirely to our efforts. Speaking for myself, I see the Covenants Initiative as—among other things—one of the possible exoteric expressions of the esoteric principle that René Guénon, and his followers in the Traditionalist or Perennialist School, call “the transcendent unity of religions.” And one of the great values of this principle, when applied to society, history, and politics, is that it prevents those who follow it from making an idol out of this or that political ideology, since it teaches them to base their thoughts and actions on eternal metaphysical principles, not ad hoc ideological strategies.

For this reason I have been able, though not without a few wrong steps in my earlier years, to largely steer clear of identifying myself as either a Liberal or a Conservative. Speaking as a Muslim who also accepts the validity of the Christian revelation, I can define American Liberalism as the secularization of Christian Mercy, and American Conservatism as the secularization of Christian Justice and Morality. And the problem with both Liberalism and Conservatism is, precisely, secularization, which is nothing less than an implicit or outright atheism thatacts to drive an unholy and unnatural wedge between Mercy and Justice.

In Christianity—that is, in God—Mercy and Justice are never and can never be separated. The Rulers of the Darkness of This World, however, have done their best to alienate Mercy and Justice from each other and set them at war. They have contrived false and counterfeit forms of them, perverting them both and thereby making both of them hateful to us. Extreme and authoritarian Liberalism, in an act of unparalleled viciousness, has transformed Mercy into what Dr. Morrow calls “compulsory immorality”, into the insidious vice of permissiveness—a cruel permissiveness that loves corruption and targets anyone who struggles to live a life of purity and decency, doing all it can to drive such conscientious people to despair—not simply by giving them no help in their struggles but by portraying their very love of virtue as a kind of self-loathing, and their desire to proclaim that love, and see it take root and grow and spread its loveliness throughout human society, as bigotry and hate.

It has imposed a loathsome regime of “political correctness”, a system which has resulted in an ideologically enslaved population who believe that anyone who does not agree with their own brand of Liberal extremism must be a Nazi or a Klansman or a Russian agent, as well as making them mortally afraid, not only of even the most moderate conservatives, but finally even of their own thoughts, thereby going a long way toward destroying freedom of speech in this country by defining certain opinions, in the terminology of George Orwell’s 1984, as thought crime.

Likewise its distrust of traditional moral values has expressed itself as an attack on Christianity, leading to a serious erosion of freedom of religion as well. It has exploited crucial and necessary efforts like environmental protection, the social advancement of women, and the struggles for survival of often-disadvantaged groups such as Blacks or Gays or Muslim and/or Latino immigrants, into unholy Liberal causes, causes which they then cynically employ to weaken the constitutional rule of law and attack and undermine their political opponents, as well as to impose extreme and destructive social experiments upon an initially unwilling, but often finally beaten and compliant, American public.

In so doing they have built up a backlog of racial and sexual hatred that the extreme Conservatives have no qualms about exploiting openly. And while pretending to still be in some sense “Leftists”, they have suppressed nearly all viable economic and class analysis, replacing it by “ethnic studies”, “gender studies” and a socially engineered racial conflict and hatred between the sexes that has poisoned this society from sea to shining sea. By this they have made Mercy itself hateful to many—and there is no greater crime than this.

Extreme and reactionary Conservatism, drawing partly on its own inherent tendencies and partly on a growing and widespread reaction against the excesses of Liberalism, has transformed the majestic virtue of Justice, Justice which is nothing less than militant Mercy, into a justification for tyranny and oppression, a code-word whose actual meaning and effect is to throw all support to the economic “1 percent” who have looted this country root and branch, destroyed the middle class, further impoverished the poor, made widespread unemployment and underemployment—cleverly concealed behind twisted and lying statistics—into the new normal, hypocritically praised family values while economically attacking and destroying actual families.

In the name of Justice and Morality they have turned the love of virtue into a license to hate and oppress anyone who does not live up to their own often ill-conceived and blindly imposed “moral” standards, recommending thrift and diligence to those who have spent years looking for a job and failed, recommending a stiff upper lip and decreased reliance on opiates to those who are in chronic pain and lack the resources to access more sophisticated treatments—standards they are zealous in imposing on others but often lax in applying to themselves, doing battle with the speck of dust in their neighbor’s eye while ignoring the two-by-four in their own.

They have made war on the poor, denying them health care, denying food stamps to the chronically mal-nourished, while doing all they can to give free rein the predatory economic forces that have brought us the savings-and-loan scandal, the Enron scandal, the sub-prime mortgage scandal, the Great Recession that has made this once rich and hopeful country into a nation of paupers, of old people who can never retire and young people who see no future but to drown themselves in the abyss of cyberspace while being a burden to their parents, who can never make marriages or families, who can never become adults! And their hatred of the poor is only equaled by their hatred of the environment, of the very Earth that sustains us all—even them. In so doing they have transformed the divine virtue of Justice which gives to everyone his or her rightful portion into an armed guard standing watch at the iron gate of the City of Robbery and Usury, making sure that the meek never will inherit the earth, that only the money-changers, those with the blood of the poor and defenseless still hot on their hands, will be granted admittance.

The terminal corruption of both Liberalism and Conservatism is clearly revealed by two sterling examples: Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump—Clinton, who openly despises the white working class and whose impending though finally derailed election, according to the Defcon website, brought the estimated danger of nuclear war with Russia to its highest level since the Cuban Missile Crisis—and Trump, who—though I applaud his powerful blows against ISIS, his apparently sincere desire to wipe them off the face of the earth—wants to cut Medicaid, deny food stamps to the poorest of the poor, axe environmental protection laws and privatize the national parks, and who—though his stated aim of rationalizing immigration policy to protect the U.S. from foreign terrorists makes a degree of sense, as long as it targets terrorists and not just Muslims—continues to offer inflammatory statements, without retracting them, that many have translated as “open season on immigrants and Muslims”, leading to a massive increase in hate crimes.

And behind both Liberalism and Conservatism lies the Deep State, the cadres of the Global Elites, who believe in nothing whatsoever, only in themselves and in the Satanic principle they worship, and who, from their position of inverted, Luciferian transcendence, can use either Liberal or Conservative ideology as they so choose, cynically, indifferently, with equal force, equal cruelty and equal and conspicuous success, according to which of these two hopeless alternatives the American people happen to have placed their feeble hopes in during a particular decade, a particular presidential administration, a particular year, in order to advance their transformation of this planet into a living hell .That’s why I thank the living God every day that He has led me to the noble science of metaphysics—and, in so doing, freed me from ideology.

Remember, Mr. Bannon—and I call on myself also to remember—that there is no Mercy without Justice and Morality; whoever believes in the contradiction of an unjust Mercy will be sorely punished by being transformed into a Liberal. Likewise there is no Justice without Mercy; whoever believes in the impossibility of a merciless Justice as will be severely chastised by being turned into a Conservative. What has Almighty God to do with flimsy human categories like Liberalism or Conservatism, the Left or the Right?

God is of neither the East nor the West: He is the Inner, the Outer, the End, the Beginning, the Highest of all, the Deepest of all, the Center of all, the Total Field—Light upon Light. To whom or what else should we turn to learn what Mercy is, and what Justice is, and how to enact them, and where to find the power to enact them? There is much good in liberality, in generosity, in compassion, in catholicity of taste, in breadth of sympathy—but Liberalism is a travesty.

Likewise there is much good in tradition, in holding to the right, in militantly protecting and defending the good, the true and the beautiful—but Conservatism is a curse. God is far above such weak and shameful human attempts to do His work for Him. And what is God? God—Mr. Bannon, and my dear friends—God is Love: Love Who is the sweetest of Mercies and the most relentless hand of Justice in a single, incandescent, thunderous, face of Truth.

By whatever Name He may be known, His is the standard I bear. So if you really want to do Justice to the profound truths that René Guénon has revealed to us, and find Mercy in them, and thereby grasp the essence of the great God-given religions, of Judaism and Hinduism, of Zoroastrianism and Buddhism, of Christianity and Islam, then take care that you never espouse a principle or give support to a policy that violates either the Justice, or the Mercy, of Love—because if you do, you will have joined the army of the Enemies of Love, and thereby made Love Himself your enemy, that being a fate more terrible than human words can express.

So what is my purpose in sending you this message? To begin with, I simply wanted to alert you to the fact that a movement like the Covenants Initiative, which has already had great influence in the Muslim world and has gained a degree of notice in the Christian world as well, could have come out of the work of two American Muslims, Dr. John Andrew Morrow and myself, over the past four years. I hope that this piece of information will provide you with a new point of reference and challenge you to entertain the possibility that American Muslims might have a greater and more active role to play in the struggle against radical Islamic extremism than simply protesting their innocence and issuing disclaimers—a role based on the commands of the Prophet Muhammad himself.

Secondly, I felt that it might be useful for you to realize that a person such as myself with an early Catholic background like yours, someone who considers himself a follower of René Guénon just as you do, could have unexpectedly risen from obscurity to play a real though modest part in world affairs in the 21st Century. What is going on here? Most of my colleagues in the Traditionalist School in the English-speaking world have long resigned themselves to social marginalization, willingly accepted their apparent duty to keep the lamp of traditional metaphysics burning, even though we might have to hide it under a bushel basket to prevent it from being snuffed out by the Darkness of This World.

That some version of Traditionalist doctrine, which we had considered to be essentially a-political, could suddenly rise to prominence in the United States, Russia and elsewhere in terms of various political ideologies, has come as a real shock to many of us. Our surprise can partly be explained by the de-emphasis of Julius Evola in our branch of Traditionalism, since Evola has been the main road for many toward a political application ofGuénon’s ideas. Yet when the covenants of the Prophet suddenly appeared in my life, due to the ground-breaking research of Dr. John Andrew Morrow, I immediately saw that they represented a legitimate and entirely Traditional way of applying the Traditionalist doctrine of the transcendent unity of religions to social action.

This development has all the marks of a prophetic sign—but a sign of what? Is Traditionalism finally “coming into its own”? Or has the Darkness of This World at last found a way to co-opt and neutralize it? These are matters that merit serious discussion. Third and last, if there ever was a time when the world’s religions need to stand together against their common enemies, it is now. The forces of militant secularism, false magical/psychic religion and fundamentalist extremism are attacking all the God-given religions.

The time is therefore ripe for a “united front ecumenism” that recognizes this threat and begins the serious work of developing strategies to counter it. Unexpectedly, Guénon’s categories from The Reign of Quantity have proved highly useful for analyzing the emerging globalist hegemony; this is partly due to the fact that, at least since the Iranian Revolution, religion has begun to have a greater influence on social change and social conflict than (perhaps) at any time since the Reformation. One face of this hegemony is the direct atheist/secularist attack on religious faith; this would correspond to Guénon’s “Anti-Tradition.” The false magical or psychic religion of the New Age, its predecessors and successors, fits Guénon’s definition of “Pseudo-Tradition”. And the Luciferianism of the global elites expresses the very essence of his categories of “Counter-Tradition” and “Counter-Initiation”.

The globalist master plan to wipe the traditional religions off the face of the earth is based on two main strategies. The first is to weaken the faiths by infiltrating them with Pseudo-Traditional doctrines and practices, many of which are based on the idea that all the religions are naturally “evolving” toward one universalist meta-religion which will incorporate the “best” of each in the process of supplanting all of them—a meta-religion of which the globalist elites themselves would constitute the priesthood.

The long-term Freemasonic attack against Roman Catholicism is perhaps the clearest and most successful example of this strategy. (Parenthetically, the greatest contradiction—and irony—in Guénon’s doctrines is his hope that Masonry could be used to re-introduce a true esoteric spirituality into the Western world; he never seems to have realized that the Freemasonic lodges almost perfectly satisfy his own definition of Counter-Initiatic organizations.)

And even if the goal of a One-World Religion, or a federation of all the world’s religions under a single secular authority, is never in fact attained, nonetheless the push for it will have so weakened the traditional religions that they will no longer be able to stand in any effective way against the globalist hegemony. One of the tools employed by the global elites in their attack on the traditional religions is the established Interfaith Movement, which is heavily subsidized and directed by national governments, including the U.S. State Department, as well as various globalist foundations and think-tanks. (This criticism certainly does not apply to all Interfaith organizations, nonetheless the globalist influence remains a dangerous factor which is not often recognized for what it is.)

The globalist-influenced Interfaith Movement influences the religions to soft-pedal various “divisive” doctrines in the name of “tolerance” and “unity”, thus weakening their basic structure and making them more vulnerable to Pseudo-Traditional incursions. The Traditionalist doctrine of the transcendent unity of religions is strictly opposed to this sort of promiscuous Liberal ecumenism since it takes the differences between the faiths as providential and sees their unity not as a desirable worldly possibility but as a transcendent reality; the paths of the various faith finally come together only in God.

Likewise the Covenants Initiative does not require any degree of doctrinal unanimity between Islam and Christianity outside the belief in One God, necessarily supplemented by the understanding that any traditional religion that affirms this belief will find itself a target of the globalist elites. The second strategy, conceived and directed by these same elites, is to subsidize the various radical fundamentalist movements within the traditional religions—movements which, ironically, have often grown up as blind, narrow-minded and ill-conceived reactions against globalism: a perfect example of the venerable technique of the “controlled opposition”.

The radical fundamentalists—who are actually another form of Anti-Tradition—are useful to the elites because they tend to oppose and attack both the religious tradition out of which they have developed, seeing it as degenerate and heretical, and all the other religions as well, seeing them as false, Satanic counterfeits of the True Faith. This allows the elites to turn various hired religious or pseudo-religious terrorist organizations—ISIS is a prime example—against both the religion they profess to follow and every other traditional faith they can get their hands on.

This is why I believe that the meta-strategy of the globalists in supporting Islamic terrorism is to neutralize ALL the religions. After all, why should an elite cadre of oligarchs backed by global finance who aspire to world domination sit back and do nothing when the beliefs and aspirations and moral standards of billions of people are determined by “out-moded” religious institutions that they do not control? And if anyone still doubts that both “religious tolerance” and mutually-destructive inter-religious war could be subsidized by the same people at the same time for the same purpose, I can report from personal experience that, during the Obama administration, the Christian/Muslim Dialogue in my home town Lexington, Kentucky was hosting speakers from Homeland Security, the Federal Attorney’s Office, the State Department and the FBI, at the very same time that this same administration, via the CIA and other entities, was subsidizing and directing the Arab Spring and the growth of ISIS.

I refer those who still remain incredulous when faced with this claim to an article by Seumas Milne that appeared in the Guardianin June of 2015, entitled “Now the truth emerges: how the US fuelled the rise of Isis in Syria and Iraq”. It maybe viewed at:https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jun/03/us-isis-syria-iraq?CMP=share_btn_fb

In conclusion, I only wish to point out that the emerging globalist hegemony, whether or not it finally takes the form of a One-World Religion or incorporates such a religion as one of its “ministries”, perfectly fits the prophesy of René Guénon, in The Reign of Quantity and the Signs of the Times, that the Counter-Tradition will ultimately express itself in terms of a visible organization that would be “the counterpart, but by the same token the counterfeit, of a traditional conception such as that of the ‘Holy Empire’”—a regime controlled by an “inverted hierarchy” which would be nothing less than the kingdom of Antichrist, the one that we Muslims call al-Dajjal, “the Deceiver”.

But still the question remains: what does it mean that the doctrines of an abstruse and reclusive French metaphysician who died in 1951 have been one of the factors that have brought both of us to our respective commitments to social action in this darkest of times in human history, the final days of the Kali-yuga? It’s a question worth discussing.


Explore the groundbreaking work and thought of Charles Upton here: www.charles-upton.com

Por Taraneh Tabatabai
 

SHAFAQNA – El Dr. John Andrew Morrow, autor, activista y ganador de premios académicos, recibió un Certificado de Reconocimiento Especial por parte del Congreso de EEUU en el Centro Cultural IMAN en Los Ángeles (California) el 24 de septiembre de 2017.

El extraordinario reconocimiento al Dr. Morrow fue dado por su conferencia sobre “Los Pactos del Profeta Muhammad con los Cristianos del Mundo”, publicado ahora como un libro.

El reconocimiento, firmado por Karen Bass ―miembro del Congreso de California por el distrito 37―, fue dado por la señora Parvaneh Kadivar, quien describió al profesor Morrow como “un escritor prolífico, un erudito  acreditado y un buen ser humano que ha dedicado su vida a la construcción de puentes entre las comunidades de fe diversa, invirtiendo su vida en la búsqueda de la verdad documentada”.

Dijo el Dr. Morrow (Imam Ilyas Islam) durante su conferencia sobre Los Pactos: “Teniendo en cuenta que la continuación del conflicto entre cristianos y musulmanes en todo el mundo ha sido artificialmente impulsado por las fuerzas del imperialismo ―especialmente en África, Oriente Medio y Asia―, el contenido de estos documentos históricos que son de un valor inestimable, puede arrojar luz sobre la historia temprana del Islam. Por medio de la información que provee esta documentación, somos testigos de la relación primordial entre los musulmanes y el Pueblo del Libro. Por lo tanto, estos Pactos pueden servir como fuente de inspiración para el establecimiento de una armonía sin igual entre las tres religiones abrahámicas: judaísmo, cristianismo e Islam”.

Relations between Muslims and Christians have been described as a centuries-old “clash of civilizations,” a binary worldview in which “Western Christendom” is “civilized” and the “Muslim world” is backward. This clash of civilizations proclaims that Western values and Islamic values are mutually exclusive and cannot coexist alongside one another in the same society or nation.

Current relations between Muslim and Christian communities are negatively shaped, even further, by the persecution of Muslims in Western countries and the persecution of Christians in Muslim-majority countries, especially across the Middle East. Considering these all-too-avoidable realities, it is essential to distinguish the rise of Islamophobia among Christians and the mistreatment of Christians by Muslims from Prophet Muhammad’s revolutionary Covenants. Simply, these Covenants are a set of charters or writs ratified by Prophet Muhammad which grant protection and other human rights to Christian communities in his midst. They help to contextualize current affairs and provide us with the necessary tools to build a more just world in which Muslims and Christians can live alongside one another in peace.

Muhammad’s Covenants with the Christian Community

While long known to religious scholars, Prophet Muhammad’s Covenants with the Christians of his time have largely been neglected or ignored by Muslim and non-Muslim leaders and policy makers alike. These Covenants, which have been resting for centuries in old monasteries and libraries across the world, have been made accessible to non-specialists thanks largely to Dr. John Andrew Morrow, author of The Covenants of the Prophet Muhammad with the Christians of the World. In his book, Morrow describes the Covenants as:

a clear rejection of classism, elitism, and racism… all [people under the jurisdiction of the Covenants] are equal before God for whom the most important thing is not language, skin color, social status or class position, which exclude others, but rather the degree of piety, humanity, love for others (which includes not only human beings but the entire natural order), sincerity of faith, the acceptance of His Commandments, and complete certainly as to the special place occupied by His Prophets, Messengers, and Imams.

Morrow refers to the Covenants as the third foundational source of Islamic scripture, and as entirely compatible with the Qur’an and Hadith. These documents uniformly command Muslims not to attack peaceful Christian communities, rob them, stop churches from being built, or tear down churches to build mosques.

One of the most well-known Covenants is that of “The Covenant of the Prophet with the Monks of Mount Sinai,” which has been housed at Saint Catherine’s Monastery in the Sinai Peninsula, Egypt for the last nine centuries. According to the Covenant with the Christians of Mount Sinai, a “Muslim nation” must extend protection to Christian communities including their buildings and leaders. Consider the following passage from this Covenant:

A bishop shall not be removed from his bishopric, nor a monk from his monastery, nor a hermit from his tower, nor shall a pilgrim be hindered from his pilgrimage. Moreover, no building from among their churches shall be destroyed, nor shall the money from their churches be used for the building of mosques or houses for the Muslims.

So long as the monks of Mount Sinai submitted to Muslim authorities and sought the protection of Muslims, Prophet Muhammad was prepared to support them. Indeed, under the Prophet’s egalitarian vision, the Christian monks of Mount Sinai received the special statuses of dhimmi, or “protected peoples,” and al-mu’minin, or “the faithful.” This worldview is also one that supports democratic principles, such as the right to private property and freedom of religion.

Religious pluralism is clearly a central theme of the Covenants. According to Professor Diana Eck of the Harvard University Pluralism Project, religious pluralism is, among many things, an energetic engagement with religious diversity, as well as between religious communities. Religious pluralism involves speaking and listening as well as criticism and self-criticism, between and within religious communities. While religious pluralism has been discussed primarily as a Western sociological construct, as the Covenants reveal, the West does not have a monopoly on religious pluralism. The concept has a long history amongst philosophers of Islam and theologians of various schools of fiqh, or Islamic jurisprudence.

The Prophet’s Example

The freedom that Prophet Muhammad granted to the monks of Mount Sinai directly contrasts with the actions of ISIS, a group which persecutes and attacks Christian communities in their midst. In February 2017, The Washington Post reported that Christians had recently been forced to flee the Sinai Peninsula in fear of attacks by Egypt’s ISIS affiliate. ISIS had targeted hundreds of Coptic Christians, as well as Coptic clergymen and human rights activists. Several deadly skirmishes have also taken place between Egyptian military forces and ISIS operatives, near the walls of Saint Catherine’s.

To confront these developments, Pope Francis traveled to Egypt in April 2017 in the hope of countering attacks on Christians and building bridges between Muslim and Christian communities. In a speech he gave at an international conference in the Egyptian capital of Cairo, the Pope called on Muslim and Christian leaders to build a “new civilization of peace” by declaring together “a firm and clear ‘no’ to every form of violence, vengeance and hatred carried out in the name of religion and in the name of God.”

The Pope’s message of peace is clearly echoed in Prophet Muhammad’s Covenant with the monks of Mount Sinai:

If a monk or pilgrim seeks protection, in mountain or valley, in a cave or in tilled fields, in the plain, in the desert, or in a church, I am behind them, defending them from every enemy; I, my helpers, all the members of my religion, and all my followers, for they [the monks and the pilgrims] are my protégés and my subjects.

I protect them from interference with their supplies and from the payment of taxes save what they willingly renounce. There shall be no compulsion or constraint against them in any of these matters.

Prophet Muhammad made it obvious that protecting Christians was a priority under his leadership. What this passage also makes apparent is that in the levying of the jizya—the poll tax on Christian communities which was similar to the Islamic “spiritual tax” or zakat—Muslim leaders should not extract money if Christians are unable to pay the tax. Rather, Prophet Muhammad asks Muslims to negotiate with the Christians on these and other matters, without forcing them into an agreement or committing any violence against them. Such conditions were clearly stated in several other Covenants, including the “The Covenant of the Prophet with the Christians of the World,” “The Covenant of the Prophet with the Christians of Persia,” and “The Covenant of the Prophet with the Christians of Najran.”

“The Covenant of the Prophet with the Christians of Najran” stems from the Prophet’s early contact with the Christians of Najran around the second year of the hijrah, or great migration of Muhammad and his followers from Mecca to Medina. Around 631 CE, Prophet Muhammad sent letters to various religious and ethnic communities in the region, encouraging them to embrace Islam and accept his authority. The Najrans lived approximately 450 miles south of Medina in what is modern-day Yemen. Although they did not accept Prophet Muhammad’s call to Islam, the Christians of Najran sent a delegation of roughly forty-five scholars and fifteen assistants to Medina. When they arrived, Prophet Muhammad allowed these Christians to pray inside his mosque. Together, they later agreed to the Treaty of Najran, which, according to Abu Bakr, one of the Prophet’s senior companions, conferred complete religious and political autonomy to non-Muslims living in the Islamic state.

As the Covenant with the Christians of Najran underscores, Prophet Muhammad was a religious pluralist who engaged in a form of proactive cooperation with other religious groups, for the sake of the well-being of all members of the Islamic state. Consider this passage from the Covenant with the Najrans:

The Muslims must not abandon the Christians, neglect them, and leave them without help and assistance since I have made this pact with them on behalf of Allah to ensure that whatever good befell Muslims it would befall them as well and that whatever harm befall Muslims would befall them as well.

A similar passage is found in the Covenant with the monks of Mount Sinai, in which Muslims and Christians are asked to work alongside one another:

If in the interest of the benevolent Muslim public, and of their faith, Muslims shall ask of the Christians for assistance, the latter shall not deny them that help, as an expression of friendship and goodwill, they are to render… we deem all help and succor rendered to them every way legitimate.

These passages command Muslims and Christians to depend upon one another for both safety and prosperity. In doing so, they align closely with the Qur’an (16:91): “And fulfill the covenant of Allah, when you have made a covenant, and do not break (your) oaths after making them firm, and you have indeed made Allah your surety. Surely Allah knows what you do.” In this Qur’anic passage, God proclaims that mutual dependence between Christians and Muslims fosters a sound and healthy society. The sense of justice exuding from the passage can help to protect society from bitterness and violation of human rights.

Civic principles were also important to Prophet Muhammad’s vision for an Islamic state. The Prophet refused to allow the Islamic state to devalue citizens based on their ethnicity, religion, race, or cultural orientation. In the Covenant with the Christians of the World, he made it clear that he would not inflict harm on Christians or interfere with their privacy, simply because they were Christians:

The covenant of Allah is that I should protect their land, their monasteries, with my power, my horses, my men, my strength, and my Muslim followers in any region, far away or close by, and that I should protect their businesses. I grant security to them, their churches, their businesses, their houses of worship, the places of their monks, the places of their pilgrims, wherever they may be found.

The rights that Prophet Muhammad granted to Christians in his realm are neutral in nature. He did not grant different rights to different religious communities. Nor did the Prophet pursue policies that would result in the disenfranchisement of Christians. Citizenship, as outlined in the Covenants, relied on the right of all people to have a “fair hearing” of their views and “fair protection” of their interests and lives, regardless of their beliefs or religious preference.

Toward Religious Pluralism

The Covenants—alongside the Qur’an and Hadiths—attest to Prophet Muhammad’s support for religious pluralism and equal citizenship rights. The Qur’an (2:256) underscores the correctness of this belief, stating, quite clearly, that “There shall be no compulsion in religion.”

This should come as no surprise to those individuals and groups who have a clear understanding of the place of Christian communities in the Islamic tradition. A special place is reserved in Islamic scripture for Christians, as well as Jews. The Qur’an refers to both populations as ahl al-kitab (“People of the Book”), or people who have received the word of God. As the Qur’an (2:62) notes:

Those who believe in the Qur’an and those who follow the Jewish scriptures, and the Christians and the Sabians – any who believe in God and the Last Day, and work righteousness, shall have their reward with their Lord; on them shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve.

Without a doubt, the Covenants offer a blueprint for advancing freedom of conscience, freedom of religion, and civic rights in “Muslim nations” and beyond. In the context of Islam, the Covenants remind us that the ummah is a form of social consciousness and an imagined community where Christians are also treated as “righteous believers.” This egalitarian creed, which stands for freedom and equality, entitles Christians and other non-Muslim communities to a secure and protected place in all Islamic societies.

So what can be done to improve relations between Muslims and Christians worldwide? It is simple: follow the example that Prophet Muhammad set by fostering religious pluralism and citizenship rights in societies across the world.

Posted by

19 Oct, 2017

Australasian Muslim Times 

Dr John Morrow recognised by US Congress

Dr John Andrew Morrow, the award-winning academic, author, and activist, received a Certificate of Special Congressional Recognition at the IMAN Cultural Center in Los Angeles, California on 24 September 2017.

The extraordinary recognition to Dr Morrow was given for his presentation of a lecture on The Covenants of the Prophet Muhammad with the Christians of the World, that has now been published as a book.

The recognition, signed by Karen Bass, Member of Congress for California’s 37th District, was presented to Dr Morrow by Mrs Parvaneh Kadivar, who described Professor Morrow as “a prolific writer, an accomplished scholar, and a fine human being who has devoted his life to building bridges between and among the diverse faith communities and who has spent his life in search of truth in scrolls and scriptures.”

During his lecture on the covenant Dr Morrow (Imam Ilyas Islam) said, “Considering that the continued conflict between Christians and Muslims across the world has been artificially ignited by the forces of imperialism, especially in Africa, the Middle East and Asia, the content of these priceless historical documents can shed light on the early history of Islam. Via this information, we are witness to the primordial relationship between Muslims and People of the Book. Thus, these covenants can serve as a source of inspiration for the establishment of insuperable harmony between the three Abrahamic religions: Judaism, Christianity and Islam.”

 15 de octubre de 2017

SHAFAQNA – Por: Dr. John Andrew Morrow (Imam Ilyas Islam)

Como parte del “gran juego” que tuvo lugar a finales del siglo XIX y comienzo del siglo XX, las potencias occidentales conspiraron para dividir y destruir la ummah (comunidad) musulmana por medios tanto suaves como violentos. Se inició entonces una campaña de propaganda dirigida a socavar el Imperio Otomano interna y externamente.

El objetivo era convencer a musulmanes, cristianos y judíos de diversos orígenes étnicos, lingüísticos, culturales y tribales, que el mundo otomano era una fuente de estancamiento científico mientras que el mundo occidental era la encarnación del progreso. Lo que se desarrolló fue, en gran medida, una guerra entre lo religioso y lo secular, entre quienes creían en Dios y lo negaban.

Siguiendo la antigua estrategia imperial del divide et impera (divide y vencerás), los británicos, franceses y alemanes convencieron a las diferentes comunidades confesionales que estaban siendo oprimidas bajo el gobierno otomano y que tenían derecho a poseer sus propios estados-naciones homogéneos. ¡Arabia para los árabes! ¡Una patria para los judíos en Palestina! ¡Una república para los armenios! Y ¡un país para los kurdos!

De esa manera los imperialistas occidentales seculares consiguieron destruir el Imperio Otomano, erradicar de la Tierra el Islam como poder político y dividir a la poderosa ummah (comunidad) musulmana en un sinnúmero de estados-naciones débiles. Pero al no inventar esas naciones-estados con características étnicas y lineamientos religiosos claros y definidos, podrían ser usadas para que choquen entre ellas en el futuro. (Si bien eso sucedió), los kurdos, que participaron activamente en el exterminio de comunidades cristianas en el papel de instrumento de los imperialistas occidentales, se quedaron en definitiva sin el Kurdistán prometido por sus amos infieles.

Los nómadas kurdos, una antigua población de origen incierto, eventualmente desarrollaron un sentido de identidad étnica y solidaridad alrededor de los siglos XII y XIII. Aunque los imperialistas occidentales estimularon sus aspiraciones nacionales, el comienzo del siglo XX los encuentra esparcidos por distintas naciones: Siria, Turquía, Irak, Irán y Azerbaiyán.

La decisión de tener escindidos a los kurdos era deliberada. A pesar de que fueron traicionados por los poderes occidentales que los utilizaron cuando se rediseñaron las fronteras en la zona luego de la Primera Guerra Mundial, siguieron siendo fieles a sus (mandamases extranjeros) traidores y se volvieron más laicos que los musulmanes. Sus actuales amos infieles ―sionistas y norteamericanos― los atendieron convenientemente al considerarlos elementos valiosos para instrumentar en Oriente Medio la sedición interna, la división y la discordia desestabilizadora.

 

(Por su parte) los kurdos, en su papel de aliados incondicionales de norteamericanos e israelíes, se benefician de una campaña de relaciones públicas positiva en el mundo occidental, donde se presentan como liberales progresistas, democráticos y seculares cuando, en realidad, su ideología comunista maoísta y su comportamiento criminal se compara al de los guerrilleros de Sendero Luminoso, quienes aterrorizaron Perú durante décadas.

El líder del PKK (Partido de los Trabajadores del Kurdistán) ―Abdullah Öcalan― tiene la compasión de una cobra y sus combatientes han cometido crímenes de guerra de todo tipo. Lo mismo ocurre con las YPG (Unidades de Protección del Pueblo): como aliadas de los Estados Unidos e Israel, se confabularon con el ISIS para limpiar, arrasar a los árabes musulmanes y asirios cristianos del territorio que sería en un futuro la “patria” de los kurdos.

La mayor parte de lo que se presenta en los mapas como “Kurdistán”, es el territorio tradicional de los cristianos asirios. Se trata de zonas que fueron capturadas, ocupadas y reclamadas por los kurdos a través de un proceso de limpieza étnica que comenzó a finales de 1800, se intensificó a principio de 1900 y parece estar queriéndose ponerle el broche final antes que finalice el actual decenio.

Si los imperialistas finalmente logran su cometido, habrá un país para árabes suníes en partes del norte de Irak y Siria, un país para árabes shiitas en el sur de Irak y un país para los kurdos, luego del robo de territorio de Siria, Irak, Turquía e Irán. La creación de Kurdistán en tierras asirias es equivalente a la creación de Israel en tierras palestinas. Es una injusticia histórica de proporciones catastróficas.

En lugar de vivir en un falso presente, los musulmanes necesitan revivir un pasado basado en hechos para comprender las mentiras de esta época. ¿Quiénes son los asirios y quiénes los kurdos? ¿Qué relación tienen los musulmanes con los asirios? ¿Cuáles son nuestras obligaciones hacia ellos? Es necesario y obligatorio responder estas preguntas.

Según antiguos relatos asirios e islámicos, un Obispo cristiano llamado Sa’id junto a una delegación, visitó al Profeta Muhammad. El Obispo aceptó pagar el tributo correspondiente al Profeta en función de que los musulmanes garantizaran a los cristianos asirios el disfrute de la libertad de culto. Puesto que los asirios en cuestión provenían de Hakkari en Mesopotamia, la cédula al efecto fue escrito en lengua persa.

A la misma se la conoce bajo el nombre de Pacto del Profeta Muhammad con los Cristianos Asirios. Este inestimable documento fue transmitido de generación en generación por la familia Shimun, los patriarcas herederos de la iglesia Asiria de Oriente. La redacción original o “firman” del Mensajero de Dios fue realzada al hacérsela en un pergamino con letras de oro y escrito de manera circular alrededor de la impresión de la palma de la mano del Profeta estampada en el centro. Junto con ese Pacto, el Profeta entregó a la familia patriarcal una daga con un mango de plata en el que había una porción de coral rojo, en tanto que en la hoja había una inscripción con incrustaciones de oro.

El origen del Pacto del Profeta con los Cristianos Asirios se encuentra sólidamente establecido según criterios históricos (Nota del traductor: Los criterios históricos no establecen per se una verdad. En el tratamiento histórico lo que fundamenta la aceptación de la verdad es la actitud crítica de peso. Es decir, que el juicio de algo se arraigue en cuestiones demostrables y basadas en análisis rigurosos. Es lo que hace el Dr. Morrow en el tratamiento de este y otros Pactos).  Se lo atribuye al Profeta († 632 C.) y fueron testigos del mismo sus Compañeros (siglo VII C.). Sus principios fueron respetados por Abu Bakr, ‘Umar, ‘Uthman y ‘Ali (632-661 C.). Las protecciones (a los cristianos asirios) que albergaba, resultaron ejemplares para Maris (siglo XII C.), Bar Hebraeus (1226-1268 C.) y Amrus (siglo XIV C.).

Su autenticidad fue confirmada por Asahel Grant (1841); Horatio Southgate (1856); Adolphe d ‘Avril (1864); Thomas William Marshall (1865); Bedr Khan Beg († 1868), su hijo y su nieto; Vital Cuinet (1891); Saturnino Ximénèz (1895); Earl Percy (1901); la Sociedad para la Propagación del Evangelio en el Extranjero (1904); George David Malech (1910); William Ainger Wigram (1910, 1920 y 1929); Abraham Yohannan (1916); Surma D’Bait Dar Shimun (1920); JG Browne (1937); Jeanne Aubert (1938); William Chauncey Emhardt y George M. Lamsa (1970); Carleton Stevens Coon (1972); John Joseph (1983); Gabriele Yonan (1996); Albert Edward Ismail Yelda (2001, 2002, 2004); AM Hamilton (2004); RS  Stafford (2006); Theodore D’Mar Shimun (2008); Areej Zufari (2012); John Andrew Morrow (2013 2015, 2017); los cientos de firmantes de la Iniciativa de los Pactos (2013 hasta la actualdiad) y Aḥmed El-Wakil (2016).

El Pacto del Profeta Muhammad con los Cristianos Asirios fue depositado en la Catedral de Mar Zaia, el principal pueblo de Jilu, en las montañas de Hakkari. Era tomado de allí todos los años para una celebración especial, ocasión en la que un clérigo musulmán lo leía púbicamente a los cristianos e islámicos. Su texto ha permanecido en la conciencia colectiva de ambas comunidades de la región desde el siglo VII C. hasta el presente.

¿Qué sucedió con el Pacto del Profeta Muhammad con los Cristianos Asirios, preciosa reliquia del siglo VII C. dictada directamente por el Mensajero de Allah a los seguidores de Cristo que habitaban la región de Hakkari?

El glorioso líder de los kurdos Bedr Khan Beg (1803-1868) declaró la guerra a los cristianos asirios, es decir, a los mismos a los que el Profeta Muhammad ―la paz y las bendiciones sean con él― les dio protección. Bedr masacró a más de diez mil, agredió sexualmente a sus hijas y mujeres, destruyó sus casas y quemó sus iglesias, catedrales y monasterios.

Y, ¿qué pasó con el Pacto otorgado por el Profeta? Fue destruido durante las masacres antes mencionadas a lo largo la década de 1840 por Bedr Khan Beg, último caudillo del emirato de Bohtan.

(Por lo tanto,) el nacionalismo kurdo se construye sobre la sangre de los cristianos asirios, tierras robadas en función de intereses antirreligiosos y la profanación y destrucción sacrílega del Pacto del Profeta. Como musulmanes, debemos ubicarnos junto a nuestro Profeta. Y nuestro Profeta ―la paz y las bendiciones sean con él― defendía y apoyaba a los cristianos asirios. Lo testimonia claramente:

Dios me ha dicho en una visión qué hacer, y yo confirmo Su Orden dando mi promesa solemne de mantener este acuerdo. (Nota del traductor: se refiere al respaldo a los cristianos asirios a través de lo enunciado en el Pacto con ellos). 

Digo a los seguidores del Islam: lleven a cabo mi orden, protejan y ayuden al pueblo nazareno (es decir, a los cristianos) en este país nuestro, en sus propias tierras. 

Dejen en paz sus lugares de culto; ayuden y asistan a su jefe y a sus sacerdotes cuando necesiten ayuda, (ya sea que) estén en las montañas, en el desierto, en el mar o en su casa. 

Dejen en paz todas sus posesiones, se trate de viviendas u otras propiedades, no destruyan nada de sus pertenenciaslos seguidores del Islam no dañarán ni molestarán a ninguno de esta nación, porque los nazarenos son mis súbditos, me pagan tributo y ayudarán a los musulmanes. 

No se recogerá de ellos ningún otro tributo más que el acordadosus iglesias quedarán como están,no pueden ser destruidas, modificadas o reemplazadas por otros edificios, sus sacerdotes podrán enseñar y adorar a su manera, los cristianos tienen plena libertad de culto en sus iglesias y hogares.

Ninguna de sus iglesias será derribada o convertida en mezquita, excepto que se lo haga con  el consentimiento y libre decisión de los nazarenos. Si alguien desobedece esta orden, la ira de Dios y Su Profeta serán sobre él. 

El tributo pagado por los cristianos se dedicará a promover la difusión del Islam y se deberá depositar en el bayt al-mal (es decir, la Tesorería General). El hombre común deberá pagar un dinar(un tipo de moneda), pero los comerciantes y las personas dueñas de minas de oro y plata y que sean ricas, pagarán doce dinares. A los extranjeros y a las personas sin vivienda ni otras propiedades raíces, no se les cobrará impuestos. Si un hombre hereda la propiedad, pagará una suma que será depositada en la Tesorería de bayt al-mal. 

Los cristianos no están obligados a hacer la guerra a los enemigos del Islam, pero si un enemigo ataca a los cristianos, los musulmanes no negarán su ayuda sino que les darán caballos y armas si los necesitan y los protegerán de los males de afuera y mantendrán la paz con ellos. Los cristianos no están obligados a hacerse musulmanes, hasta que la voluntad de Dios los haga creyentes. 

Los musulmanes no obligarán a las mujeres cristianas a aceptar el Islam, pero si ellas desean adoptarlo, los musulmanes serán amables con ellas. 

Si una mujer cristiana se casa con un musulmán y no quiere abrazar el Islam, tiene la libertad de practicar su culto en su propia iglesia según su propia creencia y su esposo no debe tratarla mal a causa de su religion. 

Si alguien desobedece esta orden, desobedece a Dios y a su profeta y será culpable de un gran delito. 

Si los nazarenos desean construir una iglesia, sus vecinos musulmanes deben ayudarlos. Se procederá así porque los cristianos nos han obedecido y han venido a nosotros suplicando paz y misericordia. 

Si entre los cristianos hay un gran hombre y erudito, los musulmanes deben honrarlo y no envidiar su grandeza. 

Si alguien es injusto y cruel con los cristianos, será culpable de desobedecer al Profeta de Dios. 

Los cristianos no deberán albergar a un enemigo del Islam o darle caballo, arma o cualquier otro tipo de ayuda. 

Si un musulmán necesita (ayuda), el cristiano lo recibirá y dará refugio de sus enemigos durante tres días y noches. 

Los cristianos, además, protegerán a las mujeres y a los niños musulmanes y no los entregarán ni los expondrán al enemigo. 

Si los nazarenos no cumplen con estas condiciones, perderán su derecho a la protección y el acuerdo será nulo e inválido. 

Este documento quedará en manos del jefe cristiano y cabeza de su iglesia para su custodia.

El Dr. John Andrew Morrow (Imam Ilyas Islam) es un orgulloso miembro de la Nación Métis, uno de los tres pueblos indígenas reconocidos por el gobierno canadiense.  Abrazó el Islam a los 16 años de edad luego de estudiarlo seriamente durante cierto tiempo. Lleva más de treinta años analizando las ciencias islámicas y recorrió el mundo en búsqueda de conocimiento. Entre sus maestros se cuentan académicos tradicionales del Islam de diferentes escuelas de jurisprudencia y caminos espirituales. Asimismo, académicos occidentales. Se doctoró en la Universidad de Toronto a la edad de 29 años y alcanzó el rango de profesor titular a la edad de 43 años. Se retiró de ese trabajo en 2016 para dedicar todo su tiempo a la investigación y el culto. Lleva escritos cientos de artículos académicos y más de treinta libros académicos, el más influyente de los cuales es Pactos del Profeta Muhammad con los Cristianos del Mundo (2013). También es el director de redacción deIslam y la Gente del Libro, una enciclopedia de tres tomos sobre los Pactos Muhamadianos que cuenta con estudios críticos de más de veinte de los principales eruditos musulmanes y las traducciones de los Pactos del Profeta en más de una docena de idiomas. La Sociedad Islámica de América del Norte (ISNA) confirió al Dr. Morrow en 2016 el premio de liderazgo interreligioso y en 2017 la Cámara de Representantes de EEUU le otorgó un Certificado de Reconocimiento Especial. Además de ser un académico galardonado, escritor y activista, dicta conferencias en distintas partes del mundo y asesora a líderes mundiales.

The Muslim Post
October 12, 2017

Delivered at the United Nations on September 19, 2017

The Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) said, “He who does not thank people does not thank Allah.” So, let me begin by thanking people. To his excellency, President Hassan Rouhani; to the honorable Ambassador Gholamali Khoshroo; to the distinguished Manuchehr Ja-farzadeh: thank you for organizing this meeting with American Muslim leaders and thank you all for attending.

For those who know me, I need no introduction. For those who do not know me, and perhaps should know me, I am Dr. John Andrew Morrow, also known as al-Ustadh al-Duktur Ilyas Islam. I am a western academic and a full professor. I am also a traditionally trained alim.

I am the author of over 30 scholarly books, the most influential of which is The Covenants of the Prophet Muhammad with the Christians of the World, a work that follows in the scholarly footsteps of Dr. Muhammad Hamidullah’s al-Watha’iq, Ayatullah Ahmadi Miyanji’s Makatib al-Rasul, and Zafar Bangash’s Power Manifestations of the Sirah.

Many educated Muslims are familiar with the Covenant of Madinahthe Treaty of Najran, and perhaps, the Ashtinamehthe Covenant of the Prophet Muhammad with the Monks of Mount Sinai, namely, with the Monastery of St. Catherine. These documents, however, merely scratch the surface. There are dozens upon dozens of covenants that the Prophet (pbuh) concluded with the People of the Book.

The principles enshrined in the Covenants of the Prophet Muhammad and Imam ‘Ali (a) are simply astonishing. They are like a Universal Declaration of Islamic Human Rights and an Islamic Bill of Rights dating back to the 7th century. They have both theoretical and practical applications.

The Covenants of the Prophet Muhammad have inspired a movement, the Covenants Initiative, which calls upon all Muslims to respect the rights that the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) granted to the People of the Book.

The Covenants of the Prophet are backed by hundreds of Sunni, Shi‘i, and Sufi scholars. They are backed by al-Azhar. They are backed by the Grand Muftis of the Muslim world.

Imam Khamenei and Ayatullah Araki received copies of this book in 2013. They invited me to meet with them in Iran and to lecture on the Covenants of the Prophet in the Hawzah ‘Ilmiyyah. Unfortunately, due to conflicts in our schedules, I was unable to visit. Since then, I have been invited to Iran on numerous other occasions. Once again, due to my obligations, these trips did not come to pass.

Allah (swt) however, works in wonderful ways. Since 2013, The Covenants of the Prophet Muhammad with the Christians of the World has been translated into Spanish, Italian, and Arabic. The Arabic translation is being published in Beirut, Lebanon, by Dar al-Kutub al-‘Ilmiyyah, under the name ‘Uhud al-Nabi li-Masihiyyi al-‘Alam.

I would like to invite you, Mr. President, as head of government of the Islamic Republic of Iran, to lend your support to the Covenants Initiative, to help disseminate The Covenants of the Prophet, and to stimulate more studies on this critically important subject.

Let us be interfaith ambassadors and not warmongers. Let us extend the olive branch to others as opposed to threaten to blow them off the face of the earth as we just heard someone do.

We are the people of truth. We are the people of justice. And we are the people of love. This is the need of the hour and the issue of the age. Thank you.

Dr. John Andrew Morrow, who spearheads the Covenants Initiative, an international movement committed to promoting co-existence between Muslims, Christians, and Jews, recently returned from a whirlwind tour of California where he shared the pluralistic message of the Prophet Muhammad, peace and blessings be upon him, with hundreds of listeners.

Organized by Zachary Markwith, a PhD candidate in Islamic Studies, and supported by various religious and academic centers, the lecture tour included speaking engagements at the IMAN Cultural Center in Los Angeles, Bayan in Claremont, the Islamic Center of Fresno, the Graduate Theological Union in Berkeley, and the Islamic Culture Center of Northern California in Oakland.

Morrow’s positive and uplifting voice was well-received by audiences in southern and northern California. “What a wealth of knowledge!” commented Noor-Malika Chishti, who attended Morrow’s presentation in Los Angeles. Asked what motivated him to organize the week-long series of lectures held at the end of September, Zachary Markwith spoke of the significance of Morrow’s scholarship: “The Covenants of the Prophet Muhammad with the Christians of the World is one of the most important books written in recent decades. It is our duty, as Muslims, to share true Islam with the world.”

October 8, 2017

This is the first of a two-part series and was originally a speech delivered by Dr John Andrew Morrow (Imam Ilyas Islam) at the 13th Annual National Muslim Congress Conference in Dallas, Texas, in the United States of America.


The Message of Love. Could there possibly be a better theme for this conference? The topic is timely, universal, and eternal. To begin, we must begin with the beginning: Allah (swt), the Mighty and Majestic. “God is love,” claim the Christians in theological error. God is not “love” because “love” is a noun, a name used to identify a person, a place or thing. However, God is not a person, a place or a thing. As Imam Ja‘far Al-Sadiq explains, He is only a thing, to bring him out of nothing; a thing like no other thing as all other things are created. [Kulayni & Saduq]

Although God is not Love, God is indeed Loving because “loving” is an adjective, a word or phrase used to describe an attribute. And how do we know God? By means of His Attributes. As we read in the Glorious Quran: “Call upon Allah, or call upon Rahman: by whatever name ye call upon Him, (it is well): for to Him belong the Most Beautiful Names.” [17:110] In Islam, we do not say Allah huwa al-ḥub or “God is Love.” We do, however, say that Allah is al-Wadud, namely, “The Loving One.” As we read in the Glorious Qur’ān: “Verily, My Lord is Merciful and Loving.” [11:90] And yet again: “And He is the Forgiving and the Loving.” [85:14] As Almighty Allah (swt) glorified and exalted be He, states in a sacred saying, in Hadith Qudsi:  “I was a Hidden Treasure and I loved to be known. Therefore, I created the creatures so that I might be known.” [Ibn ‘Arabi, Ibn al-Khaṭib, Mulla Sadra.]

The cosmos is not eternal. Only Allah is Eternal. The cosmos did not come into being by itself. Nothing can not become something. Non-existence does not will itself into existence. A void or vacuum is devoid of agency. As heartbreaking as it may be to self-centered egotistical materialists, we, human beings, were not created for ourselves: we were created for God. Everything in existence was created by God and for God. And everything that exists was created out of Divine Love.

The Hidden Treasure that is God cannot be known without existence or knowledge. Creation is the ultimate act of love. Bringing entities from non-existences into existence is the greatest act of love imaginable. The Arabic word for universe is kawn. It means “existence” or “being.” Allah brought everything into being by way of love so that He could be known.

Human beings were created in the name of Allah. In other words, we are the receptacles in which the names and attributes of God can manifest themselves fully. Human beings are permeated by the original love of the Divine Essence. If is for this reason that human beings are inclined to perfection. As Almighty Allāh explains in the Glorious Quran: “And He taught Adam the names: all of them.” [2:31]. In other words, the Asma’ Allah al-ḥusna, the Most Beautiful Names.

If Divine Love was the cause of creation, and love that brought the world into existence, it is also the law that that governs God’s relationship with creation. As Almighty Allāh decreed upon Creation: “My Mercy prevails over My Wrath.” [Muslim, Bukhari, Ibn Majah, Nasa’i] Mercy and Compassion are manifestations of love. They are the most commonly invoked attributes of the Divinity: Bismillah al-Raḥman al-Raḥim / In the Name of Allāh, the Most Compassionate, the Most Merciful. They derive from the root ‘raham’ which means “womb,” the very symbol of love, mercy, care, affection, safety, security, and compassion.

As Almighty Allah (swt) states in the Glorious Quran: “And I did not create the jinn and humankind except to worship Me.”[51:56]

The verb in question is ‘abada / ya‘budu. It is translated into English as “to worship,” “to serve,” “to submit,” and “to obey.” When we speak of ‘ibadah, we speak of obedience, submission, and devotion to God. ‘Ibadah, in Arabic, is related to words such as ‘ubudiyyah which means servitude and slavery. The meaning that is given to ‘ibadah and ‘ubudiyyah has a profound impact on one’s worldview. Many lay Muslims believe that people exist only to submit to Allāh. In their mind, God is some sort of Divine Dictator who decreed: “Be! Now, obey me or go to hell!” In other words, we are just slaves. That is the nature of the relationship between the Creator and the created. This limited and superficial understanding of Arabic and Islam can have serious consequences: spiritually, psychologically, socially, and politically. Imagine parents who have children for one reason and one reason only: to serve them: “I made you to serve me. Now go do the dishes or I will spank you.” Imagine employers who treat their employees as servants. Imagine husbands who tell their wives: “Obey me or I will slap you.” Imagine political leaders who believe that people should obey them, out of obligation, and out of fear: “You disobey, you die.” Why is the Muslim world full of despots and dictators? Look no further. I am not disputing what the Quran says; I am disputing the misinterpretation of the Quran that is so prevalent among certain Muslims. I seek to increase understand and elevate the discourse on the basis of authoritative Islamic sources: the teachings of the Prophet (peace be upon him), the teachings of the Twelve Imams (as), the teachings of Quranic commentators, the teachings of Muslim theologians, and the teachings of spiritual authorities.

“I did not create the jinn and humankind except to worship, serve, and obey Me.” [51:56] Yes, absolutely, but what is the meaning of ‘ibadah? It is obedience. It is submission. It is servitude. It is devotion. It is humility. But those are the means. What is the goal? Worship for the sake of worship? Servitude for the sake of servitude? Slavery for the sake of slavery? No! The ultimate goal is love for Allah: absolute love for the Loving. As Almighty Allāh says in a Hadith Qudsi: “Oh Son of Adam! Serve me. Verily, I love those who serve Me.” [Shirazi] What does it mean to serve and obey God? What does it mean to worship God? It means, first and foremost, to know God. And how is it that we know God? By knowing ourselves. As the Prophet, peace and blessings of Almighty Allāh be upon him, said: “He who knows himself knows his Lord.” [Ikhwan al-Safa’, Ibn ‘Arabi, al-Sha‘rani, al-Tamimi al-Amudi, Majlisi; see also, Quran 59:19]

Almighty Allah placed potentiality in the souls of humanity. Our souls are mirrors that reflect the Divinity. If we soil our souls, cloud up the mirror, scratch the mirror or crack and shatter the mirror, we will neither see ourselves nor our origin. However, if we purify our souls, clean our mirrors, and shine our mirrors, we will witness God in us and us in God. Or, to put things into simpler terms. As mothers and fathers, we see ourselves in our children. To know God means to remember God. It means to see Allah in all things. Everything in existence is a name of Allah. Everything is a signifier that points to the Signified. The Earth is not inanimate. She is alive. She feels, she communicates, and she speaks. She bears witness against our sins. The Prophet (peace be upon him) used to pick up pebbles, smile, and share their words of divine praise with his Companions. Everything in creation is in constant adoration. As we read in the Glorious Quran: “Do you not see that Allah is exalted by whoever is within the heavens and the earth and [by] the birds with wings spread [in flight]? Each [of them] has known his [means of] prayer and exalting [Him].” [24:41]

Imam Ali Zayn al-‘Abidin evoked “the keepers of the rain, the drivers of the clouds, him at whose driving sound is heard the rolling of thunder, and the reverberating clouds swim before his driving, bolts of lighting-flash, the escorts of snow and hail, the descenders with the drops of rain when they fall, the watchers over the treasuries of the winds, those with the mountains lest they disappear, those whom Thou has taught the weights of the waters, and the measures contained by torrents and masses of rain, the angels who are Thy messengers to the people of the earth with the disliked affliction that comes down.”

The signs of Allah (swt) surround us if only we are sensitive enough to perceive them. As Almighty Allah states in the Glorious Quran: “He will show you His Signs and you will recognize them;” [27:93] “Whoever honours the symbols of Allah — indeed, it is from the piety of hearts, [22:32] and finally, “We will show them Our signs in the horizons and within themselves until it becomes clear to them that it is the truth.” [41:53] The more we witness God, the more we love God. Let me repeat that: The more we witness God, the more we love God. As we read in the Glorious Quran:“Verily, in the remembrance of Allah do hearts find rest.” [13:28] Since the creation is subservient to the Creator, we need to recognize our servitude. There are those who deny God: they are kuffar or unbelievers. There are those who associate partners with God: they are mushrikin or polytheists. To be a Muslim means to submit and surrender to God. The attitude one takes toward God can be one of two: that of the slave, the ‘abd, or that of the servant, the ‘abid. The slave is the one who obeys the Master out of fear. The slave does not steal out of fear of punishment. The servant, however, is the one who seeks the reward of His Master. In other words, the slave fears Hell while the servant yearns for Paradise. Most human beings are slaves whether they recognize it or not and whether they accept it or not. Some human beings are servants. They recognize and accept that they are slaves; however, rather than rebel and disobey, they choose to submit and obey. They are good and diligent servants.

There are, however, believers who are not simple slaves or servants. They escape the servant/slave dichotomy. They are not motivated by fear of punishment or by the yearning for a reward. They are those who seek the pleasure of the Master. They are those who love the Master. They are those who long for the love of the Master. Among this elite, a select few who become close to the Master, like Prophet Ibrahim (peace be upon him), who became Khalilullah, the friend of Allah, the Prophet Muḥammad, who became Habibullah, the Beloved of Allah, and Imam Ali, who became Wali Allah or the Friend of Allah. We all begin as slaves of God. If we hear and we obey, we are good slaves. This is the bare minimum that is required of believers. All Muslims, however, should work on becoming servants of God. Rather than simply avoid damnation, they should actively seek salvation. Some, who grow spiritually, will strive to become ‘arifīn, the knowers of God, and ‘ashiqin, the lovers of God. With persistence, dedication, devotion, study, and piety, there are others who, by the will of God, and the love of God, can become awliyya’ al-salihin, the Friends of God and the Proofs of God for all creation.

Muslims have debated for over a millennium: is God transcendent or is God immanent? The jurists stressed that God was completely and utterly incomprehensible and unknowable. The mystics insisted that God was imminent and that our relationship with Him could be intimate. As always, the teachings of the Twelve Imams (peace be upon them), stress the middle ground: neither one nor the other. God is both transcendent and imminent. In matters of law, God is treated as transcendent. In matters of spirituality, God is treated as imminent. In other words, God is like a stern father and a loving mother.

Muslim theologians, however, avoid using terms such as father or mother when describing the divinity since they denote duality as opposed to divine unity. Although God is neither male nor female, Muslim theologians describe the Divinity in terms of attributes of power and beauty, namely, between feminine and masculine qualities. God, for example, is both Merciful and Wrathful, both Gentle and Severe, and both Beautiful and Majestic. Although a mother is all mercy, explains Rūmī, there is also mercy in the father’s severity for Allah’s mercy prevails over his wrath. In Islam, justice is tempered by love, mercy, and forgiveness.

Dr John Andrew Morrow (Imam Ilyas Islam) is an Amerindian with Canadian and American citizenship. He received his PhD from the University of Toronto in the year 2000. He worked as an Assistant, Associate, and Full Professor of Foreign Languages for over a decade and a half at Park University, Northern State University, Eastern New Mexico University, the University of Virginia, and Ivy Tech Community College. He is the author of over thirty academic books in the fields of Hispanic, Islamic, and Indigenous Studies, including the critically-acclaimed Covenants of the Prophet Muhammad with the Christians of the World. A public figure and activist, he lectures all around the globe and acts as an advisor to world leaders. In recognition of his accomplishments, Dr Morrow received an ISNA Interfaith Achievement Award in 2016.

October 8, 2017

SHAFAQNA – By Dr. John Andrew Morrow (Imam Ilyas Islam)

Delivered at Bayan-Claremont in California on September 26, 2017
The Covenants of the Prophet Muhammad, peace and blessings be upon him, are controversial. These documents, which are found in Muslim, Christian, Jewish, Samaritan, and Zoroastrian sources have elicited a great deal of debate and discussion. All have sought to answer a simple question: are they authentic?

There are many ways to authenticate a document. The first is to track its provenance; its chain of transmission; its chain of custody. The Covenants of the Prophet have been transmitted by hundreds upon hundreds of Muslim, Christian, Jewish, Samaritan, and Zoroastrian authorities, in dozens of different languages, for that past 1400 years. From the point of view of provenance, the Covenants of the Prophet appear to be authentic.

The second way to authenticate a document is by means of physical analysis. The scientific analysis of the paper, the papyrus, or the leather, as well as the ink, and the style of the script. The documents that have survived date from as recently as the 20th century as far back as the 7th century. So, we have, what presume to be, first hand copies, second hand copies, third hand copies, fourth hand copies, and fifth hand copies.

We can confirm, however, that the copies from the early 20th century are identical to the copies made in the 17th century and that the copies made in the 17th century are identical to the copies made in the 7thcentury. We can therefore confirm that the Covenants of the Prophet were transmitted accurately over the course of 1400 years. So, from the point of view of physical analysis, the Covenants of the Prophet appear to be authentic.

The third way to authenticate a document is by content analysis. Do the Covenants of the Prophet agree with the Qur’an? Do the Covenants of the Prophet agree with the authenticated sunnah? Can the Covenants of the Prophet be reconciled with the sirah or biography of the Prophet? Is the language an accurate reflection of the Arabic spoken at the time of the Prophet? The answer to all these questions is yes. So, from the point of view of content analysis, the Covenants of the Prophet appear to be authentic.

The fourth way to authenticate a document is by means of expert opinion. What have scholars said about the Covenants of the Prophet over the course of the past 1400 years. In some cases, opinion is divided. In other cases, most scholars have concluded that the content of the document is genuine. When we look at the dozens of Covenants that the Prophet concluded with different faith communities and denominations, we find that that the weight of scholarly opinion favors a conclusion of authenticity.

Today, we will examine a fifth way of authenticating a document, namely, the rulings of Muslim religious and political authorities throughout the ages. What did the Caliphs, Sultans, and Shahs say about the Covenants of the Prophet? Surprise, surprise: they had a lot to say and their conclusions and commands became the law of the land.

Let us take the case of the Covenant of the Prophet Muhammad with the Armenian Christians. It was authenticated by Caliph ‘Umar. It was authenticated by Imam ‘Ali. And it was authenticated by Salah al-Din. Let us take the Covenant of the Prophet Muhammad with the Christians of Persia. It was authenticated by Imam Ja‘far al-Sadiq. It was authenticated by Shah ‘Abbas, the Safavid leader.

Let us take the Covenant of the Prophet with the Monks of Mount Sinai. It was authenticated by Caliph al-Mu‘izz (953-974 CE), Caliph al-‘Aziz (975-996 CE), Caliph al-Hakim (996-1021 CE), Caliph al-Zahir (1024 CE), Vizier al-Afdal ibn Badr al-Jamali (1094-1121 CE), Caliph al-Hafiz (1134 CE), as well as by the Decree of Shirkuh (1169 CE). It was authenticated by the Ayyubids Caliphs (1195, 1199, 1201/02, and 1210/11 CE), by the Mamluk Decrees (1259, 1260, 1272, 1268/69, 1280 and 1516 CE), and by all the Ottoman Sultans from 1519 all the way to 1904.

If the Caliphs, Imams, Sultans, and Shahs, from the 7th century to the 20th century stated that the Covenants of the Prophet are authentic, then whom am I to argue otherwise. I take refuge in Allah from having the audacity and the insolence to believe that I know better than all the Caliphs, Imams, Sultans, and Shahs of Islam.

Since there are literally hundreds of firmans from the political leaders of Islam, and thousands of fatawa or edicts by the religious leaders of Islam, it would take me days to read them all to you and weeks to expound upon them. I will therefore limit myself to a short survey of imperial edicts from the rulers of the Muslim world that clearly confirm and renew the rights and protections that the Prophet Muhammad, peace and blessings be upon him, provided to the People of the Book.

The first of the edicts that is I would like to quote was authored by Abu Muhammad ‘Abd Allah ibn Yusuf ibn al-Hafiz (1149–1171), known as al-ʿAdid li-Din Allah, the fourteenth and final of the Fatimid Caliphs. The original document, which measures ten meters long, reads as follows:

Praise be to Allah, Lord of the Worlds. In the Name of Allah, the Most Compassionate, the Most Merciful. This edict was issued by our most noble leader, the supporter of Allah’s religion, and the Leader of the Believers… May the blessings of Allah’s be upon him, his virtuous ancestors, and his noble progeny…
 
The Bishop of the Monastery of Mount Sinai and its monks, who live a life of seclusion and prayer, presented a petition in our presence with the habitual signatures. They have signed decrees from the days of al-Hakim and other records that they are honored to have received from these sublime ‘Alawite states.

The monks asked us to renew the privileges that they currently have. We ordered that this edict care for them, protect them, and make matters easy for them. We ordered that they be treated as befits their customs and that they be hosted well.
 
They should be helped so that they can manage their affairs well. They should be made hopeful and happy. They are to be protected wherever they are in the [Fatimid] State. And they should be helped to benefit from its bounties.
 
The monks should be relieved of what governors asked them to pay in taxes…. The Arabs are forbidden from entering the residences of the monks and robbing them from the savings they use to host pilgrims. The monks should be exempted from taxes and duties in accordance with the decrees of the Prophet that they have in their possession and which prohibit all attempts to change or alter the privileges in question or prevent them from being implemented. The friends of the monks, and all those who work for them, must be protected. The same applies to those who gather money from them, be it tithe or alms.

No harm should come to those who secure sustenance for them whether they are in Egypt, nearby countries or the rural areas. What is more, all taxes that were recently imposed on them must be dropped.
 
Anyone who reads or hears this decree — including leaders who oversee war in the east, may Allah support them, or those in charge of fortresses on Mount Sinai, may Allah keep them strong, and all the deputies and clerks — should abide by it, pay attention to its clauses, and be careful not to transgress it…. Written in Jumada II in 564 AH, March 1169 CE.

The decree of Abu Muhammad ‘Abd Allah confirms that the Sinai monks regularly requested the renewal of their privileges. It establishes that the monks had received decrees granting them rights and freedoms that dated back to the time of al-Hakim (996-1021 CE), the sixth Fatimid Caliph.

Not only were their ancient privileges renewed, Abu Muhammad ‘Abd Allah issued a long list of caring and compassionate commands that radiate love. His decree covers all the major points found in the Sinai Covenant; however, rather that focus on the letter, he stresses its spirit that is rooted in the Golden Rule. And like the Covenant of the Prophet, the decree of the last Fatimid Caliph warns against violating the rights of Christian contemplatives.

The second document that I wish to share with you this evening is the Decree that Sultan Selim I granted to the Monks of Mount Sinai in 1517. Remember, this is the Sultan who brought the Ashtinameh, the Covenant of the Prophet Muhammad with the Monks of Mount Sinai, back to the Chamber of Relics in the palace of Topkapi in Istanbul. It reads:

Since the monks of Mount Sinai have come to our sublime Divan, and have humbly represented that Muhammad al-Mustafa, peace and blessings be upon him, being heretofore by their Monastery hospitably received in his travels, and according to their slender abilities, adorned with all kinds of honor and reverence, graciously exempting this community of Christian monks from their annual tribute, and in confirmation of it was pleased to give a holy writing signed with his own hand [print], after his example, we also, out of our great clemency, do ordain that the aforementioned monks be free from the yearly tribute paid by the rest, and to suffer without molestation to enjoy their churches and rites according to their obsolete law.
 
To this end, we have graciously ordered them an authentic copy of the Covenant of God’s Holy Prophet, confirmed by our inscription. We therefore enjoin every person exercising dominion or jurisdiction throughout our whole kingdom, not to burden the said monks of the tribe of Jesus with tribute or other political contributions. And whosoever shall act contrary to our noble decree and mandate, know that he shall be certainly punished and chastised. Given in Cairo…

Sultan Selim, the Grand Vizier, the Chief Mufti, and all the leading Muslim scholars at the service of the Ottoman Empire examined and authenticated the Sinai Covenant. They were not of the ignorant.

The third decree that I would like to cite was issued by Sultan Mustafa I (1591-1639), who ruled from 1617-1618 and from 1622 to 1623, and directed to Bishop Ghafril the Fourth in 1618 CE. It proclaims:

To the greatest judges of the states of Rumelia, Anatolia, and Egypt, the Protected. To the greatest judges of Damascus in Syria, the city that smells like Paradise. To the greatest judges of Baghdad, the city that looks like Paradise. To the judges and their deputies. To all those in charge of money. To the military commanders. To the customs directors and the port directors. To the distinguished members of the Secretariat and to all men of authority. May Allah empower them.
 
When this royal decree of mine arrives, it should be known that Pastor Ghafril IV, Bishop of Mount Sinai, based in that blessed mountain since days of old, presented to our highness a signed petition.

In the petition in question, he asks us for a sacred decree in accordance with the records and deeds in the hands of the monks of the Monastery of Mount Sinai as well as the text of the Sacred Covenant which was offered to the monks in question by the Greatest of the Prophets, Muhammad. He granted the monks this document after they met with him and accepted the terms that apply to non-Muslims. This event took place when the Prophet was passing through the sacred wilderness on a visit to the Cave of Moses, peace be upon him, along with other noble pilgrims that he was taking to Mount Sinai.
 
Based on the generous privileges provided to them by the Caliphs, may the blessings of Allah be upon them all, and by the previous Sultans, the protectors of religion. Based on the content of these decrees, records, and explanations preserved in the Royal Book. Based on the Sacred Covenant (of the Prophet) [mu‘ahadah muqqadisah] preserved by the two monasteries on the Mount of Moses, peace be upon him, and Mount Sinai since the Days of Ignorance, no military leader, nor any man of authority, should attack the monks, pastors or citizens of the two monasteries in question.

They are not to be attacked during their travels to Rumelia and Anatolia, to Egypt and Damascus, to the Mediterranean and Black Sea destinations, or to any cities and rural areas in Islamic States. They are not to be attacked while they are performing their religious rituals nor are they to be attacked when traveling to gather alms from Christians to feed and clothe the ascetics who live in the two monasteries in question and who feed the foreigners who perform pilgrimage to their monastery.
 
The monks of the monasteries in question are not to pay taxes or customs on their personal income or belongings in any place. Hence, when a monk passes away, neither the Secretariat nor any clerk in charge of dividing estates shall interfere with the property and belongings that were left behind by the deceased. This is because the property of deceased monks goes to the monks who are still alive…

Similarly, the monks of these two monasteries have the right to own property by means of endowment to their monasteries, churches, farms, hostels, residences, fields, groves, and orchards, as well as their lands and winter pastures in Rumelia and Anatolia, their churches and palm orchards along the seaside (in the city of al-Tur), such as the monasteries and properties endowed in the Jawanyah District at Bab al-Nasr in the capital of Egypt, their orchards, plots of land, and winter pastures in Alexandria and Rashid, as well as those found in any other ports, regions, directorates, cities, and rural areas.

The monks also have the right to own property. This includes lands that they themselves purchased as well as lands that were endowed or given to them by other Christians. The monks are not to be prevented from using their lands in any place and no taxes or fines are to be imposed on them, either by the directors of the Directorates, by their agents, by the supervisors of the Sultan’s endowments, by collectors of money, by the revenue officers, by the agents of the Secretariat, by the collectors of personal tribute, by tax inspectors, or by military and royal clerks and their agents…

No Patriarch or Bishop has the right, in any region or Directorate, to intervene with the affairs of the monks [from Mount Sinai] or terrorize them as these are the rights of their elected Archbishop. No one has the right to trouble them or treat them in any way that is contrary to the Sacred Covenant (of the Prophet) or the Decrees of the Sultans…
 
I have issued my order to you so that you can abide by the sublime orders that emanate from our illustrious ancestors along with my venerable order while avoiding anything and everything that might go against it… Be aware of that and place your trust in my sacred decree. Written on the 11th day of Safar in 1027 AH, April 7th, 1618 CE.

As Sultan Mustafa I indicates in his decree, the delegation of monks from Mount Sinai did not simply provide the proclamations of previous rulers to support their petition: they also provided a copy of the Covenant of the Prophet. This is precisely what we can expect was done when the monks approached Fatimid rulers and those who preceded them. Not only did Sultan Mustafa I acknowledge the authenticity of the Covenant of the Prophet, he confirmed the historical account of its granting.

If some scholars claim that there is no record of the Sinai Covenant and the events surrounding its granting in Muslim sources, they are in evident error. The decrees of Caliphs and Sultans are Islamic sources. According to most accounts, the Covenant of the Prophet was provided to the monks in pre-Islamic times when Muhammad traveled as a young merchant. He is said to have worked as a caravan leader for the monks. If this is the case, he was bringing pilgrims to the Monastery of St. Catherine.

There is also another account, lesser known than the former, that is quoted by Nektarios of Sinai (269-271). According to his sources, Muhammad’s pilgrimage to Mount Sinai took place during his prophethood. A delegation of monks from Mount Sinai had gone to Madinah to seek privileges from the Prophet. After he granted them what they had requested, they invited him to return with them to see the holy sites. This took place during the second year of the hijrah.

The account transmitted by Nektarios of Sinai appears to be echoed by Jeanne Aubert. According to her, the Covenant of the Prophet was granted in the second year of the hijrah. A battle took place between Muslims and Christians in which many of the latter lost their lives. News of the death-toll spread throughout the Middle East resulting in numerous delegations of Christians, Jews, Zoroastrians, and Sabeans arriving in Madinah to offer their submission to the powerful new prophet.

Although the decree of Sultan Mustafa I does not indicate when Muhammad performed a pilgrimage to St. Catherine’s Monastery to visit the Cave of Moses, it does confirm that the event took place. As for the prophetic privileges themselves, Sultan Mustafa I did not simply repeat them: he interpreted and applied them in the most specific fashion.
The fourth and final decree that I would like to share with you was issued by Sultan ‘Abd al-Hamid II (1842-1918) to the Bishop Burvirius II who was the Bishop of Mount Sinai in 1904. The edict of the last Caliph and Sultan of Islam reads:

The Ottoman Tughrah: “The Conqueror ‘Abd al-Hamid ibn ‘Abd al-Majid Khan, may he be victorious forever.”
 
The Egyptian Khedive informed us that His Holiness Burvirius, the Archbishop of the Monastery of Mount Sinai, has retired because his age and illness and that the monks from the monastery met and elected His Holiness Burvirius Yougotis in his place.
 
The Egyptian Khedive asked us to issue a decree accepting his election and appointing the said person as the archbishop according to established rules. The regulations were reviewed and it was found that electing ecclesiastic rulers was one of the rights that was given to the monks. It is for this reason that we issue this Sultanic decree appointing His Honor Burvirius Yougotis as the Archbishop of the Monastery of Mount Sinai.
 
We order that no one interfere with their monasteries, churches, and orchards in the sacred Mountain of Moses and Mount Sinai; their church, palm orchards and olive orchards that are located along the seaside in the town of al-Tur); their monastery in the inner district at Bab al-Nasr in Egypt, the Protected; the two agencies on the right side of the mentioned district and its north; the church on the side of St. Catherine; their places of prayer and worship; their residences and agencies; as well as the other places of their endowments in Cairo. No law enforcement agents should enter their shops or stand in their way.
 
No fees should be charged from their orchards, their fig and fruit trees, as well as their palm and olive groves. The same applies to what they store in the city of al-Tur, in Syria, as well as in Egypt.
 
No one should stand in their way in their silk trade, their endowments, as well as their trees and farms in Cyprus. They should not be asked to pay customs and entrance fees in the ports of the Red Sea, the Western Sea in Alexandria, Rashid, Demiat, Cyprus, Damascus in Syria, Nadis, Hauran, Qistah, Ghazzah, Beirut, Seida, Tripoli in Syria, Latakia, and other ports. Customs should not be paid on soap, oil, grain, offerings, and alms coming from Islamic lands.
 
They have the right to visit their cemetery in Damascus, in Syria, according to their traditions. No one should stand in their way of burying their dead. No one should interfere with their graveyards.
 
The governors should fulfil their obligations [towards the monks] immediately and completely. They should prevent people from interfering with the rights [of the monks]. No judge, governor, trustee or civil servant should interfere with matters pertaining to the monks.
 
No Alexandrian Patriarch or any other Patriarchs of other denominations should treat them badly nor should they interfere with their matters in any way. They are free under the rule of their Patriarch.
 
Since our Prophet Muhammad, the Messenger of Allah, gave the monks a blessed Covenant and considering that the Caliphs and the Sultans followed his honorable example by venerating his Covenant and his respect for the shari‘ah, they are to live in the mountain in question in complete security and equanimity. In accordance with the Covenant of the Prophet, the honorable decrees and obligatory orders [of the Caliphs and the Sultans], no one is permitted to attack or harm the monks.
 
Anyone who fails to respect the Covenant of the Prophet and the orders that have been given deserves a severe punishment. It is for this reason that I gave my orders to them to follow. Written on 15th of Ramadan al-Mubarak in 1322 AH, November 22nd, 1904 CE.

Although the purpose of the decree in question was the appointment of Burvirius II as the Archbishop of Mount Sinai, it was also an opportunity to renew the Sinai Covenant. Consequently, Sultan ‘Abd al-Hamid II confirmed the historicity of the Covenant of the Prophet and acknowledged that the rights of the monks were confirmed in writing by the previous Sultans and Caliphs. Anyone who claims to believe in the Caliphate is therefore obliged to abide by the commands of the Caliphs. As for those who oppose the Covenants of the Prophet, violate them, deny them or disregard them, they have made a mockery of their religion, have insulted the Prophet, and have defied his religious and political successors. And Allah is the Best of Judges.

7 de octubre de 2017
SHAFAQNA – LOS PACTOS DEL PROFETA SON REALES
La Respuesta Oficial de los Califas, Sultanes y Reyes del Islam
Por: Dr. John Andrew Morrow
Discurso Pronunciado el 26 de Setiembre de 2017 en la Escuela Islámica de Estudios Superiores Bayan-Claremont ubicada en California (EEUU)

Los pactos del Profeta Muhammad ―la paz y las bendiciones sean con él― son polémicos. Estos documentos, que se encuentran en fuentes musulmanas, cristianas, judías, samaritanas y zoroastrianas, han suscitado un gran debate y discusión. Siempre se ha buscado responder una pregunta sencilla: ¿son auténticos?

Hay muchas maneras de autenticar un documento. La primera es rastrear su procedencia, su cadena de transmisión, su cadena de custodia. Los Pactos del Profeta han sido transmitidos durante 1400 años por cientos y cientos de autoridades musulmanes, cristianas, judías, samaritanas y zoroastrianas, en docenas de idiomas diferentes. Desde el punto de vista de la procedencia, los Pactos del Profeta se presentan auténticos.

La segunda manera de autenticar un documento es por medio de análisis físicos. Estos se realizan en el papel, el papiro, el cuero y la tinta usados y sobre el estilo de escritura. Entre los documentos que han sobrevivido, los más nuevos son del siglo XX y los más antiguos del siglo VII. Es decir, tendríamos copias de primera mano, de segunda mano, de tercera mano, de cuarta mano y de quinta mano.

Podemos afirmar que los ejemplares de principios del siglo XX son idénticos a las copias realizadas en el siglo XVII y que las copias realizadas en el siglo XVII son idénticas a las copias realizadas en el siglo VII. Por lo tanto podemos afirmar que los Pactos del Profeta fueron transmitidos con precisión a lo largo de 1400 años. Así, desde el punto de vista del análisis físico, los pactos del Profeta se presentan auténticos.

La tercera forma de autenticar un documento es analizando su contenido. ¿Concuerdan con el Corán? ¿Concuerdan con la sunnah autenticada? ¿Se ajustan a la sirah o biografía del Profeta? ¿Su lenguaje tiene que ver con el existente en la época del Profeta? La respuesta a todas estas preguntas es “sí”. Por lo tanto, en función del análisis de sus contenidos, los Pactos del Profeta se presentan auténticos.

La cuarta forma de autenticar un documento es por medio del dictamen pericial. ¿Qué han dicho los estudiosos sobre estos Pactos a lo largo de 1400 años? A veces la opinión está dividida y en la mayoría de los casos se coincide en su autenticidad. El hecho de que el Profeta concluyese docenas de Pactos con denominaciones y comunidades de fe diferentes, aporta a la conclusión académica de que son genuinos.

Hoy examinaremos una quinta forma de autenticar un documento. Es decir, los criterios de las autoridades religiosas y políticas musulmanas a través del tiempo. ¿Qué dicen los califas, sultanes, y reyes acerca de los Pactos del Profeta? Muy sorprendente: tenían mucho que decir y sus conclusiones y mandamientos se convirtieron en ley.

Tomemos el caso del Pacto del Profeta Muhammad con los cristianos armenios. Fue autenticado por el califa Omar. Fue autenticado por el Imam Ali. Y fue autenticado por Salah al-Din. Tomemos el Pacto del Profeta Muhammad con los cristianos de Persia. Fue autenticado por el Imam Ja’far al-Sadiq y por Shah ‘Abbas, el primer líder safávida.

Tomemos el Pacto del Profeta con los monjes del Monte Sinaí. Fue autenticado por el califa al-Mu’izz (953-974 C.), por el califa al-‘Aziz (975-996 C.), por el califa al-Hakim (996-1021 C.), por el califa al-Zahir (1024 C.), por el visir al-Afdal ibn Badr al-Jamali (1094-1121 C.), por el califa al-Hafiz (1134 C.), por el Decreto de Shirkuh (1169 C.), por los califas ayúbidas (1195, 1199, 1201/02 y 1210/11 C.), por los Decretos Mamelucos (1259, 1260, 1272, 1268/69, 1280 y 1516 CE) y por todos los sultanes Otomanos desde 1519 hasta 1904.

Si los califas, imames, sultanes y reyes de los siglos VII al XX declararon que los Pactos del Profeta eran auténticos, entonces quien soy yo para sostener lo contrario. Me refugio en Dios para no caer en la osadía e insolencia de creerme superior a esos califas, imames, sultanes y reyes del Islam.

Puesto que hay literalmente cientos de “firmans” (órdenes o decretos) de los líderes políticos del Islam y miles de “fatawas” o edictos de los líderes religiosos del Islam, me llevaría días leerlos y semanas hablar a ustedes respecto a sus contenidos. Por lo tanto me limitaré a una breve exposición sobre esos edictos imperiales de los gobernantes del mundo musulmán que claramente confirman y renuevan los derechos y protecciones que concedió el Profeta Muhammad ―la paz y las bendiciones sean con él― al Pueblo del Libro (judíos y cristianos).

El primero que quiero citarles fue escrito por Abu Muhammad ‘Abd Allah ibn Yusuf ibn al-Hafiz (1160 – 1171 C.), conocido como al-Adid li-Din Allah, decimocuarto y último califa fatimita. El documento original, que mide diez metros de largo, dice lo siguiente:
Alabado sea Dios, Señor de los Mundos. En el nombre de Dios, el Más Compasivo, el Más  Misericordioso. Este edicto fue emitido por nuestro líder más noble, el protector de la religión de Dios y líder de los creyentes… Que las bendiciones de Dios sean con él, sus antepasados virtuosos y su progenie noble…

El Obispo del Monasterio del Monte Sinaí y sus monjes ―quienes viven una vida de recogimiento y oración― nos presentaron una petición con las firmas habituales. (Expusieron) los decretos de la época de al-Hakim y otros registros cuya posesión les honra, entregados por esos sublimes estados Alauitas.

Los monjes nos pidieron renovar los privilegios que actualmente tienen. Dejamos constancia que este edicto los protege, ampara y facilita sus cosas. Dispusimos que sean tratados de manera que se respeten sus costumbres y que se los atienda bien.
Deben ser ayudados para que puedan administrar sus asuntos sin problemas. Debe alentárseles y hacerlos sentir felices. Deben ser protegidos dondequiera que se encuentren en el estado [fatimita]. Y se los debe ayudar para que obtengan beneficios de las bondades (de nuestras tierras).

Los monjes quedan exentos de los impuestos gubernamentales… Los árabes tienen prohibido entrar en las residencias de los monjes y robarles sus ahorros, utilizados para albergar a los peregrinos. Los monjes quedan liberados de pagar impuestos y derechos, como lo señalan los decretos del Profeta que tienen en su posesión. Esos decretos también prohíben todo intento de cambiar o alterar los privilegios en cuestión o que se intente que no sean implementados. Los amigos de los monjes y todos los que trabajan para ellos, deben ser protegidos. Lo mismo se aplica respecto a esos que obtienen dinero de ellos, ya sea diezmo o limosna.

Nadie debería dañar a quienes garantizan su sustento, ya sea en Egipto, en los países vecinos o en las zonas rurales. Más aún, deben descartarse todas las gabelas recientemente impuestas.

Cualquier persona que lea o se entere de este decreto ―incluidos los líderes que supervisan la guerra en el este –quiera Dios respaldarlos– o los responsables de las fortalezas en el Monte Sinaí –que Dios los mantenga vigorosos– y todos los representantes y secretarios― debe regirse por él, prestar atención a sus cláusulas y tener cuidado de no transgredirlo… Escrito en Yumada II en 564 AH, Marzo de 1169 C.

El edicto de Abu Muhammad ‘Abd Allah confirma que los monjes del Sinaí solicitaban regularmente la renovación de sus privilegios y establece que habían recibido decretos otorgándoles los derechos y libertades que se remontan a la época de al-Hakim (996-1021 C.), el sexto califa fatimita.

No solo fueron renovados sus antiguos privilegios sino que Abu Muhammad ‘Abd Allah emitió una larga lista de órdenes cariñosas y compasivas que irradian amor. Su decreto abarca todos los puntos principales encontrados en el Pacto de Sinaí. Sin embargo, más que centrarse en la letra, lo hace en el espíritu, arraigado en la Regla de Oro (Nota del traductor: dicha Regla expresa: «Desea para los demás lo que deseas para ti»). Al igual que el Pacto del Profeta, el decreto del último califa fatimita advierte que no se deben violar los derechos de los cristianos contemplativos.

El segundo documento que deseo compartir con ustedes esta noche es el Decreto que el Sultán Selim concedió a los monjes del Monte Sinaí en 1517. Recuerden que este es el sultán que llevó el “Ashtinameh” (el Pacto del Profeta Muhammad con los monjes del Monte Sinaí) a la cámara de las reliquias en el Palacio de Topkapi en Estambul. Allí se lee:

Puesto que los monjes del Monte Sinaí han llegado a nuestro sublime Diván (Consejo Imperial) y humildemente han declarado que Muhammad al-Mustafá ―la paz y las bendiciones sean con él― fue en aquella época recibido con hospitalidad en su monasterio donde se le brindó las mejores atenciones que podían; (puesto que debido a ello) se eximió graciosamente a esa comunidad de monjes cristianos del tributo anual; (puesto que debido a ello) y en confirmación de esa medida (Muhammad) les dio un santo escrito firmado con su propia mano [es decir, aplicó toda su mano entintada como firma], nosotros también, independientemente de nuestra gran clemencia, ordenamos que los monjes ya mencionados queden libres del tributo anual pagado por el resto y disfruten de sus iglesias y ritos según su legislación obsoleta.

En función de ello les dejamos una copia auténtica del Pacto del Santo Profeta de Dios, matriculada por nosotros. Por lo tanto, prohibimos a lo largo de todo nuestro reino que alguien ejerza dominio o jurisdicción sobre dichos monjes, (quienes están) libres de todo tributo o contribución política. Y quienquiera que actuara en contra de nuestro noble decreto y mandato, sabrá que seguramente será sancionado y castigado. Dado en el Cairo…

El Sultán Selim, el Gran Visir, el Mufti principal y todos los importantes eruditos musulmanes al servicio del imperio del otomano examinaron y autenticaron el Pacto del Sinaí. Y ellos no eran ignorantes.

El tercer decreto que me gustaría citar fue emitido por el sultán Mustafá I (1591-1639 C.), quien gobernó entre 1617-1618 y 1622-1623. Este documento fue dirigida al Obispo Ghafril Cuarto en 1618 C. Proclama:

A los principales jueces de los estados de Rumelia, Anatolia y Egipto, el Protegido. A los principales jueces de Damasco en Siria, la ciudad que huele al Paraíso. A los principales jueces de Bagdad, la ciudad que se parece al Paraíso. A los magistrados y sus secretarios. A todos los responsables del dinero. A los comandantes militares. A los directores de aduanas y a los administradores del puerto. A los distinguidos miembros de la Secretaría y a todos los hombres de autoridad. Quiera Dios concederles las capacidades (pertinentes).

Cuando les llegue este decreto mío, es necesario que sepan que el Pastor Ghafril IV, Obispo del Monte Sinaí, ubicado en esa Montaña bendita desde hace mucho tiempo, presentó a nuestra Alteza una petición (debidamente) rubricada.

En la misma nos pide un decreto sagrado conforme a los registros y escrituras en posesión de los monjes del monasterio del Monte Sinaí y conforme al texto del Pacto Sagrado que les fue ofrecido por el más grande de lo Profetas, Muhammad. Él concedió a los monjes este documento después de una reunión y que ellos hubiesen aceptados los términos que se aplican a los no musulmanes. Este evento ocurrió cuando el Profeta transitaba por el desierto sagrado en una visita a la Cueva de Moisés ―la paz sea con él― junto con otros nobles peregrinos, a los que llevaba al Monte de Sinaí.

En base a los privilegios generosos proporcionados a ellos por los califas ―las bendiciones de Dios sean sobre todos ellos― y por los sultanes anteriores, los protectores de la religión; en base al contenido de dichos decretos, registros y explicaciones preservadas en el Libro Real; en base al Pacto Sagrado (del Profeta) [mu’ahadah muqqadisah] preservado por los dos monasterios, en el Monte de Moisés ―la paz sea con él― y en el Monte Sinaí desde los Días de la Ignorancia, ningún jefe militar u hombre de autoridad debe atacar a los monjes, pastores o ciudadanos de los dos monasterios en cuestión.

(Los monjes) No deben ser atacados durante sus viajes a Rumelia, Anatolia, Egipto, Damasco, a los destinos del Mediterráneo y Mar Negro o a las ciudades y zonas rurales de los Estados islámicos. No deben ser atacados mientras realizan sus rituales religiosos ni cuando viajan para recoger limosnas de los cristianos con el objeto de alimentar y vestir a los ascetas que viven en los dos monasterios en cuestión, monasterios en donde se alimenta a los extranjeros que peregrinan allí.

Los monjes de los monasterios en cuestión no deben pagar impuestos o derechos de aduana por sus consumos o pertenencias en ningún lugar. Por lo tanto, cuando un monje fallezca, ni la Secretaría ni ningún funcionario encargado de las sucesiones se inmiscuirá en lo relativo a las propiedades y pertenencias del fallecido. Esto es así porque la propiedad de los monjes difuntos pasa a los monjes con vida…

Del mismo modo, los monjes de estos dos monasterios tienen el derecho a la propiedad de los fondos legados a sus monasterios, iglesias, granjas, hostales, residencias, campos, bosques y huertos, así como a sus tierras y pasturas de invierno en Rumelia y Anatolia, sus iglesias y los huertos de palmeras a lo largo de la costa (en la ciudad de al-Tur).

Asimismo les pertenecen los monasterios y propiedades recibidos en donación en el distrito de Jawanyah en Bab al-Nasr, en la capital de Egipto. De la misma manera les pertenecen sus huertos, parcelas de tierra y pastura de invierno en Alejandría y Rashid, así como lo que posean en otros puertos, regiones, direcciones, ciudades y zonas rurales.

Los monjes también tienen el derecho a la propiedad. Se incluyen tierras que hayan comprado y las que fueron legadas o dadas por otros cristianos. No se debe impedir a los monjes el uso de sus tierras en ninguna parte y ninguno de los funcionarios del sultán, recaudadores o no,  debe cobrarles impuestos o multas…

Ningún Patriarca u Obispo tiene derecho, en cualquier región o lugar, a intervenir en los asuntos de los monjes [del Monte Sinaí] o atemorizarlos, pues estos son derechos de sus Arzobispos electos. Nadie está facultado para tratarlos de forma contraria a lo que estipula el Pacto Sagrado (del Profeta) o los Decretos de los sultanes…

Yo he emitido a ustedes este mandato para que acaten las órdenes sublimes emanadas de nuestros ilustres antepasados y eviten todo lo que podría contradecir estas disposiciones… Sean conscientes de ello y confíen en mi decreto sagrado. Escrito el día 11 de Safar de 1027 H. ; 07 de abril de 1618 C.

Como indica en su decreto el Sultán Mustafá I, la delegación de los monjes del Monte Sinaí, en función de su petición, no proporcionaron simplemente los documentos de los gobernantes anteriores sino que también proporcionaron una copia del Pacto del Profeta. Entendemos que, precisamente, es esto lo que sucedió al presentarse los monjes ante los gobernantes fatimíes y ante aquellos que les precedieron. El sultán Mustafá I no solo reconoce la autenticidad del Pacto del Profeta sino que confirma el relato histórico de su concesión.

Si algunos eruditos afirman que en las fuentes musulmanas no existe registro del Pacto del Sinaí y de los acontecimientos que rodearon su concesión, están evidentemente equivocados. Los decretos de los califas y sultanes están en fuentes islámicas. Según la mayoría de los relatos, el Pacto del Profeta estuvo a disposición de los monjes en la época preislámica. Es decir, cuando Muhammad viajó en su juventud siendo un comerciante. Se dice que cumplió el papel de líder de la caravana de los monjes. Si este fuese el caso, llevaba a peregrinos al Monasterio de Santa Catalina.

También hay otro relato, menos conocido que el anterior, relatado por Nektarios de Sinaí (269-271 C.). Según sus fuentes, la peregrinación de Muhammad al Monte Sinaí tuvo lugar durante su misión profética. Una delegación de monjes del Monte Sinaí había ido a Medina para que el Profeta les conceda seguridad y amparo. Después que les concedió lo que  pedían, los monjes invitaron a Muhammad a ir con ellos para ver los lugares sagrados. Esto ocurrió durante el segundo año de la Hégira.

Parece que Jeanne Aubert se hizo eco del relato de Nektarios de Sinaí. Según ella, el Pacto del Profeta fue concedido en el segundo año de la Hégira. Hubo una batalla entre musulmanes y cristianos en la que muchos de estos últimos perdieron la vida. La noticia de las pérdidas se esparcieron por todo el Oriente Medio y numerosas delegaciones de cristianos, judíos, zoroastrianos y sabeos fueron a Medina para ofrecer su sumisión al nuevo profeta poderoso.

Si bien el decreto del sultán Mustafá I no indica cuándo realizó Muhammad una peregrinación al Monasterio de Santa Catalina para visitar la Cueva de Moisés, confirma que el evento tuvo lugar. En cuanto a los privilegios concedidos, el Sultán Mustafá I no hizo una copia mecánica de los anteriores sino que los analizó y otorgó según las nuevas necesidades y coyuntura.

El cuarto y último decreto que me gustaría compartir con ustedes se trata del emitido por el Sultán ‘Abd al-Hamid II (1842-1918 C.) al obispo Burvirius del Monte Sinaí en 1904. En el  mismo se lee:

(Dice) el sello  otomano: “Quiera el Conquistador ‘Abd al-Hamid ibn ‘Abd al-Majid Khan ser victorioso para siempre”.

El Khedive (virrey) egipcio nos informó que Su Santidad Burvirius, Arzobispo del Monasterio del Monte Sinaí, se ha retirado debido a su edad y enfermedad y que los monjes del monasterio se reunieron y eligieron en su lugar a Su Santidad Burvirius Yougotis.

El Khedive egipcio nos pidió emitir un decreto aceptando esa elección y el nombramiento de la persona mencionada como arzobispo según las normas establecidas. Las regulaciones fueron revisadas y se encontró que elegir gobernantes eclesiásticos fue uno de los derechos que se concedió a los monjes. Es por ello que emitimos este Decreto Real que establece que el Venerable Burvirius Yougotis es el Arzobispo del Monasterio del Monte Sinaí.

Ordenamos que nadie interfiera en sus monasterios, iglesias y huertos en la sagrada Montaña de Moisés y Monte Sinaí; en sus iglesias, huertos de palmeras y olivos que se encuentran a lo largo de la orilla del mar en la ciudad (de al-Tur); en su monasterio en el distrito interno en Bab al-Nasr en Egipto, el Protegido; en sus dos instituciones en el lado derecho del mencionado distrito y el norte; en su iglesia al costado de Santa Catalina; en sus lugares de oración y culto; en sus residencias y organismos; en sus otras posesiones en el Cairo. Ningún funcionario de la justicia debe entrar en sus tiendas o interponerse en su camino.

No debe cobrarse ningún arancel por sus huertos, higueras, árboles frutales y plantaciones de palma y oliva. Tampoco a lo que almacenan en la ciudad de al-Tur, en Siria y en Egipto.

Nadie debe molestarlos en su negocio de la seda, en sus posesiones y en sus bosques o  granjas en Chipre. No se les debe cobrar derechos de aduana y tarifas de entrada en los puertos del Mar Rojo, el Mar Occidental ―Alejandría, Demiat, Chipre, Rashid―, Damasco en Siria, Nadis, Hauran, Qistah, Ghazzah, Beirut, Seida, Trípoli de Siria, Latakia y otros puertos. (Tampoco) debe cobrárseles aranceles por el jabón, aceite, granos, ofrendas y limosnas provenientes de tierras islámicas.

Tienen derecho a visitar su cementerio en Damasco, en Siria, según sus tradiciones. Nadie debe interferir ante el procedimiento de entierro de sus muertos. Nadie debe interferir en sus cementerios.

Los gobernadores deben cumplir sus obligaciones [para con los monjes] de manera inmediata y plena. Deben impedir que la gente perturbe los derechos [de los monjes]. Ningún juez, gobernador, administrador o funcionario debe entrometerse en las cuestiones propias de los monjes.

Ningún Patriarca Alejandrino o de cualquier otra denominación debe tratarlos mal ni meterse en sus asuntos de ninguna manera. (Los monjes) son libres bajo el gobierno de su Patriarca.

Puesto que nuestro Profeta Muhammad, el Mensajero de Dios, dio a los monjes un Pacto bendito y teniendo en cuenta que los califas y sultanes siguieron su ejemplo honorable por medio de venerar su pacto y su respeto por la Sharíah, (los monjes) deben vivir en la montaña en cuestión en completa seguridad y tranquilidad. En conformidad con el Pacto del Profeta y las honorables órdenes y decretos obligatorios [de los califas y sultanes], no se permite a nadie que ataque o dañe a los monjes.

Cualquier persona que no respete el Pacto del Profeta y las órdenes que se han dado, merece un castigo severo. Es por esta razón que ordeno el comportamiento que debe seguirse. Escrito el 15 de Ramadán al-Mubarak de 1322 H. ; 22 de noviembre de 1904 C.

Aunque el propósito del decreto en cuestión tiene que ver con el nombramiento de Burvirius II como Arzobispo del Monte Sinaí, también sirvió para renovar el Pacto del Sinaí. En consecuencia, el Sultán ‘Abd al-Hamid II confirma la historicidad del Pacto del Profeta y reconoce que los derechos de los monjes fueron confirmados en manuscritos por los anteriores sultanes y califas. Por lo tanto, cualquiera que afirme creer en el califato está obligado a acatar las órdenes de los califas. En cuanto a aquellos que se oponen a los Pactos del Profeta, los violan, los niegan o los desprecian, se están mofando de su religión, insultan al Profeta y desafían a sus sucesores políticos y religiosos. Y Dios es el Mejor de los Jueces.

John Andrew Morrow

Dhu al-Hijjah 10, 1438

The Muslims are coming. They are invading America. They are taking over. They are imposing seventh-century Shari‘ah Law on good, God-fearing, Christians. They are oppressing women. They are living off the welfare system like blood-sucking leeches. They are spreading crime and disease. Just look at Muslim-dominated Detroit, writes Geoffrey Grider, “a full-time minister for the Gospel of Jesus Christ,” it is America’s most violent, crime-filled city. Pause. Reflection. Reason. Comparison.

Detroit, Michigan, is not a Muslim-dominated city. It is a city dominated by Christians and secularists; 42.16% of people in Detroit identify as religious: 16.83% are Catholic; 6.9% are Baptist; 2.2% are Lutheran; 1.9% are Methodist; 1.6% are Pentecostal; 1.5% are Presbyterian; 0.34% are LDS while 6.5% belong to other Christian denominations. 0.001% of people in Detroit are Jewish; 0.26% practice an eastern faith while a mere 3.62% affiliate with Islam.

To assert that Detroit is “Muslim-dominated” is ignorant and nonsensical. At 38%, Christians represent the largest religious group in the city. Since secularists represent nearly 58% of the population, Detroit is a mainly irreligious city. This number is higher than the national average. In the US, an average of 50% of Americans describe themselves as secular.

It is Dearborn, Michigan, that has a large Arab American population. At nearly 30% of the population, however, they are hardly a majority. And although most of the Arabs in Dearborn are Muslims, the community includes a considerable number of Christians, mostly Maronites, Assyrians, Chaldeans, and Syriacs. How does Dearborn, a city with nearly 30% Muslims, compare with Detroit, a city with nearly 40% Christians?

On a scale from 1 to 100, with a higher number corresponding with more crime, the “Muslim” city of Dearborn earns 31.7 in violent crimes and 51.6 in property crime whereas the “Christian” city of Detroit earns 95.5 in violent crimes and 66.1 in property crimes. To put matters into perspective, the US average for violent crimes is 31.1 while property crimes are 38.1. The Arab American Muslims from Dearborn appear to act more like law-abiding, civilized, citizens, than the American Christians and secularists who make up 83% of Detroit’s population.

If we compare the crime rates, per 100,000 people, between “Islamic” Dearborn and “Christian” Detroit, based on FBI statistics from 2006, which differ little from those for 2016, the results are revealing (refer to the table of data below):

 
Detroit, MI Dearborn, MI National
murder 47.3 2.1 7.0
forcible rape 67.1 22.4 32.2
robbery 818.6 174.7 205.8
aggravated assault 1486.0 286.6 336.5
burglary 2050.3 713.9 813.2
larceny theft 2406.8 3454.2 2601.7
vehicle theft 2591.1 1102.8 501.5

When it comes to killing, the “Islamo-fascists” from Dearborn cannot compete with the “Crusaders” from Detroit. Although it is no longer “Murder Capital, USA,” Detroit comes in third place, after St. Louis and Baltimore, as the most murderous, blood-soaked, cities in the country. Its overall crime rate is 105% higher than the national average. While far from perfect, Dearborn is safer than 28% of the cities in the United States.

So, what happens when Muslims move into the neighborhood as they did in Dearborn, Michigan, in the 19th and 20th centuries and continue to do so today? They work hard as Muslims most always do. They build strong families. They help one another. They create businesses. They educate their children and especially their young women. They become professionals. They serve in the military. They enter politics. They become wealthy. They become philanthropists. In short, they integrate into American society. The same, however, cannot be said of those “Christians” in Detroit, some will argue. “But they are poor, dispossessed, and discriminated against.” Sure, it can be said, but so were the Arab Muslims who settled in Dearborn. “You can’t compare them to us. They are Christians but we are Black…” Racism comes full circle…

The comparison between African American Christian Detroit and Arab American Muslim Dearborn is not necessarily fair. The historical, sociological, and economic situation is complex and the variables are many. Contrasting the two communities, however, serves a didactic purpose and helps refute the lies of racists, bigots, and hate-mongers who try to pass themselves off as journalists. Muslims are not a menace, not any more than Christians are a menace. People are people. They are the product of their environment. Generalizing is generally wrong. However, if we look at the example of Arab Americans, particularly those from Dearborn, Michigan, the empirical evidence indicates that Muslims make the best of neighbors and are invaluable assets to the United States of America.

Dr. John Andrew Morrow is both Muslim and Michif. An academic and a religious scholar, he has authored a large body of articles and books in the fields of Islamic, Hispanic, and Indigenous Studies. An activist and advisor to world leaders, he received an ISNA Leadership Award in 2016. He can be followed @drjamorrowwww.johnandrewmorrow.com, and www.covenantsoftheprophet.com. His videos can be viewed on The Covenants of the Prophet Channel on YouTube.

John Andrew Morrow

 Dhu al-Hijjah 10, 1438

The militants had been spreading west for years, raping, mutilating, and murdering as they extended their reign of terror. Since his people were defenseless, the village elder decided that surrender was the only option. Considering that his village was on the front line of the war between foreign fanatics and the national resistance, death and destruction was a certainty.

Since the invaders outnumbered the local fighting forces, surpassed them technologically, and were on the verge of overrunning the village, the tribal chief, along with hundreds of elders, arranged to meet with the terrorist leader. So long as the villagers relocated to terrorist territory 40 miles away, and flew the flag of the foreign invaders, they were guaranteed protection.

As instructed, the local leader marched his people to an area controlled by religious fanatics. The rag-tag group consisted of elderly men, who were too old or ill to fight, along with women and children. The young men from the village refused to submit and decided to join the resistance.

Exhausted by the grueling march, and having left most of their belongings behind, the tribal members were in a state of desperation. They set up makeshift tents on the outskirts of an-extremist controlled village. They flew the flag of the foreigners. They even raised a white flag to inform other militants that they were a peaceful population that had submitted to them.

Next day, as the flags fluttered in the wind, the refugee settlement, numbering 200 old men, women, and children, was surrounded by nearly 700 militants. To the surprise and shock of the internally displaced, a terrorist commander gave order to attack. Two sub-commanders refused to obey and ordered their men not to fire. The commander cried out, “Damn any man who sympathizes with Infidels! I have come to kill Infidels, and believe it is right and honorable to use any means under God’s heaven to kill Infidels… Kill and scalp all, big and little.”

With zealous fury, the terrorists commenced to slaughter the defenseless population. Were they being punished for the fact that their young men had joined the resistance? Were they being punished for belonging to another race or ethnic group? Were they being punished for not sharing the religious beliefs of the fanatics? All they knew is that they had been set up for systematic slaughter by the people who had promised them protection in exchange for surrender. Loyalty did not protect them from treachery.

John Milton Chivington

As for what happened next, the testimony of the following six witnesses shed light on the darkness of that day,

I saw the bodies of those lying there cut all to pieces, worse mutilated than any I ever saw before; the women cut all to pieces… With knives; scalped; their brains knocked out; children two or three months old; all ages lying there, from suckling infants up to warriors… By whom were they mutilated?

I saw one Infidel lying on the bank, whose leg had been broken. A soldier came up to her with a drawn weapon. She raised her arm to protect herself; he struck, breaking her arm. She rolled over, and raised her other arm; he struck, breaking that, and then left her without killing her. I saw one Infidel cut open, with an unborn child lying by her side.

There was one little child, probably three years old, just big enough to walk through the sand. The little fellow was perfectly naked, traveling in the sand. I saw one man draw up his rifle and fire. He missed the child. Another man came up and said, “let me try to get the son of a bitch. I can hit him.” He got down, kneeled-down and fired at the little child, but he missed him. A third man came up, and made a similar remark, and fired, and the little fellow dropped.

Fingers and ears were cut off the bodies for the jewelry they carried. The body of one man, lying solitarily in the creek bed, was a prime target. Besides scalping him the soldiers cut off his nose, ears, and testicles — the last for a pouch…

Men, women, and children’s privates cut out. I heard one man say that he had cut a woman’s private parts out and had them for exhibition on a stick. I heard of one instance of a child, a few months old, being thrown into the feed-box of a wagon, and after being carried some distance, left on the ground to perish; I also heard of numerous instances in which men had cut out the private parts of females and stretched them over their hats.

Just to think of that dog and his dirty hounds… His men shot down human beings, and blew the brains out of little innocent children.

Before leaving the area, the commander and his men pillaged the meager belongings of the butchered refugees. As the smoke cleared, they looked for the wounded, and finished them off one by one. They scalped many of the dead: women, children, and infants. They used scalps and other body parts, including human fetuses, and male and female private parts, to decorate their weapons, hats, and gear. After raping the women, they cut out their genitals and stretched them over the base of their headgear. Other parts appeared as buttons at the front. The militants cut off the scrotums of the men and used them to make pouches. They publicly displayed these body parts as battle trophies throughout town.

“Islam is from the Devil.” “Muslims are all evil.” “Ban them all.” “Kill them all.” Sorry, gentle reader, this atrocity did not take place in Syria or Iraq in 2017. It took place in southeastern Colorado Territory on November 29, 1864. The commander in question was John Milton Chivington (1821–1894), a Christian pastor. The victims identified as Infidels were Indians or Native Americans: two-thirds of them were women and children. The psychopathic rapists, mutilators, and murderers who committed these crimes were not Muslims. They were Christians. They were under the command of an ordained Methodist minister. They invoked the name of God. They acted in the name of Christ. They were what we Amerindians call wasichus or white devils.

Unlike white supremacists who demonize all non-whites, and unlike Christian supremacists who demonize all non-Christians, we indigenous people do not generalize. Those that generalize know nothing of our ways. We believe that all human beings, regardless of their race, are the children of the Creator. Some are righteous. Others are wicked. We judge people on the content of their character, not their color or creed. While some so-called followers of Christ are really followers of Anti-Christ, we distinguish between true Christians who are godly and false Christians who are demonic. If it is wrong for non-whites and non-Christians to view all whites and all Christians as devils, it is wrong for whites and Christians to view all Muslims as devils as well. And “Allah is the most just of judges” (95:08).

Dr. John Andrew Morrow is an Amerindian with Canadian and American citizenship. He received his PhD from the University of Toronto in the year 2000. He worked as an Assistant, Associate, and Full Professor of Foreign Languages for over a decade and a half at Park University, Northern State University, Eastern New Mexico University, the University of Virginia, and Ivy Tech Community College. He is the author of over thirty academic books in the fields of Hispanic, Islamic, and Indigenous Studies. A public figure and activist, he lectures all around the globe and acts as an advisor to world leaders. In recognition for his accomplishments, Dr. Morrow received an ISNA Interfaith Leadership Award in 2016. He may be followed on Twitter at @drjamorrow. His websites are www.johnandrewmorrow.com as well as www.covenantsoftheprophet.com. His videos can be viewed on The Covenants of the Prophet Channel on YouTube.

Wednesday, August 30, 2017 – 01:00

What is Hajj and what takes place during the annual pilgrimage? Let us turn to an English scholar who inscribed the following epitaph in late 19th Century, when British rule dominated over much of the world:

“But above all – and herein is its supreme importance in the missionary history of Islam – it ordains a yearly gathering of believers, of all nations and languages, brought together from all parts of the world, to pray in that sacred place towards which their faces are set in every hour of private worship in their distant homes. No stretch of religious genius could have conceived a better expedient for impressing on the minds of the faithful a sense of their common life and of brotherhood in the bonds of faith. Here, in a supreme act of common worship, the Negro of the West coast of Africa meets the Chinaman from the distant East; the courtly and polished Ottoman recognises his brother Muslim in the wild islander from the farthest end of the Malayan Sea. At the same time throughout the whole Muhammedan world the hearts of believers are lifted up in sympathy with their more fortunate brethren gathered together in the sacred city, as in their own homes they celebrate the festival of ‘Eed al-Ad-haa…’”

– T. W. Arnold, The Preaching of Islam, London, 1956, p. 415

I am yet to find a more eloquent expression on Hajj even from a Muslim source than this by Sir Thomas Walker Arnold, who penned his observations in his book The Preaching of Islam, in 1896 CE. Arnold, a prominent civil servant in India was awestruck by the rituals of Hajj. Any impartial observer would have felt the same at any given Hajj season be it in 1896, 1996 or even 796.

Universal brotherhood

The format and rituals of Hajj have remained virtually unchanged since its inception 15 Centuries ago, the rituals that signify the universal brotherhood that are enjoined in Islam. The technology may have changed, modes of transport have never been more comfortable but a time traveller from the Seventh Century would have found himself or herself at home in the Plains of Arafat in 2016 and in Makkah despite all that modernisation that has taken place in recent times.

Schams Elwazer, a producer covering the event of Hajj for CNN in 2012 found herself in an identical situation to that of T.W. Arnold. Under the caption ‘A Non-Pilgrim at the Hajj: A Memoir,’ in her Blog she had this to say:

“Sitting there on the white marble floor of the Grand Mosque, it was difficult not be blown away by the diversity of the people passing by. Groups of Indonesians in crisp white wearing coloured headbands for identification and moving in tight phalanx formations quietly chanting the mantra of the Hajj (which translates approximately to “Oh God, I have obeyed your call”). Groups of West Africans in colourful garb almost singing verses of Islam’s Holy Book the Quran. Old Chinese couples, groups of blonde Europeans and Americans; it felt as if we were literally watching the entire world walk past. The effect was nothing short of hypnotic.” (28.10.2012)

It all began, or should I say the tradition established by our great Patriarch Abraham (A) was revived 15 centuries ago after a single commandment of God, “and proclaim to the people the Hajj, they will come to you on foot and on every lean camel, they will come from every distant pass.” (Quran 22:27)

The practical aspect of it was taught by Prophet Mohamed (S) in his lifetime when he undertook the pilgrimage. He emphasised on equality of Humans in the presence of God, regardless of man-made social and economic barriers. This scenario is repeated year in and year out at Hajj, where in addition to promoting universal brotherhood of mankind, the spirit of sacrifice to achieve it also emboldened in the hearts and minds of Pilgrims.

The modern world is plagued with racism and intolerance which Islam prohibits in no uncertain terms. The Hajj is an ideal occasion to re-build lost grounds and revive the brotherhood and tolerance which is sanctified in Islam. In his final pilgrimage Prophet Mohamed (S) addressing a crowd of 100,000 people declared:

“An Arab has no superiority over a non-Arab nor a non-Arab has any superiority over an Arab; also a white has no superiority over black nor a black has any superiority over white except by piety (taqwa) and good action.”

These words dispelled the myth that some races and classes of people are superior to others and established the fact that all humans are equal, for which Prophet Abraham (A) struggled in his life. We are all equal human beings in the eyes of God. It is for this same noble cause Prophet Mohamed (S) worked tirelessly during his lifetime. When he left this world at the age of 63 he had no worldly belongings. Instead of living a luxury life he sacrificed all for the sake of humanity. His parting shot was to follow the Quran and his Traditions and vowed if we abide by them we will never go astray. In his own words “you will neither inflict nor suffer any inequity.”

Today’s Muslims are tested in various ways, latest being the fear mongering by certain groups that they will be ruled under Shariah or Islamic law in Sri Lanka and they stand to lose their freedom. This is a baseless allegation, thus it is imperative for Muslims of Sri Lanka to clear this misunderstanding among non-Muslims. It is forbidden to force anything on others.

Let it be known that under an ideal Islamic government, ‘non-Muslims will have the same political and cultural rights as Muslims. They will have autonomy and freedom of religion.’ This clause was enshrined in the Constitution of Medina, also known as the Charter of Medina under the instructions of Prophet Mohammed (S) when it was drafted in the year 622 CE.

Dr. John Andrew Morrow, author of The Covenants of Prophet Muhammad (Angelico Press 2013), commends this exemplary conduct of Prophet Mohammed (S) and opined that under the Constitution of Medina:

“identity and loyalty were no longer to be based on family, tribe, kinship, or even religion: the overriding identity was membership in the ummah (nation) of Muhammad. The Constitution of Medina decreed that the citizens of the Islamic state were one and indivisible regardless of religion. Be they heathen, People of the Book, or Muslims, all those who were subject to the Constitution belonged to the same ummah (nation). In doing so, he created a tolerant, pluralistic government which protected religious freedom. The importance of this is so extraordinary that it is often misunderstood.”

Justice, equal to all

This may come as a surprise to some, but it is the fact. Tolerance is important in Islam, and justice is equal to all as Andrew Murray stressed ‘even Muhammad the Messenger of Allah was not above the law.’

Had Muslims taken a little effort to spread this message, we would not have seen the misunderstandings on Islam that are prevalent in our society today. On this blessed day I urge my fellow Muslims take this as a religious duty and make a sincere effort to clear the doubts that exist among non-Muslims, not only on this issue but on countless other issues.

The events that T.W. Arnold observed will continue by the Grace of God but what takes place in Makkah should trickle down in to our daily lives and the same should be reflected in the Muslim world at large. Then only one could proclaim it has been a success. This is the true spirit of Hajj.

While celebrating the Hajj festivities, Eid ul Adha, let us pray for forgiveness, peace and prosperity of Mother Lanka and peace and prosperity of the world.

 BY: JOHN ANDREW MORROW   SOURCE: ISLAMICITY  AUG 22, 2017

When I received an abusive message from Elmer Argomedo, in which my faith and person were directly insulted, my first instinct was to insult him back according to the law of retaliation, namely, an eye for an eye. As the Quran states, “The retribution for an evil act is an evil one like it” (42:20). Fortunately, however, I remembered the words of the Prophet Muhammad who stated that “The strong are not the best wrestlers. Verily, those who are truly strong are those who control themselves when they are angry” (Bukhari and Muslim). Consequently, I calmed myself down, seeking the pleasure of the Creator who promised forgiveness and Paradise to “those who restrain their anger” (3:134).

Seeking to avoid an explosive expletive exchange that would prove unproductive, and determined to “Repel [evil] by that [deed] which is better” (41:34), I opted to follow the procedures and polices put in place by the US Armed Forces. In short, I filed a complaint for harassment hoping that the individual in question could be reasoned with by his superior officer. Feeling that there was a lesson to be learned from the incident in question, I shared my story with sister Hanan al-Harbi, a supporter of the Covenants Initiative, who has come to my defense in times of need.

The article, titled “Muslim Leader Was Harassed by a US Marine” was published in Mvslim on Sunday, July 23rd, 2017. No sooner had it been shared by thousands of readers, I was contacted by my friend and colleague, Qasim Rashid, who notified me that his brother, Tayyib Rashid, wanted to speak with me. Although I had never met him in person, I was well-aware of his identity. Known as “The Muslim Marine,” Tayyib Rashid rose to prominence for offering to guard Jewish cemeteries in the United States from hate-filled anti-Semites who sought to desecrate them.

Assalamo Alaikum Dr Morrow,

I’m writing as a mediator for Corporal Elmer Argomeda. After reading the article regarding the disturbing comment he left on your video I found him on Facebook and reached out to him to explain himself. Coincidentally, he is stationed at Cherry Point NC, same as my permanent duty station almost 20 years ago.

It turns out that he realizes that he is guilty of exercising poor judgment and asked me to make sure that you receive his apology below.

Message from Corporal Argomedo:

Good afternoon. First of all, I want to sincerely apologize regarding the comment I already deleted. I have nothing against Muslims people nor people in general who follow the Islamic religion. With that being said, I was talking about the radicals but I guess I should’ve be specific in that part. I hope you can understand and forget this. Have a wonderful day.

In any case I just wanted to try and make peace between a fellow Marine and a fellow Muslim. I hope you can find it in your heart to forgive him. Is so, please do let him know.

Jazakallah,
Wasalam,
Tayyib Rashid
TheMuslimMarine.com

Although the law of retribution provides for justice, the law of love calls of mercy: “pardon and overlook” (24:22). As we read in the Quran, “whoever pardons and makes reconciliation, his reward is [due] from Allah” (42:40). “If they incline to peace,” states Muslim Scripture, “then incline to it [also] and rely upon Allah.” And as the Prophet Muhammad counseled in the Covenants that he granted to Christian communities: “If a Christian were to commit an offense, Muslims must stand by his side, help him and support him… They should encourage reconciliation between him and the victim to either help or save him.” As one who submits and surrenders to the Creator, my only conceivable course of action is the statement: “We hear and we obey” (2:285)

As a Muslim and as an Aboriginal Person, I hold no grudges. There is no place for hatred in my heart. I have love for all. Consequently, I forgive Corporal Elmer Argomedo and have formally withdrawn my complaint of harassment that was submitted to the United States Marine Core. It takes courage for a man to say sorry to another man. Corporal Argomedo, however, did not hesitate to man up. For that I respect him. I also respect his desire to serve this great country which is based on profound principles. As for myself, I have only endeavored to adhere to the teachings of the Quran, which command: “Repel [evil] by that [deed] which is better; and thereupon the one whom between you and him is enmity [will become] as though he was a devoted friend” (41:34).

«A pesar de que Mahoma se valió de la guerra santa para imponerse política y religiosamente, en un documento conservado en Persia llamado Achiname y Carta de la Paz, que la mayoría de los musulmanes desconocen, garantizó protección a los monjes del monte Sinaí y a los seguidores de la fe cristiana; además proclamó la paz y la fraternidad entre los seres humanos»

El islam de Mahoma y el de hoy

MARÍA DEL CARMEN MARTÍN RUBIO – @abc_es 22/08/2017 07:32h – Actualizado: 22/08/2017 10:44h.Guardado en: Opinión

Ante la oleda de atentados terroristas islamistas que Europa viene sufriendo desde mediados del siglo pasado, especialmente en las presentes décadas, parece conveniente recordar cómo y por qué surgió el Islam o Yihad.

Para ello es preciso retroceder al siglo VII después de Cristo, cuando la mayoría de los árabes eran nómadas, vivían en la península de Arabia agrupados en tribus y tenían sus viviendas en los oasis del desierto, aunque, contrastando con estas primitivas formas de vida, existían las ciudades de La Medina y La Meca en las que habitaban poderosos comerciantes que llevaban una vida lujosa. Ésta última, rodeada del desierto y situada a pocos kilómetros del Mar Rojo, en lo que hoy es Arabia Saudí, era muy rica porque, al estar situada en un cruce de las rutas de caravanas que traficaban con mercancías, desarrollaba un gran comercio. En ella se encontraba la Kaaba o Casa de Dios que, según las creencias musulmanas, había sido construida por Abrahán y su hijo Ismael, de quienes los árabes suponían que descendían pero, aunque desde el siglo VI conocían a un Dios al que llamaban Ilah, del que procede el nombre de Allah, en el templo también había otros ídolos a los que rendían culto desde tiempos ancestrales.

El 26 de abril del año 570 nació en La Meca, en el seno de una de aquellas poderosas familias de comerciantes perteneciente al clan Hasin, de la tribu de los Qurais, un niño que se llamó Muhammad o Mahoma. El niño, huérfano desde los seis años, fue criado por un tío que se dedicaba al comercio por lo que consecuentemente se convirtió en un guía de caravanas. Ese trabajo, además de viajar, le permitió conocer las religiones judía y cristiana; además, en su primer viaje a Damasco contactó con los cristianos nestorianos condenados en el concilio de Éfeso por negar el dogma de la Santísima Trinidad y el carácter divino de la Virgen María; y a los 40 años, cuando gozaba de una buena economía, pues a los venticinco se había casado con Jadicha, una viuda rica de su edad, y siendo ya reservado y meditativo, se retiró a orar y a meditar a una cueva del Monte Ira, cerca de la ciudad donde, según comunicó a sus allegados, recibió revelaciones del Dios Allah a través del arcángel San Gabriel, con quien realizó un viaje nocturno a la Jerusalén judaica, en el cual le impulsaba a seguir la religión de Abrahán. Estas revelaciones se repitieron tres años más tarde por lo que, considerándose profeta y bajo el legado de Abrahán, Moisés y Jesucristo, frente al tradicional politeísmo de La Meca, su ciudad natal, comenzó a predicar la existencia de un Dios único y la vuelta a la religión de Abrahán. Rápidamente consiguió adeptos entre las gentes más pobres campesinas, de las que incorporó gran parte de sus tradicionales normas nómadas.

Como sus adeptos aumentaban constantemente, las autoridades se encontraron incómodas y comenzaron a perseguirle, de ahí que en el año 622 tuviera que huir al norte, a La Medina. Allí tomó contacto con los judíos y éstos le rechazaron por los errores de interpretación que a su entender Mahoma hacía de las Escrituras Sagradas; entonces esbozó una nueva religión: el Islam, en la que combinaba la persuasión con la fuerza que, para poder subsistir junto a sus seguidores, permitía que éstos atacaran a las caravanas y a las ciudades cercanas. Así comenzó la guerra santa: en ella había que convertir por la fuerza a los infieles árabes.

En La Medina, Mahoma se transformó en un político, religioso y militar:acaudillando a sus seguidores se apoderó primero de La Meca y en el 630 limpió la Kaaba de los ídolos paganos; seguidamente, en el 632, poco antes de morir, sometió a toda la Arabia, consiguiendo que las belicosas y dispersas tribus árabes pasaran a ser un pueblo unido.

Las creencias de Mahoma, inspiradas en el Dios Allah, fueron recogidas con variaciones por sus seguidores en diversos manuscritos, por lo que el califa Uthman Ibn Affan ordenó en el año 650 que fueran recopiladas y redactadas, bajo la versión oficial del califato, en un libro al que se llamó Corán. Dividido en ciento catorce capítulos que contienen oraciones y mandatos del Dios Allah mediante un número variable de versículos, pasó a ser desde entonces el libro sagrado de los musulmanes: es decir su Biblia. Al crearse los califatos, en siglo VIII, fue la guía que les llevó a alcanzar una gran prosperidad dentro y fuera de sus fronteras.

Mas, a pesar de que Mahoma se valió de la guerra santa para imponerse política y religiosamente, en un documento conservado en Persia llamado Achiname y Carta de la Paz, que la mayoría de los musulmanes desconocen, garantizó protección a los monjes del monte Sinaí y a los seguidores de la fe cristiana; además proclamó la paz y la fraternidad entre los seres humanos. Y ya dominada Arabia, nunca obligó a convertirse a la religión islámica o Yihad a ningún cristiano.

Llegados a este punto hay que preguntarse por qué algunos islamitas radicales actuales, en nombre de Allah, combaten en cualquier parte del mundo a cuantos no comparten sus creencias, prácticas religiosas y formas de vida, incluso a sus mismos compatriotas: la explicación que dan algunos de ellos, transformados en terroristas, es que pretenden volver a la época de esplendor del Islam; ante esa óptica yo pregunto: ¿en vez de matar a personas inocentes y niños, no sería más coherente y beneficioso para todos que estos radicales mediante el estudio, el esfuerzo y el trabajo consiguieran ese objetivo que, por fortuna, practican millones de musulmanes…? Ya que, como indica la referida Carta, y pese a la guerra santa, Mahoma al igual que Jesucristo potenciaba la paz y la fraternidad entre todos los seres humanos que habitamos el mundo en que vivimos.

MARÍA DEL CARMEN MARTÍN RUBIO ES HISTORIADORA

This is the second in a two-part series (you can find part one here) on the experiences of Dr. John Andrew Morrow (Imam Ilyas Islam) on his journey towards finding himself, his roots and becoming both Métis and Muslim. The Métis are people of mixed European and Indigenous ancestry, and one of the three recognized Aboriginal peoples in Canada; the use of the term Métis is complex and contentious and has different historical and contemporary meanings. For more, click here


One of the most moving moments in my life and one that drove me with greater determination to document my native ancestry was the Gathering of Nations in Albuquerque, New Mexico, that I attended in 2009. As the dancers entered the ring, as part of the Grand Entry, and the chanting, drumming, and circling commenced, I entered a trance, the most profound of spiritual states. Overwhelmed, in ecstasy, with tears uncontrolled flowing down my cheeks, I became at one with my people, and at one with the One, the Creator, the Provider, and the Great Spirit. I may have embraced Islam at the age of 16, finding spiritual similarity between Sufism (Tasawwuf/’Irfan), and the Right Path of Life found in Native American spiritual teachings; however, for me, the Grand Entry at the Gathering of Nations was comparable to making the pilgrimage to Mecca and circling the Holy Kaaba.

Although I have visited my spiritual forefathers, Idris I and Idris II, in Zerhoun and Fez, in Morocco, along with other saintly figures in South Africa, and have derived great benefit from performing pilgrimages to their holy sanctuaries, and while I would eagerly visit other sacred personalities in North Africa, the Middle East, and beyond, the Earth itself is a masjid, a mosque, a place of prayer, and a site of prostration.

“Some Muslims may travel to Arabia, Iraq, and Iran in search of spiritual satisfaction: I find mine here, on my land, the land of my ancestors.”

Although I have been offered employment in Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Qatar, and Iran, I refuse to leave Turtle Island. I would rather perform tawaf or circumambulation with the Miami Nation, the Chippewa Nation, and the Métis Nation than performing it in Wahhabi-occupied Arabia where Islam merely exists in name. 

Although the essence of Islam remains pure, some of its teachings have been corrupted by Muslims. And while some North American Indians may have become corrupted, their teachings remain pure. There is more Islam in the Seven Grandfather Teachings than there is in the entire body of Salafi-Wahhabi-Takfiri literature. The Eastern Woodland Indians believe that that there is One God, the Great Spirit. They believe that the Great Spirit created the world in harmony and that we, human beings, are but a part of the whole. The Eastern Woodland Indians believe that the Great Spirit is Omnipresent in Creation. Consequently, all of creation must be respected. This is the religion of Muhammad. This is the religion of Jesus. This is the religion of Moses. This is the religion of Abraham. This is the religion of Adam. And this is the real religion of Allah, Islam, peace and submission. It is true tawhid or Divine Unity: The Creator is One and Creation is One. All at one with the One.

It was the will of God that I was brought from North Dakota, traditional Métis territory, to Indiana, traditional Métis territory. I spent two years conducting research at the Genealogy Center, at the Allen County Public Library, in Fort Wayne, the second largest institution of its kind in the United States. As an experienced academic and university professor, with decades of research experience, I painstakingly prepared the ancestral tree of my family, in all directions, going back over 500 years and, in some cases, even further back in history, with each link supported by birth, death, and marriage certificates, and supplemented by other historical documents, photographs, and paintings. Although many modern-day Métis and Indians trace their ancestry back to a single indigenous ancestor, I confirmed my descent from hundreds of aboriginal forefathers and foremothers.   

I vividly remember the moment in which I discovered a document confirming my descent from Roch Manitouabeouich, a scout and interpreter for the French, and his wife, Oueou Outchibahabanoukoueau. If these identifiably indigenous names were not enough, historical documents described them as “savages,” the French term that was used to contrast them from the “civilized” Europeans. Roch appears to have been Huron whereas Oueou appears to have been Abenaki. Their daughter, Marie Olivier Sylvestre Manitouabeouich is listed as being an Algonquin who lived with her father who was the Chief of the Hurons.

Not only was I a direct descendant of Manitouabeouich and Outchibahabanoukoueau through various family lines, I also confirmed that I was a direct descendant of Chief Membertou, the leader of the Mi’kmaq Nation, as well as Gisis “Jeanne” Bahmahmaadjimiwin, the wife of Jean-Nicolet de Belleborne, who belonged to the Nipissing Nation. These are only a few of the most prominent of my indigenous ancestors. There were hundreds more in an unbroken chain from the past to the present. Some of my French ancestors married Native women. Some of my French ancestors adopted Amerindian girls. Their mixed-blood descendants virtually always married other mixed-bloods. The fact that Métis typically married other Métis for centuries indicates that they shared a common Aboriginal culture. Although there are Métis with roots in a single region, my indigenous ancestry is varied and comes from Acadia, Québec, Ontario, and beyond. They were Huron-Wyandot, Mi’kmak, Abenaki, Penobscot, Algonquin, Innu, Abekani, and Nipissing. The ethnogenesis of the Métis or and Michif Otipemisiwak, did not take place in the prairies in the 19th century. It dates to the 17th century and took place throughout New France.

Like many Métis, my parents and grandparents did not speak openly about our indigenous ancestry. We were proud Francophone Canadians. We would canoe and kayak. We would harvest, trap, fish, and hunt. We passed down knowledge of medicinal herbs. We transmitted the songs and music of our ancestors. We were intimately connected with our environment. Our language was Métis. Our food was Métis. Our traditions were Métis. And our culture was Métis. We did not, however, openly identify as Métis. When I told my lifelong Jamaican-Canadian friend that I was indigenous, he could not comprehend why my family failed to tell me: “Your commitment to social justice and your solidarity with the oppressed has always been remarkable.”

Dr. John Andrew Morrow runs an educational YouTube channel on Islam. You can find a link at the end of the article.

Since the Métis have no specific phenotype and range from blue-eyed people with blond hair to tanned people with black hair, they can be racially ambiguous. Although some Métis moved onto reservations with their First Nation cousins, others continued to live with their French-Canadian cousins. Since it was bad enough being Francophone under English domination in Canada, professing to be Aboriginal was an added burden. Louis Riel, the revolutionary leader and martyr, who holds the same position to the Métis as Imam Husayn holds to Shiite Muslims, warned his people against being placed in reservations. Louis Riel wanted the Métis to maintain citizenship and the right to vote. As reservation Indians, the Métis would become wards of the State: their way of life would also suffer.

If my parents and grandparents did not openly speak about their Indigeneity, it was because the State literally came after our children. Inuit, First Nation, and Métis children were rounded up by the Canadian government and placed in residential schools to supposedly civilize, Anglicize and Christianize them. They were humiliated, degraded, physically abused, and sexually assaulted. The Aboriginal people of Canada still suffer from the scars that were inflicted upon them in residential schools. Our parents and grandparents did not assimilate to seek privilege. They were already second-hand citizens, subject to racism and discrimination as Francophones. They did what any sensible parent would do: they stressed their French-Canadian side as opposed to their Native Canadian side for the sake of survival. Call it strategic dissimulation. They lived as Métis people. They just did not use that dangerous word.

Since the documentary confirmation of my indigenous ancestry was an overwhelming experience, I was concerned as to how my father would react when I revealed to him the result of two years of genealogical research. My mother reassured me that I had nothing to be concerned about. After I presented the fact to my father, he smiled and said: “Son, you are right.”

The secret was just below the surface. All I had to do was scratch.

He had suspected it all along and, as my mother suggested, my paternal grandfather of Irish ancestry, was certainly aware of it. My grandmother, after all, was a Beaulieu, a family of noble French ancestry. In New France, the men from the Beaulieu line married indigenous women. Many of them lived in Québec but travelled throughout New France. Some had spouses in Eastern Canada and spouses in the Mid-West and prairies. Some settled in Manitoba, Saskatchewan, and North Dakota, among other places. Others reached the West coast of North America. 

When I presented my 5000-member circular genealogical chart to my mother, with all the Métis and First Nation ancestors highlighted in yellow, she was amazed at my work and accepting of my findings. Although they never described themselves as Métis, due to the dangers of racism and discrimination, she recognized that the Drouin and Bisson families were of mixed ancestry. When I presented my findings to my aunt, who looks stereotypically Indian, she acknowledged that we were indeed aboriginal people. Like a well that had been held back, and that suddenly burst, she started sharing information about her kokum or great grandmother, who was a big Indian woman and the head of her family clan. I reached out to another branch of the Drouin family in the Beauce and found that they openly identified as Métis. In fact, a relative of mine, François Beaulieu recently assumed the leadership of the Métis Nation of Québec. One cannot fake being Métis. All Métis descend from a small number of common ancestors. They are all interrelated and interconnected. Métis families are famous for keeping meticulously detailed genealogical trees. We have all found each other and in so doing we have all found ourselves. My family, which lives in Québec, Ontario, and Indiana, all fly the Métis flag with pride. In fact, my father, who is nearly eighty, insists upon it: “Son,” he said, repeating words he told me when I was but a boy, “Be proud of who you are.” I say the same to my sons who are being raised openly and proudly as indigenous inhabitants of Turtle Island. We are proud to be Métis and we are proud to be Muslim.

by Dr John Andrew Morrow

Click here to read Part 1 in this series.


Dr John Andrew Morrow (Imam Ilyas Islam) is an Amerindian with Canadian and American citizenship. He received his PhD from the University of Toronto in the year 2000. He worked as an Assistant, Associate, and Full Professor of Foreign Languages for over a decade and a half at Park University, Northern State University, Eastern New Mexico University, the University of Virginia, and Ivy Tech Community College. He is the author of over thirty academic books in the fields of Hispanic, Islamic, and Indigenous Studies, including the critically-acclaimed Covenants of the Prophet Muhammad with the Christians of the World. A public figure and activist, he lectures all around the globe and acts as an advisor to world leaders. In recognition of his accomplishments, Dr Morrow received an ISNA Interfaith Achievement Award in 2016.

Iraqi American Receives Humanitarian Award

Meet Haneen Alsafi, recipient of a humanitarian award from the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community USA and quite an inspiration.

Raised in al-Hillah, in Babil, Iraq, she is the daughter of an Arab Shia father who grew up in Baghdad and a Turkmen Sunni mother who grew up in Erbil. As Alsafi explains in an interview, although they belonged to different ethnic and religious groups, “My parents never disagreed with each other’s sects or beliefs, just like the others, we all shared one country and lived in peace.”

She grew up in a small, very conservative city, but Alsafi also spent enough time in Erbil, a city of over 1.5 million people, to develop a connection. There, she was exposed to an ethnically diverse population consisting of Kurds, Assyrians, Arabs, Armenians, Turcomans, Yezidis, Shabakis and Mandeans, and a religiously rich community with believers in Sunni, Sufi and Shia Islam, as well as Christianity, Yezidism, Yarsan, Shabakism and Mandeanism. Her experience in Erbil was eye-opening.

My family would take us every year to visit my mother’s family in Erbil. I was exposed to a diverse population. Although the culture was very similar, the traditions and the languages were different. I think this exposure definitely prepared me to become the person I am today and played a major role in my path and passion in life. We have Kurdish, Turkmen and Christian friends in the north of Iraq. We still maintain friendship with them. It never was an issue for people from different religions and/or ethnicities to become friends.

Like most Iraqis, the people of Hillah were not spared the ravages of war, death and destruction. The city was the scene of heavy fighting during the 2003 U.S. invasion of Iraq. Although the city was relatively peaceful after the initial invasion, it soon became the scene of numerous terrorist attacks.

Hillah was targeted by terrorist groups through a series of car bombs and suicide bombers. I lost one of my dearest friends in a car bomb in 2006 at the graduation party for the engineering college graduates. Many other bombings followed: in the local market, at the police academy graduation ceremony and at the retirement center. Hundreds of people were killed each time since, as you can imagine, those attacks targeted huge groups of people. We have been close to bombings but luckily not too close to get injured.

Seeking greater safety, Alsafi’s family relocated to Erbil, where she would find peace, for a time. The product of a multilingual environment, Alsafi grew up speaking Arabic as her dominant language, Turkic as a second language, and acquired some knowledge of Kurdish, which she learned through her mother. English, however, was her calling.

I started my English Literature major at Babylon University. Then I transferred to Salah Aldeen University during my last year of college and graduated from Erbil. The reason I chose English Literature is because I wanted to learn to speak English fluently. After the first year in college, I discovered that formal instruction was not the way to learn to speak the language, so I started watching American TV shows without the translation in subtitles. One of my favorite shows was ScrubsFriends and Grey’s Anatomy. I also listened to a lot of Backstreet Boys, Blue and other music which also helped me understand the slang language. In 2004, I decided to major in English and wanted to learn it because I wanted to work with the Americans in Iraq to help rebuild the country.

Iraq had been invaded or liberated by the Americans, depending on one’s personal political opinion. The only options available to Alsafi, however, were to contribute to a civil war in action or try to pick up the pieces. Consequently, she decided to help rebuild her country.

My first job in 2008 was with the U.S. State Department’s Regional Embassy Office in Babil (REO), where I worked as a consultant and interpreter, assisted both the local government and the private sector to rebuild Iraq into a better place. The U.S. government had invested massive amounts of dollars in projects to assist Iraqis in upgrading their lifestyle; they helped build hospitals, schools, roads and assisted many small business entrepreneurs in starting their businesses and contributing to the economy. We also worked on many educational projects such as opening a TOEFL center and providing books and supplies to schools.

An intelligent, socially committed and patriotic young woman, Alsafi was not naïve when it came to the risks involved in helping to rebuild her country and the dangers posed by religious demagogues and political opportunists.

It was not an easy decision to make when it came to “working with the Americans,” as they say. It was socially difficult to reveal as most people would either consider me a traitor or just a corrupt woman who “wanted to be with Americans.” Although I didn’t care too much about what such people thought, I realized that working at the REO placed myself and my family in danger. In fact, many locals who worked for the [U.S. Department of State] or [U.S. Department of Defense] were kidnapped and eventually killed by militias in Iraq, mostly claiming to be religious groups. I started getting threatening text messages saying: “You betrayed the country; we will cut off your head.” I did not know who was texting me but I felt like it could be the beginning of something nasty. I applied for the Special Immigrant Visa … in the hope of leaving the country. My application was approved and I was ready to leave. It was very sad to leave my family and friends behind, but I had to do this at the time.

Like most refugees and immigrants, Alsafi was overwhelmed when she arrived in America. As an educated working woman in Iraq, she seemed set for success. After all, she was the public diplomacy coordinator for the U.S. State Department/U.S. Regional Embassy in Iraq for nearly three years. However, in the U.S., she faced all sorts of challenges and obstacles.

I arrived in Dallas/Fort Worth in June 2010 and lived in North Richland Hills for nine months. There I suffered from cultural shock and learned first-hand how difficult it was to find a job when you are fresh in the country. I worked many jobs, including Pizza Hut, Apple Refurbishment and a local insurance agency. I also volunteered at North Richland Hills Hospital and Catholic Charities. I decided to move to North Carolina to be close to my sister who lived in Raleigh at the time. I started volunteering with Lutheran Services Carolinas to help refugees and applied for a job as a case manager. 

In the years that followed, Alsafi would rise in the ranks from case manager to education coordinator, and eventually to resettlement director/area manager for Lutheran Services Carolinas. It was due to her commitment to serving refugees that she received the Ahmadiyya Humanitarian Award at the 69th Annual Conference of the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community USA that was held in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, on July 15.

Established in 2011, the Ahmadiyya Muslim Humanitarian Award recognizes the contributions and services of individuals who selflessly strive to serve oppressed and disadvantaged communities around the world. By giving a voice to the voiceless, these individuals honor fundamental and universal human rights guaranteed by the Quran and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

Alsafi joins the illustrious ranks of previous recipients, including: Bill Ayres, co-founder of Why Hunger?; Katrina Lantos Swett and Robert George, former chairs of the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom; Veerawit Tianchainan, executive director of the Thai Committee for Refugees Foundation; and Dr. Milton Boniuk of the Boniuk Institute for Religious Tolerance at Rice University.

Alsafi is universal in her world view

I respect all religions and faiths. I believe that religions are one way to set rules and teach discipline in people.

Who is Haneen?

I like to help people.

Although Alsafi does not fit the stereotypical image of a religious person and does not actively practice any faith, she is an inspiring woman with a heart of gold. Imam Ja‘far al-Sadiq — the 8th-century religious scholar respected by Sunnis, Shias and Sufis — once said, “Do not judge a person on how much they pray and how much they fast, judge them on how they treat other human beings.”

If this is the criteria for goodness, holiness and real religiosity, then Alsafi is a person to be held in high esteem. The Quran states that humans were created to serve, to be the custodians and caretakers of creation. It is incomprehensible why someone who serves the oppressed and disadvantaged would be threatened with beheading. Her wisdom, care and compassion is inspired by solidarity, service and a desire to care for others.

The situation in Erbil has changed since the U.S. invasion and occupation of Iraq, particularly with the rise of ISIS.

Erbil has been protected by the Kurdish Peshmerga, the Kurdish military, since the 1980s when Kurdistan claimed independence from the rest of Iraq that was ruled by Saddam. So, Kurdistan did not see much violence compared to the other parts of Iraq. 

ISIS has actually made the Iraqis stronger and more united. The Peshmerga were fighting ISIS from the north and have done [a] great job in protecting [the] Kurdistan region from the ISIS invasion. From the south and mid of Iraq, the people of Iraq got together and formed what they call al-Hashd al-Sha‘abi, the People’s Mobilization Force. They also well liberated many parts of Iraq from ISIS.

Erbil has seen great development in the past 10 years on many levels, especially economically and socially. Many people who left between the 1980s and the year 2000 came back and invested in small businesses. Many Arabs from all over the country found peace and made a living in Erbil. Americans, Europeans and many other nationalities found employment in Erbil and they do live peacefully there.

Erbil also hosts thousands of refugees from Syria, as well as Yazidis and other victims of ISIS from Iraq. Those refugees live in a refugee camp in tents. They receive support and donations from the local government, UNHCR, and the many good people that want to help. Small local nonprofits are now assisting those refugees to resettle back in their cities, towns and villages that were occupied by ISIS and were recently liberated.

In short, rather than contribute to divisions and distrust in the community, ISIS has actually drawn people closer together, Alsafi says. She provides an honest analysis for the greatest challenges facing Iraq and some possible solutions.

One of the many challenges facing Iraq right now is the lack of leadership and the high level of government corruption. The majority of government officials, who are supposed to be the leaders of the country, are all in power for one reason and one reason only: to make as much money as possible. They have no skills and no knowledge. It is so unfortunate that the country is being led by unfit and unqualified individuals. It is also very contradictory and ironic that Iraq was once the bastion of civilization.

There was a time when Iraq produced the best scientists, doctors and scholars in the world. Throughout history, the people of Iraq were among the most educated and well-read. Iraqis have suffered through a series of wars, violence, dictatorship and separation from the rest of the world during Saddam’s regime. When we consider its recent history, it is not strange or surprising that Iraq has yet to find stability. I am really not sure what the solutions are to this mess but perhaps it could start by getting rid of the corrupt individuals who do not add value to the country.

As a service provider, Alsafi shares experiential knowledge on the impact the Trump administration’s policies have on refugees.

The executive orders that put a ban on refugees traveling from certain countries has definitely impacted the population we serve. We usually receive a high number of arrivals each summer. This summer, we received less than a handful of refugees. The ban has been extended until October with few exceptions made. During the ban, LSC as well as many other agencies had to lay off staff in programs due to funding cuts. We hope that things will be better after the ban is over. The resettlement agencies across the U.S. will continue to advocate for refugees and raise awareness within the communities.

Alsafi refutes ill-founded assertions — that refugees are a threat to Western civilization and values, for example — with facts and success stories.

Refugees are definitely not a threat to the Western civilization; they are carefully vetted for a minimum of two years prior to being allowed to travel to the U.S. Refugees add great value to the U.S. economy because they are extremely hard workers who are dedicated to learning about their new country and adapting to its culture.

Through the assistance of refugee resettlement agencies across the nation, refugees reach self-sufficiency within six to eight months after arrival to the U.S. through employment opportunities, at which point they get off government assistance. Employers value refugees due to the skills and the hard work they bring to their business. Almost every family and individual refugee resettled is a success story. I want to offer myself as an example of a success story. We also have many [Special Immigrant Visa] clients from Afghanistan and Iraq who arrived and immediately added value to the economy by finding early employment.

 As for those who want to block the entry of refugees and immigrants, I encourage them to learn about the history of the USA, learn about how and why their ancestors made it to this country, and learn about their struggles and the reasons for leaving their home counties back then. America was built, and is built, by refugees and immigrants. There is strong evidence that this population can succeed and make it through challenges.

Far from being disloyal, Alsafi, a refugee herself, has truly embraced America and all that it offers.

The thing that I appreciate the most about the U.S. is that it has a system for everything. Although it might not be effective all the time, it helps to have a system in place. I also appreciate the Bill of Rights that gives us the right to justice.

Despite her love for the U.S., and the fact that she was recently granted citizenship, part of Alsafi’s heart will always remain in her homeland. When asked if she sees herself ever returning to Iraq, a certain nostalgia comes to the surface. “I will one day go back and live in Iraq,” she explains. “If I do so, it will be in Erbil.”

If she does, I think, it will be a gain for Iraq and a loss for America.

*Image: Haneen Alsafi at the annual Muslim Television Ahmadiyya event. >Photo via MTA 

By Hanan al-Harbi

On July 7, 2017, John Rossomondo published an article titled “Paranoid Terrorist Apologism Dominates ISNA Convention in Chicago.” As if the title did not speak for itself, this propaganda piece was printed in IPT News, the mouthpiece of the Investigative Project on Terrorism, a so-called “research group” founded by Steven Emerson, a man widely denounced as being a dishonest bigot. The Southern Poverty Law Center has this to say about him:

Steve Emerson is a self-described “expert on terrorism” who has claimed that the Obama administration “extensively collaborates” with the Muslim Brotherhood; asserted that Europe is riddled with “no-go zones” and is “finished” because of Muslim immigration; and stated that 480 million to 640 million Muslims “support the notion that it’s okay to bomb the World Trade Center,” among other things. A reviewer for The New York Times Book Review said a 1991 book he co-authored on terrorism was marred by “a pervasive anti-Arab and anti-Palestinian bias.” Despite this sorry record, Emerson, a former journalist who started the Investigative Project on Terrorism in 1995, has been repeatedly interviewed on Fox News, testified on several occasions to Congress, and been cited by government officials as an authority. But Emerson’s reputation took a huge hit in January 2015, when he claimed that Birmingham, England, was a “no-go zone” for non-Muslims and that in parts of London “Muslim religious police … actually beat and actually wound seriously anyone” not wearing “religious Muslim attire.” British Prime Minister David Cameron responded by calling Emerson “clearly a complete idiot,” and Ofcom, which regulates the British media, said the comments were “materially misleading.” In 1997, Emerson was accused of giving The Associated Press documents he claimed were from the FBI but were really written by him. The Tennessean reported in October 2010 that in 2008, Emerson’s nonprofit Investigative Project on Terrorism “paid $3,390,000 to [Emerson’s for-profit firm] SAE Productions for ‘management services.’ Emerson is SAE’s sole officer.” The paper quoted Ken Berger, president of Charity Navigator, saying, “Basically, you have a nonprofit acting as a front organization, and all that money going to a for-profit,” he said. “It’s wrong. This is off the charts.”

As for John Rossomando, who holds the title of “Senior Analyst” at the Investigative Project on Terrorism, his publications have all the hallmarks of hate speech. After bashing the 54th Annual ISNA Conference and some of its other speakers, Rossomando, makes the following groundless assertion:

Another ISNA speaker, John Morrow, who teaches at Ivy Tech Community College in Indiana and directs the Covenants of the Prophet Foundation, launched into conspiratorial rhetoric accusing the U.S. of using the CIA to support jihadi groups with the intent of spreading anti-Muslim hatred.

“How do you ensure that the public continues to support the War on Terror, which is really a war on Islam and Muslims?” Morrow asked. “By means of terrorist attacks, by means of false flag operations, that way the eternal endless war of the globalist totalitarian fascists continues unabated to the pleasure of big brother, or as we know him in Islam, the one-eyed liar. The philosophy is clear. Keep the focus on fear.”

To start with, Dr. Morrow retired from his position as a Full Professor at Ivy Tech over one year ago. If Rossomando were a real journalist who adhered to professional standards, he would verify his sources prior to publishing information that is both false and misleading.

Dr. Morrow did not engage in “conspiratorial rhetoric.” On the contrary, he engaged in fact-based rhetoric. It is a confirmed fact that the CIA has supported terrorists and authoritarian regimes all around the world to advance its geo-political agenda. Has Rossomando heard of the Contras in Nicaragua, the Cuban exiles, the Salvadorean death squads, the Mujahidin and al-Qaeda in Afghanistan, and the various terrorist outfits operating in Iraq and Syria?

According to Rossomando, “This is the same narrative that ISIS jihadist recruiters use to lure disaffected Muslims into becoming terrorists.” No, it is not. Anyone who makes such allegations does not even have a Wikipedia-level knowledge of the subject at hand. So, good look to him when it comes to “Seeking a position as an open-source intelligence analyst,” as he advertised on his LinkedIn page. He is clearly unqualified to even comment on the Comics.

Unlike Rossomando, Dr. Morrow has been consulted by dozens upon dozens of governments around the world, including, the Obama administration, and, believe or not, the Trump administration. Regardless of their ideological inclination, and although Morrow does not mince his words, they value the depth of his knowledge, his non-partisan position, and his brutal honesty.

If Rossomando were a bona fide reporter, he would research his subject. As even a cursory investigation confirms, Morrow has been at the forefront of the war on Takfirism, described incorrectly by Islamophobes as “Radical Islam.” As the leader of the Covenants Initiative, a Muslim movement devoted to protecting the People of the Book, Morrow is a virulent critic of extremism and terrorism. His seminal study, The Covenants of the Prophet Muhammad with the Christians of the World, was one of the factors that contributed to the Marrakech Declaration which reaffirms the rights of non-Muslim minorities in Muslim-majority nations.

Along with numerous other interfaith partners, Morrow helped get the Fortenberry Resolution passed in the House of Congress, thanks to which the actions of ISIS have been officially described as war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide. He has also worked incessantly to unite people of all stripes in a common struggle against all forms of intolerance and fanaticism.

Morrow is as far removed from terrorism as John Rossomondo, Steven Emerson, Joseph Farah, and Meira Svirsky are from intellectual honesty. Who, then, are the real “paranoid terrorist apologists?” I would venture to say that the title perfectly applies to Islamophobes who espouse grandiose and delusional anti-Muslim conspiracy theories for the same reasons that Hitler demonized Jews and the Serbs dehumanized Bosnians. As Bob Marley said, “If the hat fits, let them wear it.”

Considering that Morrow issued a religious statement excommunicating ISIS from the Muslim faith, it cannot be logically claimed that his rhetoric helps to recruit them. The same, however, cannot be said of Islamophobic fascists. The racist, paranoid, and hate-filled rhetoric of the extreme right is the fuel that fires violence against innocent and defenseless men, women, and children whose sole sin is that they are Muslim or happen to look Muslim. And since Muslims come from every race, ethnicity, and nationality all human beings can fall victim to the blind rage of intellectually-impaired racists.

Appealing to the humanity of 21st century hatemongers, the illegitimate offspring of the German SS, the Spanish Falange, the Italian Fascists, the Serbian Chetniks, the Zionist Stern Gang, and the American KKK, is in vain. For the modern-day Goebbels who work for the Ministry of Public Enlightenment and Propaganda, producing fake news and promoting conspiracy theories, the only good Muslim is a dead Muslim. As proud and patriotic people of faith, we have no choice but to fight the enemies of religious freedom in defense of our democratic values.

For those who really want a sense of what Dr. Morrow said at ISNA, the complete transcript of his speech, and the video of the entire session, is available on the Muslim Post: http://www.themuslimpost.com/the-role-of-faith-in-a-culture-of-fear-in-america/

Hanan al-Harbi is a Dutch-Syrian journalist. She is a graduate of the University of Iceland, in Reykjavík, where she studied Political Science She writes for Veterans Today, the Muslim Post, and many other publications. 

The Muslim Vibe (August 9, 2017)

This is the first in a two-part series on the experiences of Dr. John Andrew Morrow (Imam Ilyas Islam) on his journey towards finding himself, his roots and becoming both Métis and Muslim. The Métis are people of mixed European and Indigenous ancestry, and one of the three recognized Aboriginal peoples in Canada; the use of the term Métis is complex and contentious and has different historical and contemporary meanings. For more, click here


I was born John Andrew Morrow in Montréal, Québec, Canada. Although both of my parents were Francophone Quebeckers, and French was my maternal language, my English (or rather Irish) name was the cause of some confusion to both myself and others. My mother was Francophone from both sides and my father was Francophone from one side and Anglophone/Francophone from the other. I was clearly French Canadian as opposed to English Canadian. So while much was clear, much, however, remained veiled.

During the time of my grandparents, we were simply Canadians, a term used to distinguish us from the English invaders and colonizers. During the time of my parents, we moved from being Canadians to hyphenated French-Canadians. During my time, we moved from being French Canadians to being Québécois. Our identity was becoming increasingly narrow as we became increasingly minoritized and marginalized in the new multicultural Canadian mosaic.

Although my maternal family was clear that they were French, French Canadian, and Québécois, my paternal family was more ambiguous. My paternal grandfather was a Quebecker of Irish ancestry. His family had been in la Belle Province for generations. He spoke fluent French and became renowned as an expert woodsman and fisherman. My paternal grandmother spoke English as a second language – she only learned it after marrying my grandfather. I never heard her describe herself as French, French Canadian or Québécois. Her origins were obscure. She never spoke about her parents, her family, and her past. We assumed she was hiding some painful family secrets. As my father said when I asked him about our origins:

“Whatever we are, be proud of it.”

As much as my name was Irish, I knew that I was only Irish by direct paternal ancestry; not by language, culture, or identity. At the same time, I knew, deep-down, that we were not entirely French Canadian either.

My maternal grandfather, who spoke nothing but joual, a 16th-century French dialect, peppered his colorful language with indigenous words: “Grand Manitou”, something he would cry out when he was shocked, surprised, or excited. My maternal grandfather used to invoke the Great Spirit. When I asked my maternal grandmother about our ancestry, she mentioned that we descended from the coureurs des bois, the runners of the woods; they were the trappers, traders, and voyageurs who traveled North America from North to South and East to West and were mostly Métis. They were of mixed ancestry: part French and part First Nations. They typically spoke Métis French along with half a dozen indigenous languages. Among themselves, they spoke a language of their own, a mixed language, known as Michif.

“Do we have any Chinese in our family?” I once asked my mother when I was a child. “Not that I know of,” responded my mother. “Why do you ask?” “Well, we have many family members with Oriental eyes,” I pointed out referring to the epicanthic eye-folds that I noted on my cousins and maternal grandmother. I also noted that, with the exceptions of my paternal and maternal grandfathers, who were blue-eyed blonds, the rest of my relatives had thick, jet-black hair, and while their complexions varied, many of them had olive colored skin and high cheekbones. In fact, some of my uncles were so dark that some of my mulatto friends had lighter skin than my family members. Although we were proud of our Francophone culture, it was clear that we were not entirely European. If some of us appeared white, it was only on the outside.

After my family relocated from Québec to Ontario, my sense of Otherness intensified due to discrimination. My circle of friends consisted of people like me, who were different, and was made up mostly of immigrants, African Canadians, and Asian Canadians. As a French Canadian, and as a Quebecker, I was an outsider to Anglo Canadians. Consequently, I always insisted upon being Québécois. In short, I had roots dating back to the 16th century. As was eventually to be revealed, those roots traced back tens if not hundreds of thousands of years.

*

As a teenager in Toronto, I was fond of collecting, listening, and singing traditional French-Canadian folk-songs. Some of these songs were clearly from France, some dating back to medieval times. Others dated from the Encounter between the Old World and the New World. They were songs of voyageurs, loggers and raft-men. I literally learned the entire repertoire of traditional French-Canadian songs by heart. Apart from a few songs, which were clearly composed by Métis runners of the woods, my relatives in Québec were completely unfamiliar with the songs that I would sing. “But these are traditional French-Canadian songs that are accompanied by a guitar,” I asserted. “What kind of music did you hear at home?” I asked my mother. “There were dances every weekend,” she responded, “They played the fiddle; not the guitar. Your grandmother played the spoons. And they used to dance to jigs.” When I played French-Canadian songs to my mother, she could not identify them. However, when I played her Métis music from the prairies, it was like taking her back in time: that was the music they played in her childhood home.

From the time I was a small child, I sensed that we had indigenous roots. My grandmother had said so subtly herself: we descend from the runners of the woods. I was always at home in the forests of the eastern woodlands of North America. I would wander for days on end in the traditional territory of the Algonquins in the company of my cousin. As I child I danced in pow-wows in northern Ontario. As a teenager and a young man, I attended indigenous events in and around Toronto. As a university student, I was a regular at the Native Canadian Center in Toronto and at events organized by Mayan, Quechua-Aymara, and Mapuche Indians. I stood in solidarity with the First Nations of the Americas. Rather than lose my time and my soul dancing in discos of Western decadence, I would spend my time celebrating Inti Raymi with the Incas and other events of cultural and spiritual significance. I remember a friend of mine looking at an old family portrait of my father, his parents, and his sisters. He said: “They look Latino. Your grandmother looks Indian.” In the words of my Salvadorean friend, “If you told me this was a Mestizo family, I would believe you.”

My Latin American friend was only partly correct. The people in the photograph were indeed Mestizo, the Spanish word for Métis, people of mixed blood, particularly used to describe the miscegenation of Europeans and Native people. The Mestizo people of the Americas, however, are not indigenous people. Although they have Indian blood, they are not Indian by language, culture or identity. In short, they do not embrace the indigenous worldview. Having indigenous blood does not make one indigenous. To be an indigenous person, one must have indigenous genes, one must identify as an indigenous person, one must belong to an indigenous community, and one must be recognized as indigenous by an indigenous community. The Mestizos of Latin America may have some Indian blood; however, they are Hispanic by language, culture, history, and identity. They are Western European in their worldview. What is more, they are not considered indigenous by the indigenous people of Spanish America. In fact, the Mestizos of Mexico, Central, and South America have a long history of slaughtering, persecuting, and oppressing indigenous people. In fact, in Latin American Spanish, the term Indio or Indian signifies “idiot” or “imbecile,” a person who is hopelessly backwards.

A representation of a Mestizo, in a Pintura de Castas from New Spain during the late colonial period. The painting’s caption states “Spanish and Indian produce Mestizo”, 1780.

I was of indigenous ancestry. I embraced the indigenous worldview. I celebrated indigenous culture. I devoted myself to the indigenous studies at the undergraduate and graduate levels. I completed both an M.A. thesis and a doctoral dissertation on indigenous themes: The Indigenous Worldview in César Vallejo and The Indigenous Presence and Influence in Rubén Darío and Ernesto Cardenal. I would eventually publish the former in a peer-reviewed journal while the latter was published as two separate academic monographs, Amerindian Elements in the Poetry of Rubén DaríoThe Alter Ego as the Indigenous Other and Amerindian Elements in the Poetry of Ernesto Cardenal: Mythic Foundations of the Colloquial Narrative.

As much as I was indigenous by blood, by mind, and by soul, I was reluctant to assert my identity openly due to lack of documentation. (How silly is that? Did our ancestors have Indian or Métis status cards? Why do we continue to allow others to define who we are as a people?) Still, I was drawn to participate in wasipis with the Dakotas, Lakotas, and Nakotas in South Dakota, and to visit the Three Affiliated Tribes of the Fort Berthold Reservation in North Dakota. My life journey brought me from Québec to Acadia, from Acadia to Québec, from Québec to Ontario, from Ontario to Missouri, from Missouri to South Dakota, from South Dakota to New Mexico, from New Mexico to North Dakota, from North Dakota to Indiana, and from Indiana to Michigan. I realize now that I was retracing the paths of my ancestors, my predecessors, the Métis traders of centuries past. As my research would find, I have indigenous relatives in all these regions.

by Dr John Andrew Marrow


Dr John Andrew Morrow (Imam Ilyas Islam) is an Amerindian with Canadian and American citizenship. He received his PhD from the University of Toronto in the year 2000. He worked as an Assistant, Associate, and Full Professor of Foreign Languages for over a decade and a half at Park University, Northern State University, Eastern New Mexico University, the University of Virginia, and Ivy Tech Community College. He is the author of over thirty academic books in the fields of Hispanic, Islamic, and Indigenous Studies, including the critically-acclaimed Covenants of the Prophet Muhammad with the Christians of the World. A public figure and activist, he lectures all around the globe and acts as an advisor to world leaders. In recognition of his accomplishments, Dr Morrow received an ISNA Interfaith Achievement Award in 2016.

Muslim Writers Guild (August 3, 2017).

By Dr. John Andrew Morrow

Bismillah wa alhamdulillah wa salawat ‘ala Rasulillah.

I, Dr. John Andrew Morrow, known as Ilyas ‘Abd al-‘Alim Islam, am honored to address the 69th Annual Convention of the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community.

I am one of the few Muslim leaders who leads Friday prayers for Sunnis, who performs majlis for Shiis, who participates in dhikr with Sufis, and who speaks on the same platform as Ahmadis.

I am one of the few Muslim leaders who addresses Christian audiences, Jewish audiences, and secular audiences.

I am a person who values diversity but who seeks unity within diversity.

I believe in building bridges and common ground. I believe in focusing on similarity instead of difference. I believe in addressing agreement as opposed to disagreement.

I am not a minimalist. I refuse to be a minority of a minority of a minority.

I am Métis. Our ethnogenesis was the product of a genetic and cultural mixture between French Canadian fur-trappers and First Nation women. I am Quebecois. I am French Canadian. I am Canadian. I am American. I am a citizen of planet earth.

I am universalist.

Let us not reduce ourselves to nothing. We may be Shii. We may be Sunni. We may be Sufi. We may be Ahmadi. But we are not only that.

We may be Malikis, Shafis, Hanbalis, Hanafis, Ja‘faris, Zaydis or Isma‘ilis. But we are not only that. We may belong to dozens of different theological, legal or spiritual paths. But we are not only that.

We may be Jews, Samaritans, Christians, and Muslims but most importantly we are monotheists. We are believers in the One and Only God, the Creator and Sustainer of the Universe.

You can take a cow and chop it into thousands of different cuts: but it is still beef. That’s an allegory for anyone who might be hungry right now.

We have differences. That is a given. That is a blessing. That is what enriches us as human beings. But we are not the sum of our differences.

Let us set aside our differences and focus on fundamentals, the belief in One God, the belief in the Prophets of God, and the belief in Life after Death.

Let us unite on the basis of primordial ethical and moral principles.

God is One and God is Just so let us stand for social justice. As Almighty Allah says in the Glorious Qur’an:

O ye who believe! stand out firmly for justice, as witnesses to Allah, even as against yourselves, or your parents, or your kin, and whether it be (against) rich or poor: for Allah can best protect both. Follow not the lusts (of your hearts), lest ye swerve, and if ye distort (justice) or decline to do justice, verily Allah is well-acquainted with all that ye do. (4:135)

Let us be kind and considerate for as the Prophet Muhammad, peace and blessings be upon him, preached: “None of you has faith until you love for your neighbor what you love for yourself.”

Let us build bonds of brotherhood and sisterhood for as Almighty Allah commands the Prophet in al-Qur’an al-Karim: “Say: ‘No reward do I ask of you for this except the love of those near of kin.’” (42:23)

Finally, as the Messenger of Allah said: “He who does not thank people does not thank Allah” (Tirmidhi and Ahmad)

So let me thank the Ahmadi Community for inviting me here today and let me give credit where credit is due.

The Ahmadi Community was the first to systematically spread Islam in the Western world in general and here in the United States in particular. For this, I thank you.

The Ahmadi Community has always rejected violent jihad and terrorism. For this, I thank you.

The Covenants of the Prophet may be new to some Sunnis, Shiites, and Sufis; however, they are time-honored traditions to the Ahmadi Community. For this, I thank you.

The Covenants of the Prophet were recognized as authentic by the Islamic Review, an Ahmadi academic journal, in 1940.

The Covenants of the Prophet were recognized as authentic by Abdullah Alladin, the Ahmadi scholar, in 1971.

The Covenants of the Prophet were recognized as authentic by Qasim Rashid, my friend and colleague, in 2014.

Finally, in 2016, His Holiness, Hadhrat Mirza Masroor Ahmad, the current Khalifa of the Ahmadi Muslim Community, quoted a study on the Covenants of the Prophet that was completed by my friend and colleague, Dr. Craig Considine.

Shukran lakum wa shukralillah. Thank you and thank Allah.

Al-salaamu ‘alaykum wa rahmatullahi wa barakatuhu.

(This speech was delivered to the 69th annual convention of the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community USA. It can be viewed here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=znOMN2sY8cI.)

The International Museum of Muslim Cultures has thrived for 16 years in Jackson, growing from a little-known exhibit to an internationally known archive. But its impact in education, advocacy, religious co-existence — even its very existence — is not widely known in its home city.

The institution was the first museum in the United States dedicated to international Muslim cultures and histories, and its creators aspired to unite people through education. It’s currently one of four U.S. museums celebrating some aspect of Islam and its followers: America’s Islamic Heritage Museum in Washington, D.C., which conserves the history of Muslim Americans; the New African Center in Philadelphia, which preserves African American Muslim history, and the Arab American National Museum in Dearborn, Mich., which is dedicated to showcasing Arab American history and culture.

People from approximately 40 states and 35 other countries, such as Senegal, Mali, Indonesia and Turkey, have visited the Jackson museum.

https://mississippitoday.org/2017/08/01/the-making-of-a-muslim-museum-in-mississippi/embed/#?secret=ijoRPNwIJU

The prestigious W.K. Kellogg Foundation has provided significant financial support. In May 2017, the foundation awarded a $600,000 grant to fund the museum’s “Bridging Cultures: Working for Equity Across Race, Class, Religion and Ethnicity” project. The goal of this project is to “utilize the power of the museum to mobilize cross-racial healing, justice and human dignity.”

That was the museum’s third Kellogg grant since 2006. The first two were for $31,000 (2006-2007) and for $150,00 (2013-2015). Like the museum, the foundation says it is committed to racial equity and the mission to “support children, families and communities as they strengthen to achieve success as individuals and as contributors to society.”

A key component of that accomplishing the mission is the “Timbuktu Human Dignity” curriculum that focuses on helping re-establish a sense of human dignity and unleashing the potential of youth of the African diaspora.

To Okolo Rashid, a co-founder of the museum and its president, the concept of human dignity is about having a sense of “inherent nobility, worth, honor and a born-sense of leadership and self-governance, which is the endowment of every human being.” She says this is the same concept that’s in the Declaration of Independence:

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”

“A big part of the problem with academic achievement, for African Americans in particular, is tied to our historic experience here in this country and what slavery took away,” Rashid said. “Slavery wiped out the cultural memory of African Americans and a big part of that is this idea of what it means to be human.”

Emad Al-Turk, the museum’s other co-founder and its board chairman, says African American visitors will learn they came from educated, rich, civilized and cultured societies, which “is not what they learn in school.” Rashid also notes how many school lessons begin with slavery when it comes to African American history, but there’s so much more.

“Many African Americans are searching for who they are, where they came from and what their roots and traditions are,” Al-Turk said. “This is an excellent way of connecting.”

So far, Rashid says she has seen success with this curriculum in two pilot programs. These pilots were tested in the at Brinkley Middle School and Lanier High School in Jackson as a year-long elective and in the Holmes County school district with a select group of middle and high school African American male students as a year-long after-school program. Holmes County is has the poorest demographic in the U.S. while Jackson public school system is the second largest school district in Mississippi.

The curriculum is extensive, incorporating these topics: human dignity, service learning, West African and African American history, empowerment theory, geography, global worldview, civil rights, leadership, civic engagement, conflict resolution and more. The program was deemed successful based on the participants’ and instructors’ evaluations, says the museum’s education coordinator Maryam Rashid. Students improved an average of 19 percent on pre- and post-assessments of the Timbuktu curriculum.

This curriculum is a branch of the museum’s current exhibit called “The Legacy of Timbuktu: Wonders of the Written Word,” which was revealed in November 2006. This exhibit emphasizes West Africa’s Islamic culture and history via the historic city of Timbuktu in Mali, which was the center of education in West Africa between the 13th and 17th centuries.

Al-Turk and Rashid hope this exhibit will positively influence visitors and especially uplift the African American community locally and around the nation. The Timbuktu exhibit is scheduled to tour the nation in select cities in the 2020.

Forty ancient Timbuktu manuscripts on display showcase the high level of scholarship, achievements and forward thinking of West Africa’s civilization. These manuscripts cover an array of topics, including music, politics, conflict resolution, astronomy, history and proper meat preparation.

The manuscripts and many of the artifacts belong to the exhibit’s partner, Abdel Kader Haidara, who is founder of the Mamma Haidara Library in Timbuktu. Haidara’s family has lived in Timbuktu since the 15th century and has been passing down artifacts through its generations.

Also displayed are a blacksmith’s tools and products, a Malian bride’s traditional headdress and a model of the Great Mosque of Djenné. Visitors learn how women were held in high esteem in society and were independent, how the famous 14th-century traveler Ibn Battuta considered Timbuktu one of the safest places to travel, and how Malians made their own striped paper.

Take a look at this slideshow to see more photos from the Timbuktu exhibit. 

Roysean Tuyrez Philson, a 6th grade teacher for Teach for America in Ferriday, La., says while touring the museum he was fascinated by the trends West Africans set, the education they created and by how intelligent African Muslims were.

“I didn’t know these things because the history that I grew up learning in my school systems told it from a very biased perspective,” said Philson, who was raised in South Carolina. “We have to be open to hearing perspectives that are different than what we grew up hearing. It shed beauty on a beautiful culture.”

PUSHING FORWARD THE PRESENT THROUGH ITS PAST

Al-Turk says the museum isn’t not only an educational facility but also an activist organization, “arming people with information to allow them to do better for the entire community.”

The goal of the museum is to share the contributions of Muslims and Islam throughout history and no longer allow the media to define who Muslims are or what Islam is, according to Al-Turk. He says this is especially important in this current time of Islamophobia shown by the public and even elected officials.

“The first question we get is, ‘Wow, how do you have a Muslim museum in Jackson, Miss., and why do you have it here?’” Al-Turk said. “Why not? This is the center of the Civil Rights movement and what’s happening to the Muslim community is an extension of that movement.”

Al-Turk hopes the museum is contributing to the improvement of relations between Muslims and non-Muslims in the U.S. and around the world.

Another step toward this goal is the exhibit set to open in November called “Muslim with Christians and Jews: An Exhibition of Covenants and Co-Existence.” It’s based on John Andrew Morrow’s book “The Covenant of Prophet Muhammad with the Christians of the World.”

The exhibit will feature five covenants that were written to extend protection to Jews, Christians and others by the Prophet Muhammad and his people, one of the earliest constitutions in history (the Constitution of Medina) and a two-dimensional trade caravan, among other things.

The goal of this exhibit is to showcase Islam’s principle of religious coexistence, to introduce the leadership duality of Prophet Muhammad as a civic and religious leader, and to address Islamophobia with a message of understanding and tolerance.

Islam has historically promoted peace, Al-Turk said, and many things some Muslims claim to do in the name of Islam are not Islamic in nature, including groups such as ISIS, Hamas and Al-Qaeda.

“Our role in the museum is to educate the general public, Muslims and non-Muslims, about what Islam is and about the role of Islam,” Al-Turk said.

This exhibit is set to tour in Chicago, Atlanta, the Dallas-Forth Worth area, Detroit and major cities in New York and California in 2018. It will be open to the public and stationary in Jackson Nov. 30, 2017-April 2018.

“We want to take our exhibit and the work we’re doing to advocate our message outside of the museum walls,” Al-Turk said. “We want, over time, for millions of people to embrace the message of what we’re talking about.”

Who is ‘We’?

Humera Khan’s dismissal of divine decrees
Héctor Manzolillo

Dhu al-Qa’dah 08, 1438

Considering the collective amnesia of most of the Muslim community over the course of the past century, the resurrection and revival of the Covenants of the Prophet (pbuh) is a phenomenon of considerable importance. Consequently, when a self-proclaimed counter-terrorist expert like Humera Khan publishes a statement saying that “We don’t need these documents,” we are obliged to ask an essential question: Who is We? In other words, who is it that does not need these documents?

Humera Khan is the Executive Director of Muflehun which her bio describes as “a think tank specializing in preventing radicalization and countering violent extremism (CVE).” Her areas of expertise include “Countering Violent Extremism (CVE), Social Media in CVE, Security Strategies, Islamic Studies, Ideology of Violent Extremism, Women in Security, Youth CVE Programs, Online Radicalization, Women CVE Programs.” She also “contributes in an advisory capacity to the US government (including FBI, DHS, DOJ, DNI, DOS, NCTC, NSC and TSA) and law enforcement agencies in several European countries.” In recognition for her services, she was awarded the FBI Director’s Community Leadership Award in 2012.

“We,” of course, could be “We Muslims,” namely, “We Muslims do not need these documents.” Why any Muslim leader would dismiss documents with such profound socio-political prospects is incomprehensible. The Covenants of the Prophet (pbuh) are powerful proponents of tolerance, inclusivity, and peaceful co-existence between members of all faiths. To claim that Muslims do not need the Covenants of the Prophet (pbuh) is like saying Americans do not need the Constitution or human beings do not need the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

“We” could also have a broader meaning as in “We, human beings, do not need these documents.” The prophetic pledges might be of interest to Muslims; however, they are of no consequence to non-Muslims. This is a perilous proposition for there are no documents in Islam that address the rights of non-Muslims more completely and comprehensively than the Prophet’s Covenants. What is more, the documents in question have been cherished by Jews, Samaritans, Christians, and Magians as veritable insurance policies responsible for protecting their lives, religious rights, property, and liberties. To state that “We, human beings, do not need these documents” is to deprive non-Muslims of identity and existence in the Islamic world.

Muflehun Executive Director Humera Khan joining the technology panel at the UN Security Council Counter-Terrorism Committee (CTC) Special Meeting on Preventing terrorists from exploiting the internet and social media to recruit terrorists and incite terrorist acts, while respecting human rights and fundamental freedoms. Apparently, the executive director, perhaps blinded by photo-ops with the “movers and shakers,” still does not get it that the real terrorists are the ones who routinely veto UNSC resolutions that the majority of the world supports, leading to the terrorism she wants to curtail.

The mysterious “We,” however, could have more sinister connotations and convey the sense of “We, the FBI or the State Department, do not need these documents.” Rather than represent a benefit, they are a liability. They interfere directly with the imposed dichotomy between “good Muslims” who support Western plans and lifestyles and “bad Muslims” who support sovereignty and defend Islamic values. What is more, most Western governments, including that of the United States, have embraced the principles of CVE or Combating Violent Extremism.

While nobody sane of mind and soul opposes the struggle against violent extremism, Peter Romaniuk concludes in “Does CVE work? Lessons Learned from the Global Effort to Counter Violent Extremism” that “…the achievements of CVE in practice are not yet proportional to its prominence in the public discourse.” The fact that CVE focuses on the rehabilitation and reintegration of violent extremist offenders is the very manifestation of liberal nonsense. We are not dealing with wayward youth who smoke pot, sleep around too much, and consume excessive amounts of alcohol. We are dealing with mass rapists, mass torturers, and mass murderers. We should not baby them. We should behead them.

Herein lies the fundamental difference between the proponents of CVE and the supporters of the Covenants Initiative. The Covenants of the Prophet (pbuh) are clear: they demand justice. Serious crimes such as sexual assault, human trafficking, war crimes, and genocide should not go unpunished. Otherwise, the Throne of Majesty trembles with anger.

Who is “we”? and “We” is who? If one thing is clear, the “we” is not “who” we think. The “we” could not conceivably consist of the Muslim collective. The argument that the Qur’an is all that Muslims need is Qur’anically inadmissible. As Almighty Allah (swt) says Himself, “Obey Allah and obey the Messenger” (3:31, 4:59, 5:92, 24:54, 64:12). As the Qur’an states explicitly, “He who obeys the Messenger has obeyed Allah” (4:80). It is also definitively established that “Anyone who disobeys Allah and His Messenger is clearly misguided” (33:36).

If the Qur’an is all that Muslims need, why not burn all the books of traditions? Why not place books of jurisprudence, exegesis, theology, history, and philosophy on the funeral pyre? The Ahl al-Qur’an, who accept only the revealed text, are certainly not Sunnis, Shi‘is or Sufis. Mainstream, orthodox Muslims, all accept the authenticated Sunnah. Muslims are divided into myriad sects, schools, and movements yet all of them claim to follow the same Qur’an.

Factually speaking, the Qur’an has not been used as a source of unity and uniformity in the Muslim community for as the saying goes “God unites but human beings divide.” We have had the Qur’an for approximately 1,500 years but Muslims have continued to slaughter both Muslims and non-Muslims. Why? Because they disobeyed a key, transcendental, command of the Prophet (pbuh) directed to all Muslims. They disobeyed the universally recognized mutawatir hadith of Ghadir Khumm. The Messenger of Allah (pbuh) foretold that Muslims would become misguided as a result of deviant and malevolent interpretations of the Qur’an,

There will soon come upon the people a time in which nothing of the Qur’an remains save its trace and nothing of Islam remains save its name; their masjids will be full, though they are devoid of guidance. Their scholars are the worst people under the sky, from them strife emerges and spreads.

Muslims, however, could return to the straight path and set aside strife by simply applying the Covenants of the Prophet (pbuh).

Regardless of whether one believes that the Covenants of the Prophet (pbuh) that were passed down by Jews, Samaritans, Christians, and Magians are authentic, they contain the same core components as the Covenants of the Prophet (pbuh) that have survived, piecemeal, in censored Muslim sources. Even if one asserted that all the letters, treaties, and covenants of the Prophet (pbuh) in all sources are forgeries, one could not, in good faith, be a Muslim, and be a believer, if one rejects the principles that they espouse: the right to life, the right to human dignity, the right to believe, the right to worship, the right to property, and the right to protection.

“We don’t need these documents?” Really? Almighty Allah (swt) believes that we need them; otherwise, He would not have revealed them to the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh). The Messenger of Allah believes that we need them; otherwise, he would not have entered into them in the first place, would not have committed them to writing in numerous copies, would not have had them witnessed by dozens upon dozens of his companions; and would not have provided them to religious communities throughout the Muslim East.

Let’s be honest. Muslims need the Covenants of the Prophet (pbuh). The People of the Book need the Covenants of the Prophet. Human beings need the Covenants of the Prophet. We all need them now more than ever.

Editor’s note: for more on the subject, readers are referred to Power Manifestations of the Sirah: Examining the Letters and Treaties of the Messenger of Allah (2011) by Zafar Bangash, The Covenants of the Prophet Muhammad with the Christians of the World (2013) by John Andrew Morrow, and Islam and the People of the Book: Critical Studies on the Covenants of the Prophet (2017), authored by Dr. Morrow and a dozen leading Muslim scholars.

Héctor Horacio Manzolillo is a leading political activist who was imprisoned several times as a result of his social commitment with the oppressed and exploited. An active participant in the socio-political work spearheaded by the “Movement of Priests for the Third World,” he was expelled from Argentina by the military dictatorship in 1976 after over a year of imprisonment. Manzolillo is a political analyst who, for many years, published articles in two newspapers in the province of Corrientes in Argentina. The author of hundreds of articles, he is also the translator of over 60 Islamic books from English into Spanish, including The Covenants of the Prophet Muhammad with the Christians of the World. He continues, to this day, in the same line of work.

Dr. John Morrow and Charles Upton, two leading American Muslim intellectuals, are working to help end Christian-vs.-Muslim strife by publicizing the Covenants of the Prophet Muhammad to the Christians of the World. These remarkable documents, drafted and signed by the Prophet himself, enshrine Muslims’ duty to protect Christians “until the end of the world.”

Charles Upton and Dr. Morrow ask that you forward this article to “Christian leaders or activists, or anyone else, who might be able to get these resources to Christian congregations living under threat from the Jihadists in any part of the world.” They are also looking for publishers in Arabic, French, Spanish, Italian, Portuguese, Persian, Turkish, Dutch, Indonesian, Tamil, Russian, and Urdu. (Translations into those languages have already been completed.)

Kevin BarrettVeterans Today Editor

An Offering of the Covenants of the Prophet Muhammad to the Christians of the World

in the Twenty-First Century

by Charles Upton and John Andrew Morrow

In October of 2013 a book by Prof. John Andrew Morrow was published in the United States, entitled The Covenants of the Prophet Muhammad with the Christians of the World [Angelico/Sophia Perennis, 2013]. The covenants of the Prophet with various Christian communities, which Prof. Morrow re‐discovered in obscure monasteries and collections and sometimes newly translated, also providing powerful arguments for their validity, uniformly state that Muslims are not to attack peaceful Christian communities, rob them, stop churches from being repaired, tear down churches to build mosques, prevent their Christian wives from going to church and taking spiritual direction from Christian priests and elders, etc. On the contrary, the Prophet commands Muslims to actively defend these communities “until the coming of the Hour”—the end of the world. In order to publicize this book I conceived of an initiative—the Covenants Initiative—which invites Muslims to subscribe to the theory that these covenants are legally binding upon them today. The heart of the Covenants Initiative is the following Declaration, addressed by Muslims to Christians:

We the undersigned hold ourselves bound by the spirit and letter of the covenants of the Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him) with the Christians of the world, in the understanding that these covenants, if accepted as genuine, have the force of law in the shari‘ah and that nothing in the shari‘ah, as traditionally and correctly interpreted, has ever contradicted them. As fellow victims of the terror and godlessness, the spirit of militant secularism and false religiosity now abroad in the world, we understand your suffering as Christians through our suffering as Muslims, and gain greater insight into our own suffering through the contemplation of your suffering. May the Most Merciful of the Merciful regard the sufferings of the righteous and the innocent; may He strengthen us, in full submission to His will, to follow the spirit and letter of the covenants of the Prophet Muhammad with the Christians of the world in all our dealings with them.

Since 2013, the Covenants Initiative has become an international movement in the Muslim world. Many Muslims from all walks of life, as well as a number of respected Islamic scholars—including Dr. Mohammed Gameaha of Al-Azhar University, which is the premier religious authority in Sunni Islam—have signed the Initiative. An interview with Dr. Morrow also appeared on the website of Ayatullah Khamenei, the Supreme Leader of Iran.

On the Christian side, we have received letters of support from Bartholomew, Ecumenical Patriarch of the Eastern Orthodox Church, and Theophilus II, Patriarch of Jerusalem; The Covenants of the Prophet Muhammad with the Christians of the World has also been presented to Pope Francis. In 2016, in response to an appeal from Bishop Francis Y. Kalabat, Eparch of the Chaldean Catholic Church (of Iraq) now in exile in Detroit, Michigan, the Covenants Initiative launched a project called the Genocide Initiative, which was a call to “all political players” to declare the actions of ISIS war crimes and genocide; it took the form of a petition posted on Change.org. The Genocide Initiative formed part of the push that led to the unanimous passage of the (unbinding) Fortenberry resolution in the House of Representatives, in March of 2016, affirming our position on ISIS; soon afterwards, Obama’s Secretary of State John Kerry felt it necessary to make a public statement to the same effect: that the actions of ISIS constitute genocide. The Genocide Initiative was commended in an article in the foremost U.S. armed forces publication, Stars and Stripes (reprinted from the Fort Wayne Herald.

Most of our energy over the last four years has been directed toward the Muslim world, since we felt that the first order of business was to inform Muslims of the existence and the crucial import of these documents authored by the Prophet Muhammad himself, documents that most Muslims, and many Muslim scholars, had never heard of. One powerful sign of our success in this effort appeared in May of 2017: when ISIS burned St. Mary’s Cathedral in Mindanao, the Philippines, the Governor of the Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao immediately invoked the Covenants of the Prophet to prove that this action of ISIS was “un-Islamic”. It was this, among other indications, that resolved us to turn more of our rather slim resources toward Christian outreach. In line with this decision, the present article should be understood as a formal offering of the Covenants of Muhammad to the Christians of the world, particularly those under siege by ISIS and other Takfiri terrorists, or who have reason to believe that they might be in the future, as shields of protection in the name of the Prophet Muhammad. (The word “Takfiri” denotes a pseudo-Muslim extremist who holds that any non-Muslim, and any Muslim not part of his or her particular sect, is a heretic who can legally be killed.)

This is entirely in line with Muhammad’s original intent. The Prophet foresaw that the expanding Muslim state would eventually come to blows with the Byzantine Empire, and knew that if this were to happen, some zealous but ignorant Muslims would simply consider this as inaugurating an “open season” on all Christians. Several passages of the Holy Qur’an, various rulings of the Prophet which have come down to us in the hadith literature, and most especially his Covenants with the Christian communities of his time, were explicitly designed to nip this tendency in the bud. Certainly these declarations were not entirely successful in preventing various excesses in later years, but they did exercise a powerful influence in the direction of tolerance and mutual respect among Muslims and Christians, an influence which lasted at least until the fall of the Ottoman Empire in 1922—the Covenants having formed the basis of state policy toward religious minorities under the Ottomans—and which has been resurrected in our own time largely through the ground-breaking scholarship of Dr. John Andrew Morrow.

It is of course important for those Christians who are considering how they might use the Covenants of the Prophet as documents of protection against various Takfiri terrorist groups to satisfy themselves that these documents are valid; a sampling of our exhaustive case for their genuineness appears below. To make a thorough study of our arguments would be time- consuming, even if the reader did not attempt to assimilate the approx. 550 published reviews favorable to The Covenants of the Prophet Muhammad with the Christians of the World, or become familiar with the objections of our critics—many of which appear, so as to be refuted, in that book, as well as in our three-volume anthology of critical studies on The Covenants, Islam, and the People of the Book, which includes articles by Dr. Morrow and 17 other scholars, both Muslim and Christian.

On the other hand, the Covenants have the potential for saving lives—and when lives hang in the balance, long deliberations and delays can have serious consequences. In this sense the Covenants are like a new and potentially lifesaving drug that’s undergoing clinical trials. If the drug is released too soon there could be unintended negative effects; if the release is delayed too long, lives will be lost. The goal of this article is to provide a “fast-track” for the acceptance of the Covenants by Christians, while directing them to more exhaustive research if they still have lingering questions. Meanwhile, the reader can refer to the May 2017 article “The Hidden Documents of Islam that can Defang Islamic Terror” by Melik Kaylan in Forbes magazine, to get some idea of the profound import of the Covenants for our time.

The following section, by Dr. Morrow, contains his list of authenticating authorities for five of the six Prophetic Covenants contained in The Covenants of the Prophet Muhammad with the Christians of the World and Six Covenants of the Prophet Muhammad with the Christians of His Time, a shorter work which contains only the texts of the Covenants themselves. This list provides solid evidence for their ultimate authorship—despite the vicissitudes of history undergone by the texts that we possess—by the Prophet Muhammad himself:

The Covenants contained in The Covenants of the Prophet Muhammad with the Christians of the World and Six Covenants of the Prophet Muhammad with the Christians of His Time were treated as trustworthy by the Companions and their Followers along with the Caliphs, the Sultans, and the Shahs of Islam from the 7th century until the early 20th century.

They were regularly renewed by Muslim rulers over the course of the past 1400 years and consistently authenticated by leading Islamic authorities from all schools of jurisprudence throughout the ages.

The Covenants of the Prophet Muhammad were certified as genuine or sahih by Sultan ‘Abd al-Hamid II, the 34th Sultan of the Ottoman Empire and the Last Caliph of Islam, who passed away in 1918.

As primary documents of prophetic provenance, they come second only to the Qur’an.

As the Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him, attested, they are binding upon all believers until the end of times.

AUTHENTICATION

The Covenant of the Prophet Muhammad with the Monks of Mount Sinai

Authenticated by
The Prophet Muhammad (d. 632 CE)
The Companions of the Prophet (7th century CE)
Abu Bakr, ‘Umar, ‘Uthman, and ‘Ali (632-661 CE)
The Monks of Mount Sinai (7th century CE to the present)
The Jabaliyyah Arabs of the Sinai (7th century CE to the present)
Honored by Abu Bakr, ‘Umar, ‘Uthman, and ‘Ali (632-661 CE)
Honored by the Ummayads and ‘Abassids (661-750; 750-1258 CE)
Ibn Sa‘d cites Treaty of Najran / St. Catherine (d. 845 CE)
Fatimid Decrees (965, 1024, 1109, 1110, 1135, 1154, and 1156 CE)
Fatimid Caliph al-Mu‘izz (953-974 CE)
Fatimid Caliph al-‘Aziz (975-996 CE)
Fatimid Caliph al-Hakim (996-1021 CE)
Fatimid Caliph al-Zahir (1024 CE)
Fatimid Vizier al-Afdal ibn Badr al-Jamali (1094-1121 CE)
al-Hafiz (1134 CE)
Decree of Shirkuh (1169 CE)
Ayyubids Decrees (1195, 1199, 1201/02, and 1210/11 CE)
Mamluk Decrees (1259, 1260, 1272, 1268/69, 1280 and 1516 CE)
Ibn Kathir reportedly paraphrases the complete list of privileges granted to St. Catherine’s Monastery (d. 1373 CE)
Treaty of the Sultan of Egypt with the Order of St. John of Jerusalem (1403 CE) Fatwas: Nearly 2000 Edicts from Five Schools of Jurisprudence (975 CE-1888) Ottoman Decrees (1519 to 1904)
Jean Thenaud (1512 CE)
Copies of the Covenant (Undated, 1517 CE, 1561 CE, 1683 CE, 1737/38 CE, 1800/01 CE) Tsernotabey (1517 CE)
Firman of Selim I (1517 CE)
Copies of Achtiname (1517-1858 CE)
Greffin Affagart (1533 CE)
Feridun Bey (d. 1583 CE)
Franciscus Quaresmius (1639)
Balthsar de Monconys (1646-1647)
Nektarios of Sinai (1660)
Grand Vizier Merzifonlu Kara Mustapha Pasha (1663-1666)
Joannes Caramuel de Lobkowitz (1672)
Henry Stubbe (1632-1676 CE)
M.L.M.D.C. (1697)
Eusèbe Renaudot (1713)
Bernard Picard (1736)
Johann Lorenz von Mosheim (1693-1755) (apocryphal but authentic in content) Richard Pococke (1743)
Thomas Salmon (1744)
J.A. Van Egmont and J. Heyman (1759)
George Psalmanazar (1764 CE) (apocryphal or limited to the Sinai Monks)
Jean Michel de Venture de Paradis (1798)

Napoléon Bonaparte (1798)
Jean-Joseph Marcel (1798)
Commission des Sciences et des Arts (1798)
Charles Thomson (1798)
Edward Wells (1809)
J.N. Fazakerley (1811)
Abraham Salamé (1819)
Félix Mengin (1823)
Thomas Clarke (1823)
John Carne (1826)
Abbé Grand and Adrien Egron (1827)
John Gibson Lockhart (1835)
National Geographic Society (1835)
Joseph von Hammer-Purgstall and J.-J. Hellert (1837) Ministers of Various Evangelical Denominations (1839)
C.B. Ḥoury (1840)
Maria Giuseppe de Géramb (1840)
Pietro della Valle (1843)
A. Oumanetz (1843)
Louis de Tesson (1844)
Père Joguet (1844)
Léon Gingras (1847)
Austen Henry Layard (1850)
Amable Regnault (1855) (authentic in content)
Henry Day (1857)
J.G. Pitzipios-Bey (1858)
Joseph Wolff (1861)
Antonio Figari Bey (1865)
John Davenport (1869)
Samuel Sullivan Cox (1887)
R. Accademia dei Lini (1888)
Philippe Gelât (1888/1889)
Nawfal Effendi Nawfal (late 19th century CE)
Syed Ameer ‘Ali (1891)
R.P. Jullien (1893) (authentic with reservations)
Dean Arthur Stanley (1894)
L’Union islamique / al-Ittihad al-Islami (1898) Bessarione (1898)
Échos d’Orient (1898)
Anton F. Haddad (1902)
‘Abdullah al-Ma’mun al-Suhrawardy (1904 and 1905) Sultan ‘Abd al-Hamid II (1904)
Sésostris Sidarouss (1907)
Jurji Zaydan (1907) (apocryphal but based on authentic covenants) Na‘um Shuqayr (1916)
Alberto M. Candioti (1925)

Muhammad Marmaduke Pickthall (1927)
Essad Bey (1936)
Porphyrios III (1937)
Jeanne Aubert (1938)
Edmond Poupe (1938)
Islamic Review (1940)
Joan Meredyth Chichele Plowden (1940) (not impossible)
Joaquim Pedro Oliveira Martins (1946)
‘Aziz Suryal Atiya (1955)
Albert Champdor (1963)
Alfred Nawrath (1963)
Hasan al-Shirazi (1967)
Stuart E. Rosenberg (1970) (cannot be proven or disproven)
Oleg V. Volkoff (1972) (neutral)
Robin Waterfield (1973)
Criton George Tornaritis (1980)
Le Figaro (1986)
Akram Zahoor and Z. Haq (1990)
Nikolaos Tomadakis (1990)
Konstantinos A. Manafis (1990)
Hieromonk Demetrios Digbassanis (1990)
Edwin Bernbaum (1990) (according to tradition; dating back at least to early Fatimid times) Nicole Levallois (1992)
Giovanna Magi (1993)

Joseph J. Hobbs (1995) (neutral)
Jacqueline Lafontaine-Dosogne (1996)
LaMar C. Berrett and D. Kelly Ogden (1996) Gawdat Gabra and Morsi Saad el-Din (1998)
Ansar Hussain (1999)
Hüseyn Hilmi Işik (2000)
Yusuf Islam [Cat Stevens] (2001)
Giovanni Magnani (2001)
Harun Yahya (2002)
Frederick Quinn (2002)
Let’s Go Inc. (2003)
Bruce Merry (2004)
J. Gordon Melton (2004)
Brian Paciotti (2004)
Reza Shah-Kazemi (2005)
R.W. McColl (2005)
Elizabeth A. Zachariadou (2005)
Martin Gray and Graham Hancock (2007) Jean-Pierre Isbouts (2007) (authentic according to tradition) K. Staikos (2007) (authentic according to tradition) David Douglas (2007)
Andrew Eames (2008)

National Geographic (2008) (authentic according to tradition)
‘Abdurrahman Wahid (2009)
David Dakake (2009)
Muqtedar Khan (2009)
Peer-Jada Qureshi (2009)
Mohamed el Hebeishy (2010)
J. Gordon Melton and Martin Baumann (2010)
Zia Shah (2011)
Raj Bhala (2011)
Hedieh Mirahmadi (2011)
Farhad Malekian (2011)
Ahmed Shams (2011)
Altaf Hussain (2011)
Zora O’Neill (2012)
Judy Hall (2012)
Areej Zufari (2012)
Kyriacos C. Markides (2012)
James Emery White (2012)
Helen C. Evans (2012)
Father Justin of Sinai (2012)
Pave the Way Foundation (2012)
Shemeem Burney Abbas (2013)
Nikos Kazantzakis (2013)
Timothy Wright (2013)
John Andrew Morrow (1990, 2012, 2013, 2015)
Scores of scholars and signatories to the Covenants Initiative too numerous to mention (since 2013)
John Watson (2014) (authentic according to tradition)
Brad Tyndall (2014)
Qasim Rashid (2014)
Muhammad Quraish Shihab (2014)
Zaid Shakir (2015)
Hamza Yusuf (2015)
Ronald H. Stone (2015)
Calum Samuelson (2015)
Alexander Winogradsky Frenkel (2015)
Sayyid ‘Ali Asghar (2015)
‘Azizah al-Hibri (2016)
Ahmed El-Wakil (2016)

The Covenant of the Prophet Muhammad with the Christians of Najran

Authenticated by
The Prophet Muhammad (d. 632 CE)
The Companions of the Prophet (7th century CE) Abu Bakr, ‘Umar, ‘Uthman, and ‘Ali (632-661 CE)

Waqidi (745-822 CE)
Ibn Ishaq (d. 761 or 770 CE) / Ibn Hisham (d. 833 CE)
Muqatil ibn Sulayman al-Balkhi (d. 767)
Abu Yusuf (d. 798 CE)
Muhammad ibn al-Hasan al-Shaybani (d. 805 CE)
Yahya ibn Adam (d. 818 CE)
Abu ‘Ubayd (728-825 CE)
Ibn Zanjawayh (d. 865 CE)
Abu Dawud (817-889 CE)
Habib the Monk (878-879 CE)
Baladhuri (d. 892 CE)
Ya‘qubi (897-898 CE)
Chronicle of Seert (9th century CE)
Shaykh al-Mufid (11th century CE)
Abu al-Futuh al-Razi (1078-1157 or 1161 CE)
Fakhr al-Din al-Razi (1149-1209 CE)
Bar Hebraeus (1226-1286 CE)
Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyyah (1292–1350 CE)
Ibn Kathir (1301–1373)
Maris (12th century CE)
Qalqashandi (1355 or 1356-1418 CE)
Amrus (14th century CE)
Giuseppe Simonio Assemani (1721)
‘Abdullah al-Ma’mun al-Suhrawardy (1904 and 1905)
Muhammad Siddique Qureshi (1991)
Abu Muhammad Ordoni (1992)
Muhammad ‘Amarah (2002)
Harun Yahya (2002)
‘Adil Salahi (2002)
Milka Levy-Rubin (2011)
John Andrew Morrow (2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017)
Scores of scholars and signatories to the Covenants Initiative too numerous to mention (since 2013)
Yasin T. al-Jibouri (2014)
Ahmed El-Wakil (2016)

The Covenant of the Prophet Muhammad with the Christians of the World

Authenticated by
The Prophet Muhammad (d. 632 CE)
The Companions of the Prophet (7th century CE) Abu Bakr, ‘Umar, ‘Uthman, and ‘Ali (632-661 CE) Tabari (838-923 CE)
Mas‘udi (896-956 CE CE)
Caliph Muqtafi II of Baghdad (1138 CE)
Ibn al-Athir (1160–1233 CE)

Bar Hebraeus (1226-1286 CE)
Maris (12th century CE)
Amrus (14th century CE)
Father Pacifique Scaliger (found in 1629; dated 1538 CE) René de l’Escale Pacifique de Provins Scaliger (1627) Louis XIII, King of France (1601-1643)

André Du Ryer (c. 1580-1660)
Jacobo Nagy de Harsany (b. 1615)
Gabriel Sionita (1630)
Antoine Vitray (1630)
M.J. Fabricius (1638)
Claudius Salmasius (d. 1653)
Johann Georg Nissel (1655; 1661)
L. Addison (1679)
Giovani Paolo Marana (1642-1693)
Des grossen Propheten und Apostels Muhammad’s Testament… (1664) Pierre Briot and Paul Ricaut (1668 CE)
Abraham Hinckleman (1690)
Henri Basnage de Beauval (1657-1710)
Eusѐbe Renaudot (1646-1720)
A.C. Zeller R. Abrah. b. Dior (1724)
Claude-Pierre Goujet (1758)
Edward Gibbon (1776)
Comité d’instruction publique de la Convention Nationale (1795) Jean-Baptiste Lefebvre de Villebrune (1795)
Societe d’Amis de la Religion et de la Patrie (1797)
Asiatic Annual Register (1801)
Ministers from various Evangelical Denominations (1839)
C.B. Houry (1840)

Henry Layard (1850)
Jakobs Georgios Pitzipios-Bey (1858) Sir Travers Twiss (1809-1897) Pedro de Madrazo (1816-1898) Edward Rehatsek (1819-1891)
M. Grassi (Alfio) (1826) Alexandre de Miltitz (1838) Alphonse de Lamartine (1862) Edward Van Dyke (1881)

Henry Layard (1850)
‘Abdullah al-Suhrawardy (1904 and 1905) James Thayer Addison (1887-1953) Sésostris Sidarouss (1907) Meletius IV (1922)
Ibrahim Auwad (1933)
Jeanne Aubert (1938)
Edmond Poupe (1938)

Nikēphoros Moschopoulos (1956)
Joseph Hajjar (1962)
Abdullah Alladin (1971)
Josée Balagna (1984)
Mithoo Coorlawala (2011)
John Andrew Morrow (2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017)
Scores of scholars and signatories to the Covenants Initiative too numerous to mention (since 2013)

Ahmed El-Wakil (2016)

The Covenant of the Prophet Muhammad with the Assyrian Christians

Authenticated by
The Prophet Muhammad (d. 632 CE)
The Companions of the Prophet (7th century CE)
Abu Bakr, ‘Umar, ‘Uthman, and ‘Ali (632-661 CE)
Maris (12th century CE)
Bar Hebraeus (1226-1268 CE)
Amrus (14th century CE)
Asahel Grant (1841)
Horatio Southgate (1856)
Adolphe d’Avril (1864)
Thomas William Marshall (1865)
Bedr Khan Beg (d. 1868), his son, and his grandson
Vital Cuinet (1891)
Saturnino Ximénèz (1895)
Earl Percy (1902)
Society for the Propagation of the Gospel in Foreign Parts (1904)
William Ainser Wigram (1910, 1920 and 1929)
Abraham Yohannan (1916)
Surma D’Bait Dar Shimun (1920)
J.G. Browne (1937)
Jeanne Aubert (1938)
George David Malech (1910)
William Chauncey Emhardt and George M. Lamsa (1970)
Carleton Stevens Coon (1972)
John Joseph (1983)
Gabriele Yonan (1996)
A.M. Hamilton (2004)
R.S. Stafford (2006)
Theodore D’Mar Shimun (2008)
Albert Edward Ismail Yelda (2001, 2002, 2004)
Areej Zufari (2012)
John Andrew Morrow (2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017)
Scores of scholars and signatories to the Covenants Initiative too numerous to mention (since 2013)

Ahmed El-Wakil (2016)

The Covenant of the Prophet Muhammad with the Christians of Persia

Authenticated by
The Prophet Muhammad (d. 632 CE)
Witnessed by the Companions of the Prophet (7th century CE)
Abu Bakr, ‘Umar, ‘Uthman, and ‘Ali (632-661 CE)
Sebēos (660 CE)
Ja‘far al-Sadiq (8th century CE)
Maris (12th century)
Bar Hebraeus (1226-1286 CE)
Amrus (14th century CE)
Shah ‘Abbas and Safavid Shi‘ite scholars (1606)
Leon Arpee (1948)
John Andrew Morrow (2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017)
Scores of scholars and signatories to the Covenants Initiative too numerous to mention (since 2013 CE)
Ahmed El-Wakil (2016 CE)

N.B. For a complete study of the sources that support the genuine nature of the Covenants of the Prophet, kindly refer to “The Provenance of the Prophet’s Covenants” in Islam and the People of the Book (Cambridge Scholars, 2017).

In addition to the bare question of authorship, I have identified what I believe are two “hurdles” to Christian acceptance of the Covenants of the Prophet Muhammad. The first is the notion that the intent behind our work in disseminating these documents is simply to “whitewash” Islam, to give it a better public relations image. Nothing could be further from the truth. While some Muslims may believe that the Covenants can be used for this purpose, in reality they represent a powerful challenge to Muslims to renounce both active terrorism (which, as we will see, actually excludes those who practice it from the Muslim fold) and their half- conscious, passive acceptance of terrorists as “people whose methods we abhor, but who are still ‘our guys’”, and follow the explicit commands of our Prophet. [See my article “The Covenants of the Prophet: A Call to Repentance” at https://covenantsoftheprophet.org/2017/05/30/the- covenants-of-the-prophet-a-call-to-repentance/ ] Far from “making Islam look good”, the Covenants of the Prophet Muhammad make those Muslims who are still reluctant to treat Christians and other non-Muslim religious groups with simple human decency look decidedly bad. While the vast majority of Muslims, an estimated 93%, reject jihadism, a certain reluctance to come out strongly against it is still apparent in some population groups. This is due to a mixture of shame at the bad name the jihadists are giving Islam around the world, a very real fear of terrorist reprisals if they are openly condemned, and the general passivity of human nature, irrespective of race or religion. Some Muslims still see groups like ISIS as the “black sheep” of the Muslim family, lowlife relatives whose shameful actions must be hushed up. The Covenants, however, have begun to give some of us the courage to go beyond passive shame and actively break identification with these mad dogs, based on an understanding that that they are in open violation of the Qur’an, the Islamic doctrine of just war, and the explicit commands of the Prophet—not to mention the fact that their Muslim victims far outnumber their Christian ones. This excommunication of the jihadists as intrinsically un-Islamic was formalized in August, 2016 at a conference in Grozny, Chechnnya, sponsored by Russia, which included Grand Shaykh of Al-Azhar and a number of Grand Muftis. The conference issued a group fatwa, explicitly declaring that “Salafi-takfirists, Daesh (so-called ‘Islamic State’) and similar extremist groups” are not Muslims. The fatwa was seconded by a similar statement from the Russian Council of Muftis. [See http://chechnyaconference.org/material/chechnya-conference-statement-english.pdf For the full text of the Grozny Declaration.] In addition to the Declaration, the turn against Takfiri terrorism in the Muslim world has resulted in literally hundreds of other declarations and campaigns against the jihadists; links to thirty of the most important of these can be found here: https://ing.org/global-condemnations-of-isis-isil/

The second hurdle is the suspicion among certain Christians that the Covenants may be a kind of subtle Muslim plot, concealed under a show of false friendship, to return them to a state of second-class citizenship under the dhimmi system. If they will think for a minute, however, they will realize just how unlikely this is. Outside the short-lived and bogus “Caliphate” of ISIS, which is now in the process of being painfully de-constructed, and other efforts by Takfiri jihadists, nowhere in the world are Christians in danger of falling under Muslim rule outside of those nations long-considered to be part of Dar al-Islam. And if ISIS would grant dhimmi status to the Christians who have temporarily fallen under their yoke rather than massacring them wholesale, the lot of Christians under their regime would be greatly improved. This is not likely, however: ISIS and the other Takfiri terrorists hate the Covenants of the Prophet since these documents explicitly define them as laboring under the curse of Allah and his Prophet; there is even some indication that Da’esh may be searching for whatever Prophetic Covenants might remain in their conquered territories, possibly housed in ancient monasteries, in order to destroy them. As for the situation of Christians in Muslim-majority nations, no nation that is not officially Muslim could conceivably have the authority to enforce the provisions of the Covenants after a century-long hiatus, which in any case would require renewed negotiations between Christians and Muslims, like those that took place in the Prophet’s time, before both parties agreed to the terms of any particular new treaty based on the Covenants model. The rights granted to Christians under the Covenants, which lay both duties and rights on Muslims as well as Christians, if they could be renewed today would certainly represent an improvement in the status of Christians in some Muslim-majority nations—Turkey for example, where an enforcement the provision that Christians must not be prohibited from repairing their buildings would represent a real gain for the Christian population. Such a development, however, seems highly unlikely from many points of view.

It is the position of the Covenants Initiative that, in the absence of a Muslim political entity like the Ottoman Empire, or a viable plan to renew the Covenants within an officially Muslim nation such as Iran—which would require equitable negotiations between Christians and Muslims involving a detailed revision and updating of the terms of the original agreements, thus doing away with their status as actual Covenants of the Prophet—another approach is required. Muslims, whether or not they are part of the ulama (the religious authorities), need to discern the basic intent of the Prophet Muhammad in drafting these documents, and make it their own. Muslims must embrace the spirit of the Covenants as individuals, and then try their best to prevail upon their governments to embrace that spirit as well—because the Prophet did not declare the Covenants binding upon all Muslims only until the fall of the Ottoman Empire, but until the end of time. Anyone who reads the texts of the Prophetic Covenants will necessarily be struck with the great respect and admiration Muhammad felt toward the followers of Jesus, expressed in terms of a noble and chivalrous pledge to defend them from all who would menace them, non-Muslims and Muslims alike.

It is also necessary to mention that, while groups like ISIS certainly seek membership among Muslims with Wahhabi or Takfiri/Salafi beliefs, plenty of evidence is now emerging that ISIS itself was formed with help from the West as part of its geopolitical brinksmanship against Syria, Russia and Iran; see the article in the Guardian by Seumas Milne, “Now the truth emerges: how the US fuelled the rise of Isis in Syria and Iraq” at https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jun/03/us-isis-syria-iraq?CMP=share_btn_fb

It only remains to say that, as soon as Christian leaders have satisfied themselves as to the validity of the Covenants of the Prophet, their existence should be widely publicized, and no effort spared in getting them into the hands of the Christian communities who need them. The Covenants of the Prophet Muhammad with the Christians of the World is quite a hefty volume; it contains exhaustive arguments, both textual and historical, for the validity of the Covenants, and provides a great deal of background. More appropriate for bulk distribution is the pamphlet-sized Six Covenants of the Prophet Muhammad with the Christians of His Time which contains only the actual texts of these documents. This book has already been translated into 14 languages: English, Arabic, French, Spanish, Italian, Portuguese, Persian, Turkish, Dutch, Indonesian, Tamil, Russian, Azeri and Urdu. The English and Azeri editions have already appeared. As soon as various arrangements for publication of the rest have been finalized, we intend to make them available in bulk, free of change, to any Christian leader who can show us a viable plan for their distribution to Christian communities presently under terrorist threat, or possibly vulnerable to such threat in the future.

As opposed to the more usual interfaith initiatives, where religious dignitaries meet and smile at each other in various “safe spaces”, in contexts that exert a subtle but constant pressure upon them to soft-pedal any “divisive” doctrines, the Covenants Initiative neither requires nor encourages any degree of doctrinal agreement between Christians and Muslims. Rather, it is an example of what I call “united front ecumenism”: the will to make alliances between the faiths in the face of common enemies. Christians need not accept Muhammad as rasul Allah, a Messenger sent by God. All that’s required is that they accept him as a religious leader with a great respect and veneration for the followers of Jesus, one sworn to defend them against all comers. As for how the Six Covenants of the Prophet Muhammad with the Christians of His Time and our other documents might be used by Christian communities in danger of attack, it’s pretty obvious that showing them to the Takfiris themselves would be worse than useless; the Takfiris care nothing about the commands and prohibitions of the Prophet Muhammad, and often react with violence against those who do. However, this book could be of great help to Christians in establishing ties with local Muslims who, while in no way supporting terrorism, may be uncertain as to how to respond in a situation where armed Takfiris claiming to be Muslims are beginning to issue threats, or have already appeared in force. We would be glad to provide any interested Christian leader with single copies of The Covenants of the Prophet Muhammad with the Christians of the World and Six Covenants of the Prophet Muhammad with the Christians of His Time, free of charge. In return we hope that these leaders will begin to consider how the books could best be distributed to local Christian communities in various parts of the world. Upon submission of viable plans for such distribution, we will to provide additional copies of Six Covenants of the Prophet Muhammad with the Christians of His Time, also free of charge, so they can be forwarded to Christians in need of the kind of protection they could potentially provide.

Let any Christian leader or activist who is interested in receiving one copy of each of The Covenants of the Prophet Muhammad with the Christians of the World (now available in English and Italian, and hopefully soon in Arabic) and Six Covenants of the Prophet Muhammad with the Christians of His Time, free of charge, place his or her order via the contact form at http://www.covenantsoftheprophet.com/ As already noted, only the English and the Azeri versions of the Six Covenants are presently available; please feel free, however, to request a copy in Arabic, French, Spanish, Italian, Portuguese, Persian, Turkish, Dutch, Indonesian, Tamil, Russian or Urdu; we will provide one, again free of charge, as soon as it is published in the language you’ve requested.

In conclusion, please don’t take too long to decide whether or not to participate; these documents can save lives.

Mvslim (July 23, 2017)

Dr. John Andrew Morrow, an American academic and interfaith activist, has filed a harassment complaint against a US Marine.

“The amount of hate mail that I receive is disconcerting,” stated Morrow. “Like my colleagues, Craig Considine, Qasim Rashid, Catherine Shakdam, and others, I am subjected to abuse for the sole sin of promoting peace, understanding, and co-existence.”

Although Morrow has been at the forefront of the ideological war against Takfirism, Wahhabism, and pseudo-Islamic terrorism for several years, the attacks he has received in recent history all come from Islamophobes. As he explains:

“It is not enough that I place my life in peril by denouncing Daesh and other extremist groups on a daily basis: Islamophobes hate all Muslims without distinction. To them, there is no difference between Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi and a little Muslim school-girl. We are all vermin to them. Their worldview is Hitlerian. Islamophobes are as hate-filled and violent as so-called Radical Islamists. They are two sides of the same coin.”

Like most religious leaders of Jewish, Christian or Muslim faith, Dr. Morrow reports all such incidents to Google, Gmail, Hotmail, YouTube, and appropriate authorities.

Asking why he decided to act in the case of Elmer Argomedo, Morrow did not mince his words: “If some random person insults on the street, I would be more than pleased to return the greeting. However, when a uniformed member of the military engages in harassment, such behavior is absolutely intolerable.”

The culprit in question, Elmer Argomedo, sent Dr. Morrow an insulting message on June 17, 2017, in response to his video titled “Where are the Moderate Muslims?” in which the scholar refutes the Islamophobic allegations of a certain Hussein Aboubakr.

While Argomedo looks respectable in uniform, one should never judge a book by its cover. A man is judged by his words and actions. They are a reflection of his character.

Responding to Morrow’s claims that Muslims should not be condemned for laws found in their religious texts any more than Jews and Christians should be condemned for the laws found in the Bible, the US Marine responded in the following fashion:

“soooooooooo ?? because it is in the bible we all the same too ?? i do not get it. Who the fuck care if is in the bible or not ? the thing is we do not do the same shit as the majority of muslims (…) …”

In Argomedo’s view, Jews and Christians do not follow the penal code found in the Bible. In his mind, most Muslims believe in implementing the corporal punishments contained in the shariah. If he were more educated and less overly emotional, he would find that such a gross overgeneralization is false. Most Muslims have no interest in resurrecting Old Testament style punishments.

While Morrow is ready to let most civilian insults slide, placing trust in divine justice, he is not prepared to be harassed by a person who openly and proudly professes to be a member of the US military; in this case, a person from the Marine Corps Air Station Cherry Point in North Carolina.

“How would Elmer Argomedo feel,” asks Morrow, if someone said that Latinos were illegals, criminals, drug-dealers, and rapists?” “I cannot comprehend,” he continues, “how a member of a minority can stereotype and discriminate against other minority groups.” As Morrow explains,

“The level of animosity against Islam and Muslims on the part of some Hispanic-Americans is certainly alarming. In fact, on June 18th, another Islamophobic Latino, 22-year old Darwin Martinez Torres, an illegal alien from El Salvador, kidnapped, sexually assaulted, and beat to death a 17-year old Muslim girl with a baseball bat after she left a local mosque. If Muslims are a threat to America, what about Islamophobic Latinos? And what happens when such hateful people are deployed to Muslim countries? There are consequences to that.”

Morrow, one of the leaders of the Covenants Initiative and the Genocide Initiative, was credited by Stars & Stripes, the major US armed services publication, for contributing to the passage of the Fortenberry Resolution in 2016 which labeled ISIS as war criminals who were guilty of genocide.

To attack a patriot, like Morrow, who has been consulted by the Obama and Trump administrations, along with other world leaders, on issues of counter-terrorism is entirely un-American and counter-productive. Anyone who opposes Morrow for trying to neutralize extremists and terrorists on all sides of the spectrum, and bring Muslims, Christians, and Jews closer together, can only be someone who wishes to foster discord between them. Clearly, Morrow is a man of peace whereas the Marine in question is a man of war.

Although Dr. Morrow is not a Marine, he will not tolerate being abused by a Marine, nor is he prepared to allow him to harass others with impunity. Besides being an Islamophobe, who stereotypes all Muslims as being terrorists, Elmer Argomedo promotes violence against people because of their sexual orientation. For example, he liked a video titled “How Trannies Get Beat Up.” Since he engages in harassment while identifying himself as military personnel from the Marine Corps Air Station Cherry Point, the US military could be held vicariously liable for his actions.

In response to the scandals caused by the misconduct of male Marines harassing female Marines by posting sexually explicit photos of the latter online, the Commanding General, T.D. Weidley, has the following words to say:

“On-line sexual harassment, threats of violence, and other misconduct that demeans, degrades, and bullies fellow Marines is absolutely unacceptable. This despicable behavior cuts at the very core of who we are as Marines and erodes the sacred trust and confidence we place in each other as Marines. We owe it to each and every Marine to maintain world class installations that not only prepare warriors to go into harm’s way, but also foster a culture of pride, dignity, and respect. If you witness this type of online activity, report it immediately.”

By filing a complaint against Elmer Argomedo for online harassment, Morrow was simply following the recommendations of the US Military. As far as the latter is concerned,

“Islamophobic, homophobic, transphobic, and intolerant individuals like Elmer Argomedo are unfit to serve in the armed forces of our great nation. As Commanding General T.D. Weidley states, ‘A Marine is a Marine 24/7… even online.’ They must respect themselves and respect others and when they serve, they serve ALL AMERICANS regardless of their race, ethnicity, religion or sexual orientation. And if people like Elmer Argomedo do not like it, and have no respect for the American Constitution and the Bill of Rights, let them ship off and ship out. Go back to where you came from! This is America: love it or leave it!

This article is written by Hanan al-Harbi. 

Morocco World News

83 Years Old and Graduating from First Grade: Why Women Education Matters in Morocco

By John Andrew Morrow

The success story of Fatimah Ouaziz, who decided to enter elementary school in her 80s, shows that providing women with equal and fair access to education will allow Morocco to further its commitments to human rights and economic development.

“Allah tasketh not a soul beyond its scope” (2:286)

“Fatimah is one of our most inspiring students,” explains her instructor. “Although it took her three years to pass grade one, her attendance record was stellar, her hard work was unparalleled, and her accomplishment well-earned.”

Born in the tiny town of Tazoughart in the Middle Atlas of Morocco, Fatimah Ouaziz suffered through the famine provoked by the secular French occupiers during the French “Protectorate.”

From an Amazigh family, she grew up speaking Tamazight. Like most Moroccans of the time, the lively little girl was deprived of even a basic education.

Since the traditional Islamic school system was dismantled by the French, and mosques could no longer operate as a medium of literacy teaching, Fatimah, like millions of others, became part of a lost generation that mastered neither French nor Classical Arabic. While Moroccans could speak Berber languages and Darija, the Moroccan Colloquial Arabic dialect, they could neither read nor write them.

Like most Moroccan girls in the mid-half of the 20th century, Fatimah was married in her early teens to a man nearly ten years older, named Moha Bejja, who was already twice divorced. Fortunately for her, he was found to be a kind, caring, and compassionate man who abhorred misogyny. As a traditional Middle Atlas Berber, he had never absorbed Arabic cultural influences in matters of gender relations. He was more matriarchal than he was patriarchal.

Fatimah raised a family of eight in both Beni Tedjit and Bouarfa. After her husband passed away in 2007, and she completed two pilgrimages to Mecca, she became determined to acquire literacy. “Teach me to read,” she would ask family members, who brushed her off with a smirk or a shake of the head, thinking she was far too old to learn to read in her seventies. After all, she had never completed any studies in her life. A mind is like a muscle, the family figured, it atrophies if it remains unused. Like the proverbial Little Train, Fatimah persisted: “I think I can, I think I can, I think I can.” And she clearly could. Where there is a will, there is certainly a way.

As if her prayers were answered, the Kingdom of Morocco instituted a series of important reforms over the past few years. In response to the rise of intolerance, King Mohammed VI, who holds the official title of “Leader of the Believers,” hosted a gathering of hundreds of religious scholars that resulted in the Marrakesh Declaration, a reaffirmation of the rights of religious minorities in Muslim-majority countries.

In response to the rise of extremism and fundamentalism, a phenomenon that is inextricably linked to misogynistic misinterpretations of religion, the King of Morocco set into motion plans to place women imams in all mosques. If gender relations were imbalanced, with men dominating Islamic discourse, the presence of educated and empowered women would help bring matters back into balance.

Unlike other Muslim-majority countries where women are discouraged or prohibited from entering mosques for prayer, Moroccan mosques have always been open to women. Their sections, however, have been substandard and most attendees have always been men. Since women play such an important role in the education of children and the transmission of faith, the Kingdom of Morocco determined that it was imperative for women to acquire a better understanding of Islam to protect and reassert their God-given rights.

Permitting women to attend mosques is nothing new. As the Prophet Muhammad himself commanded, “Do not prevent the female servants of Allah from attending the mosque” (cited by Abu Dawud and Muslim). In Malaysia, Vietnam, Thailand, and Indonesia, women are provided prayer sections that are as large as those provided to men.

Rather than be relegated to the back of the building, Muslim women in south-east Asia are often given a vast balcony providing them with a panoramic view of the mosque. In other cases, the mosques are split down the middle, with a simple line or a modest, symbolic barrier, distinguishing between the women’s side and the men’s side. The mosques are in gender harmony: half for women and half for men, standing side by side in equal sections, without either feeling like second-class citizens.

Although women imams exist in all parts of the Muslim world, they are not very common, with the notable exception of China. In the Far East of the Muslim world, there exists a long tradition of female imams who lead, educate, and guide female congregations. In China, there are mosques for men, with male imams, and mosques for women, with female imams.

The desire of the Moroccan Kingdom to open mosques to women also has important economic implications. As empirical evidence indicates, the development of nations is directly related to the education of its women. When women are illiterate, countries are chronically underdeveloped. When women are literate, countries are developed. To educate and empower women is the path to progress.

No longer limited to places of prostration, opened only during prayer time, and closed immediately thereafter, mosques in Morocco have been given a new life, meaning, and purpose. Many of them are now operating as schools, as they did during the Golden Age of Islam, not only for children, but for adults as well, and not only for boys and men, but for girls and women as well.

Every day for three years, Fatimah would rise early in the morning, shower, get dried, get dressed, eat breakfast, pack her schoolbag, and head off to school at the local mosque. There, women teachers, the new female imams hired by the Kingdom of Morocco, would teach the pupils, senior citizens in this case, how to read, write, count, and do basic math.

The curriculum is grade one: all the same subjects as taken by six- and seven-year-old children in elementary school. Some of the senior citizen students struggle. Some succeed. And some fail. In Fatimah’s case, she was forced to repeat grade one a full three times. The third time, however, was a charm and Lala Fatimah Ouaziz Bejja passed with honors. “God commanded us to read,” explains this sweet sharifah, “I heard and I obeyed.”

Fatimah had a dream. She pursued that dream. She persisted when everyone, even her family members and in-laws were convinced she could never learn to read and write due to her advanced age.

Forgive me, my beloved mother-in-law, forgive me for failing to teach you when you asked. I am so proud of you and so ashamed of myself. You had the strength to learn to read in your eighties while I was too weak to teach you in my forties.

By: John Andrew Morrow

Source: IslamiCity

Jul 15, 2017

Delivered at the Interfaith Banquet at the 54th ISNA Convention in Chicago, Illinois, on Sunday, July 2, 2017, in the presence of over two hundred interfaith and government leaders from the Jewish, Christian, and Muslim communities.

A‘udhu billahi min al-Shaytan al-rajim. Bismillah al-Rahim al-Rahim. Alhamdulillahi rabb al-‘alamin. Salawatu wa salaam ‘ala al-nabi al-karim, Muhammad al-Amin, wa ‘ala alihi wa sahbibi ajma‘in.

I take refuge in Allah from Satan, the Rejected. In the Name of Allah, the Most Compassionate, the Most Merciful. Praise be to Allah, the Lord of the Worlds. Peace and blessings be upon the noble prophet, Muhammad, the Truthful and the Trustworthy, as well as all of Family and Companions.

WA QUL: JA’A AL-HAQQU WA ZAHAQA AL-BATILU; INNA AL-BATILU KANA ZAHUQAN
AND SAY: “TRUTH HATH COME AND FALSEDHOOD HATH VANISHED AWAY. LO! FALSEHOOD IS EVER BOUND TO VANISH.” (17:81)

I begin with words of thanks and gratitude to Almighty Allah, glorified and exalted be He, to the Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him, to Dr. Kareem Irfan, to President Azhar Azeez, to Dr. Mohamed El-Sanousi, to Sayyidah Catherine Osborne, to Sidi Farooq Kathwari, to Sayyidah Katherine Lohre, to Bishop Jake, to Bishop Burkat, to Bishop Miller, to Imam Anwar, to Bishop Eaton, to Dr. Sayyid Syeed, and to all our friends and supporters for the amazing work that they have done, and continue to do, in the path of Humanity and the Divinity. Congratulations to you all for your accomplishments. Please give them a round of applause.

I have been invited to comment upon the Covenants Initiative, an international movement of Muslims committed to spreading the letters, treaties, and covenants of the Prophet Muhammad, blessings and peace be upon him, his family, and his faithful companions.

The Covenants of the Prophet are found in Jewish, Samaritan, Christian, Zoroastrian, and Muslim sources. They are found in books of hadith, books of Qur’anic commentary, books of Islamic jurisprudence, and books of history. They also survive in ancient manuscripts that were passed down over the past 1400 years. They are like gold nuggets in a sandy river. They are like diamonds among stones.

It was only with the publication of The Covenants of the Prophet Muhammad with the Christians of the World in 2013 that knowledge of the letters, treaties, and covenants of the Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him, truly became widespread throughout the world. Thanks to the Covenants Initiative, and all its partners, the foremost of which is ISNA, the Covenants of the Prophet Muhammad with the People of the Book came out of scholarly obscurity and have now become a powerful global force with serious socio-political and spiritual consequences. The Covenants are now available in English, Spanish, Italian, and Arabic, as well as a dozen other major world languages. We are spearheading a dozen different initiatives to disseminate them.

Since its publication, this book and the movement it sparked has been the subject of over 600 articles, including one in Forbes magazine in May of this year, as well as numerous video, radio, and television speeches and interviews. The Covenants Initiative has been signed by prominent Muslim scholars and leaders from many parts of the world, including influential figures from al-Azhar University.

The Covenants of the Prophet with the Christians of the World has been featured on the website of Ayatullah Khamenei, the Leader of Iran, and garnered support from Francis, Pope of Rome; Bartholomew, the Eastern Orthodox Ecumenical Patriarch; Theophilos III, Patriarch of Jerusalem; the Holy Fathers from Mount Sinai and Simonopetras, along with many other religious leaders, including Jews, Christians, and Muslims.

The Covenants of the Prophet Muhammad were invoked in the House of Lords in London in the summer of 2014. In Autumn of 2015, the Covenants Initiative sponsored a petition, the Genocide Initiative, to have the actions of ISIS declared “genocide” and “war crimes,” which — as confirmed by an article in Stars and Stripes — was one of the factors leading to the unanimous passage by the House of Representatives of the Fortenberry Resolution, and the subsequent statement to the same effect by Secretary of State John Kerry.

The Covenants of the Prophet, which includes the Covenant of Medina, were factors that contributed to the Marrakesh Declaration in January of 2016, reaffirming the traditional rights of religious minorities in Muslim lands. They are being used by Muslim and non-Muslim groups across planet Earth for interfaith work and counter-radicalization.

In April of 2016, I was honored to receive an Interfaith Leadership Award from the Islamic Society of North America and was part of a delegation of Muslim leaders who met with senior administrators in the Obama White House. The Covenants Initiative has advised the Organization for Islamic Cooperation. The Covenants Initiative has advised religious and political leaders from dozens of different countries. The Covenants Initiative has advised the Obama administration and admonished the Trump administration. Yes, you heard me, admonished the Trump administration. We are doing our very best to share the concerns of the Muslim Community with the current President of the United States. As Almighty Allah says in the Holy Qur’an: “Indeed, We have sent you, [O Muhammad], with the truth as a bringer of good tidings and a warner, and you will not be asked about the companions of Hellfire” (2:119). Our duty is to warn. We are obliged to engage. We must speak truth to power. Come what may.

To sum up, since its inception, the movement begun by The Covenants of the Prophet Muhammad with the Christians of the World has become an international phenomenon in the Muslim world. There is no better sign of its global influence than the fact that, after the recent Takfiri attack on the Catholic Cathedral in the Philippines, the Covenants of the Prophet were immediately cited by no fewer than seven news outlets on the island of Mindanao as proof that the attack was un-Islamic. Muslim leaders from Mindanao, both political and religious, all invoked the Covenants of the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him.

Alhamdulillah, praise be to Allah, the Covenants of the Prophet have become common knowledge. Let us honor them for as Almighty Allah warns in the Glorious Qur’an: “And those who break the covenant of Allah after ratifying it, and sever that which Allah hath commanded should be joined, and make mischief in the earth: theirs is the curse and theirs the ill abode” (13:25).

I send you greetings of peace from a man of peace, a religion of peace, and a people of peace: and social justice: Al-salaamu ‘alaykum wa rahmatullahi wa barakatuh. May the peace, mercy, and blessings of Allah be upon you all.

By Dr. John Andrew Morrow (Shaykh Ilyas Islam)

Delivered at the 54th Annual ISNA Convention on Friday, June 30, 2017, in Chicago, Illinois

A‘udhu billahi min al-Shaytin al-rajim. Bismillah al-Rahman al-Rahim. Alhamdulillahi rabb al-‘alamin wa salawat ‘ala khatim al-nabiyyin, Muhammad al-Amin, wa ‘ala alihi wa sahbihi ajma‘in.

I take refuge in Allah from Satan the Rejected. In the Name of Allah, the Most Compassionate, the Most Merciful. Praise be to Allah, the Lord of the Worlds, and blessed be the Seal of the Prophets, Muhammad, the Truthful and the Trustworthy, as well as all his Family and Companions.

Ladies and gentlemen. Brothers and Sisters. Distinguished panelists. I wish you all a warm welcome to the 54th Annual ISNA Convention and thank you for selecting this session on the most timely of topics: The Role of Faith in a Culture of Fear.

Welcome to America! A country rooted in fear: the fear of the First Nations, the savages who, in many ways, were far more noble than the civilized. A country rooted in the fear of African slaves and ex-slaves who grew so numerous that they posed a threat to the white supremacists and colonialists who brought them here in the first place. A country rooted in the fear of foreigners, particularly the Hispanic, feared by the capitalists who brought them here by the millions as a source of cheap labor. A country founded on the fear communists, a convenient excuse to engage in wars of imperial domination on a planetary scale.

And now, a country founded on the fear of Islam and Muslims, a pretext to attack, destroy, invade, and occupy sovereign nations for highly profitable geo-political purposes. They make a killing by killing. Billions of bucks to buy bombs. They make a killing by stealing natural resources. Billions of dollars in fossil fuels and the building of pipelines for natural gas. And they make a killing by rebuilding. Billions of dollars in business deals.

Don’t get me wrong. I love America. I am America. I am part French Canadian and part First Nations: Michif-Otipemisiwak: 500,000 strong, in Canada, and the United States. Proud to be Métis. We hold no grudges. We have no hatred in our hearts. As our elders teach us, “Meet hatred with love. Meet evil with good.”

We live in a culture of fear. The foreign policy of the US government and the Western world contributes to this culture of fear both internationally and nationally. The corporate-controlled mass media is now devoid of any real connection to journalism. They are propaganda engines that pump out sensationalistic one-sided stories that stoke the flames of fear.

Muslims, in particular, are stigmatized, demonized, and dehumanized. The media blames Muslims for terrorism. The media expects Muslims to bear the burden of blame for the thousands of victims of terrorist actions, actions that Muslims neither committed nor condoned. The media also ignores the fact that Muslims make up 95% of the victims of terrorism.

The media focuses on the thousands of innocent people killed by terrorists while completely ignoring the fact that the “War on Terror” has killed millions upon millions of innocent Muslims. That death-count speaks for itself: the War on Terror has become a War of Terror.

The foreign policy of the United States can only be described as a Sick Circle. The CIA supports Takfiri extremists in the Muslim world as part of its proxy wars: the Mujahidin and the Taliban in Afghanistan, the Takfiris in Libya, and the Takfiris in Iraq and Syria. They use them to fight their enemies: the Russians, the Libyans, the Syrians, and the Iranians.

The conflict caused by these Takfiri terrorists provides grounds for military intervention in the region. The Americans and their allies get embroiled in actions abroad. The terrorist groups that they have supported all along turn around and target the Western world. This heightens sentiments of Islamophobia.

If Westerners witnessed the atrocities committed by Western governments in the Muslim world, public opinion would turn against them. They would demand an end to military actions. If they saw images of the millions of civilians that were slaughtered by their governments, they would be protesting in the streets. There would be an Anti-War Movement like the one that existed during the Vietnam Era.

So, what do you do? How do you ensure that the public continues to support the War on Terror which is really a War on Islam and Muslims? By means of terrorist attacks. By means of false flag operations. That way, the eternal and endless war of the globalist, totalitarian, fascists, continues unabated to the pleasure of Big Brother or, as we known him in Islam, the One-Eyed Liar. The philosophy is clear: keep the focus on fear. So, let us examine the issue of fear, its dangers, and its consequence.

As Imam ‘Ali, radi Allahu ‘anhu, may Allah be pleased with him, the first Imam and third Caliph of Islam stated: “People are enemies of what they do not know.” In other words, people fear what they know not. Ignorance leads to fear. Fear leads to hatred. Hatred leads to violence. And violence leads to suffering. I sound like Yoda. I know many of you have thought about it but it is high time for someone to say it: Yoda is a Muslim and all the Jedi Masters are Muslims. They believe in the Force. They believe in Eternal Life. They abide by a code of morality and they adhere to a path of spirituality.

So, what is fear? A phobia is a fear: an extreme or irrational fear of or aversion to something. There are literally hundreds of phobias. In some cases, the phobic person feels sentiments of dislike, disapproval, prejudice, hatred, discrimination, and hostility towards the object of the phobia. Ignorance is the breeding ground of fear. It is the petri dish in which the bacteria of fear is cultivated.

Fear of the unknown is a survival mechanism. Human beings lived in family groups, in family clans, and in tribes for tens of thousands of years. People who were known to you, people who looked like you, people who acted like you, and people who spoke like you were a sense of security and safety.

Outsiders or Others were unknown. They were un-vetted. They were viewed and treated as a threat. This fear of the unfamiliar is the root of tribalism, racism, sectarianism, and nationalism. If unchecked, it gives rise to colonialism, imperialism, and globalism. It leads to death, destruction, and suffering. Hatred is the product of fear. Fear is the product of ignorance. So, what is the opposite of ignorance? Knowledge. So, what is the cure to ignorance? Knowledge.

The Prophet Muhammad, sallalahu ‘alayhi wa alihi wa salaam, made the seeking of knowledge obligatory on all Muslims, male and female. He told us to “Seek knowledge from the cradle to the grave.” He told us to “Seek knowledge, even in China.” He commanded his Companions to learn foreign languages and learn about other religions and cultures.

Knowledge is of two kinds. Knowledge of Self and knowledge of God. But both are intertwined. As the Messenger of Allah, ‘alayhi salawatu wa salam, said: “Whoever knows himself knows God.” The path to the Divinity passes through our singularity. Or, to help our young people comprehend: our souls are like cell-phones that are connected to the Master Server.

We are the mirrors in which God sees Himself. When we know ourselves, we know God. When we see ourselves, we should see God. Everything that exists is a manifestation of God. Everything that you see or sense is a sign of the Supreme. Every signifier points to the Signified.

As the Quechua-Aymara Indians teach their children when they are young: “As you see others they see you.” They instill in their children that they are the same as other children and other children are the same as them. They instill a sense of unity and humanity. If I see God in Myself and Myself in God, I will see God in Others and Others in God.

The Seven Grandfather Teachings of the Métis and other First Nations consist of Respect, Love, Truth, Bravery, Wisdom, Generosity, and Humility. The first Teaching or Commandment is Respect: Respect your fellow living beings. Do not look down upon others. They are all children of the Creator. The second Teaching is Love: Love yourself so that you can love others. The third Teaching is Truth: Judge yourself before judging others. In other words, focus on your own faults before focusing on the faults of other. Forget about your qualities and work on improving your shortcomings. When dealing with others, look at their strengths instead of their weaknesses.

The fourth Teaching is bravery, the product of right mind and right action. The fifth Teaching is Wisdom which is defined as eloquently expressing one’s ideas and the ideas of others. For indigenous people, wisdom is the ability to understand others. The sixth Teaching is Generosity which means the ability to meet the needs of others and to stand together. Finally, the seventh Teaching is Humility, namely, humbling oneself before other fellow human beings.

The traditional teachings of the Eastern Woodland Indians and Métis of North America are completely compatible with the traditional teachings of Islam. They are teachings based on Tawhid that were transmitted by the prophets, messengers, and friends of the Creator who were sent to the people of Turtle Island, the continent you know as the Americas.

We need ‘ilm or knowledge. We need ma‘rifah or direct knowledge of the Divinity. We need knowledge of Self that translate in knowledge of Others. As Almighty Allah, subhanahu wa ta‘ala, makes explicitly clear in al-Qur’an al-Karim:

O humankind! We created you from a single (pair) of a male and a female, and made you into nations and tribes, that ye may know each other (not that ye may despise (each other). Verily the most honored of you in the sight of Allah is (he who is) the most righteous of you. And Allah has full knowledge and is well acquainted (with all things). (49:13)

Humanity is called to Unity. We are called upon to be One with each other and to be One with the One. As the Prophet Muhammad, peace and blessings be upon him, said: “None of you has faith until you love for your neighbor what you love for yourself.” He did not say “Muslim neighbor.” He said neighbor. In short, the command applies to all human beings. As Almighty Allah asserts in the Holy Qur’an:

As for those who divide their religion and break up into sects, thou hast no part in them in the least: their affair is with Allah: He will in the end tell them the truth of all that they did. (6:159)

We must oppose destructive sectarianism in the Muslim Community. There can, and should, be diversity; however, there should also be unity within that diversity. As Muhammad, the Messenger of Allah, is reported to have stated: “Difference of opinion in my Community is a mercy for people” [ikhtilafu ummati rahmatun li al-nas]. We must move away from destructive theologies of hatred and injustice to constructive theologies of compassion and justice.

We must build bridges between the People of the Qiblah and the People of the Book, namely, between Muslims, Jews, and Christians. Speaking of the Ahl al-Kitab, Almighty Allah has this to say:

Not all of them are alike: Of the People of the Book are a portion that stand (For the right): They rehearse the Signs of Allah all night long, and they prostrate themselves in adoration. (3:113)

Jews and Christians are not all the same. They must never be condemned categorically. We, Muslims, have been stereotyped. Like us not do to others what we do not like others to do to us. As Imam ‘Ali, karama Allahu wahjuhu, may Allah bless his glorious countenance, said: “Our enemies are not the Jews or Christians, but our enemy is our own ignorance.”

If Jews, Samaritans, Christians, Zoroastrians, and members of other faith communities only understood each other better, they could come together on common ground. In fact, this is precisely what the Qur’an commands:

Say: O People of the Book! Come to a common word between us and you: that we shall worship none but God, and that we shall ascribe no partner unto Him, and that none of us shall take others for lords beside God. And if they turn away, then say: Bear witness that we are they who have surrendered (unto Him). (3:64)

The Ummah of Muhammad, the Community of the Prophet, was never the realm of exclusivism: it was always the real of pluralism. We must reconnect the Muslim masses with the true teachings of the Qur’an, the Sunnah, and the Shari‘ah. We must reconnect the Muslim masses with the true teachings of spirituality: tasawwuf and ‘irfan. We must reconnect the Muslim masses with ethical principles or akhlaq. We must reconnect the Muslims masses with a true understanding of history. And, most importantly, we must teach Muslims how to think critically so that they do not succumb to the scourge of literalism, fundamentalism, and extremism.

In America, today, in 2017, we live in a culture of fear. There are those what sow, fertilize, irrigate, and cultivate hatred. You reap what you sow. You sow what you reap. If you spread hatred and violence you get served with hatred and violence. It is a sick circle. Let us help break that cycle. The only way to fight fear is through faith. The only way to fight fear is through faith. The only way to fight ignorance, is through knowledge: knowledge of Self and Knowledge of God. So, let us pray together, in the words of the Glorious Qur’an: “O my Lord! Increase me in knowledge” [Rabbi zidini ‘ilma] (20:114).

Dr. John Andrew Morrow (Imam Ilyas ‘Abd al-‘Alim Islam) is a Métis Canadian Muslim scholar who embraced Islam over thirty years ago at the age of sixteen. He has studied the Islamic sciences for over three decades at the hands of both traditional Muslim scholars as well as Western academics. He completed post-doctoral studies in Arabic in Fez and Rabat and considers Morocco to be his second home. Dr. Morrow worked as a university professor for two decades, retiring from teaching after reaching the rank of Full Professor. He has authored a vast body of work, including over one hundred academic articles and thirty scholarly books. One of his most influential studies, The Covenants of the Prophet Muhammad with the Christians of the World, inspired the creation of The Covenants Initiative, an international Muslim movement devoted to promoting the letters, treaties, and covenants of the Messenger of Allah with the People of the Book. An activist and advisor to world leaders, he received an ISNA Leadership Award in 2016. He can be followed @drjamorrowwww.johnandrewmorrow.com, and www.covenantsoftheprophet.com. His videos can be viewed on The Covenants of the Prophet Channel on YouTube.

2 de Julio de 2017

Por: Dr. John A. Morrow

“Creo que el Islam nos aborrece”,  afirmó un multimillonario fanfarrón el 09 de marzo de 2016, mientras competía para ser Presidente de los Estados Unidos. Al parecer, muchos estadounidenses comparten dicho sentimiento. Gracias a la propaganda antimusulmana, muchos estadounidenses se envalentonan y consideran correcto odiar a todos los musulmanes de manera abierta, descarada e indiscriminada.

EEUU se edificó sobre el odio: odio a los aborígenes del país, odio a los afroamericanos, odio a los católicos estadounidenses, odio a los hispanoamericanos y odio a los musulmanes estadounidenses. La historia de los Estados Unidos, en gran medida, es una historia de odios.

A la luz de ese vergonzoso legado de intolerancia y fanatismo, no sorprende que a partir de 2017 haya en EEUU 917  de grupos activos fomentando la discriminación. Después de todo, es tan estadounidense como el pastel de manzana (que, por supuesto, realmente es francés canadiense).

Según el Southern Poverty Law Center, 130 de esos grupos discriminadores pertenecen al Ku Klux Klan (KKK), 99 son neonazis, 100 son nacionalistas blancos, 78 son cabezas rapadas racistas, 21 pertenecen a “Identidad Cristiana” (promotores de una interpretación racial del cristianismo), 43 son neoconfederados (separatistas blancos), 193 son separatistas negros, 52 son anti LGBT, 101 antimusulmanes y otros 100 discriminadores en general.

Con la excepción de los grupos separatistas negros, como “La Nación del Islam” (que nada tiene que ver con el Islam como religión), sectas como la de los moros “Nuwaubian Nation” y grupos racistas y antisemitas, como el nuevo Partido Pantera Negra –que se desarrolló como una respuesta natural a la supremacía blanca–, todos los grupos discriminadores activos en Estados Unidos se componen de gente blanca, la mayoría de las cuales se identifican como cristianas.

Estados Unidos está amenazado externa e internamente. Las amenazas internas provienen de grupos discriminadores de extrema derecha, terroristas de izquierda, separatistas puertorriqueños, anarquistas y ecoterroristas. Las externas provienen de grupos aparentemente vinculados con la red yihadista internacional y los estados patrocinadores del terrorismo internacional que atacan al país y sus intereses tanto dentro como fuera de Estados Unidos.

Al-Qaeda fue la mayor amenaza para Estados Unidos en el decenio de 1990 y principios del 2000. Luego fue reemplazada por el grupo terrorista Daesh (ISIS/ISIL). Según los investigadores del Programa sobre Extremismo  de la Universidad George Washington, hay 300 reclutadores del ISIS operando en los Estados Unidos. El FBI informó que contabilizaba 1.000 de ellos. El gobierno estadounidense ha identificado positivamente menos de una docena de estadounidenses que se han unido al ISIS.

Hay más de 1.000 estadounidenses salafitas-wahabitas que apoyan al ISIS. En contraste, en EEUU hay de 5.000 a 8.000 miembros del KKK. Si reunimos a todos los antimusulmanes y supremacistas blancos, estamos tratando con un “Imperio Invisible”, como los llama la “derecha alternativa” (extrema derecha que rechaza a los conservadores que adoptan ideas progresistas), pero que yo prefiero llamarlos el Trailer Park de imbéciles innatos, compuesto por medio millón (o más) de activos promotores de la discriminación y el extremismo violento.

Desde el 2015 la cantidad de grupos discriminadores antiislámicos aumentó un 197%. Los crímenes de odio contra los musulmanes aumentaron 67% en 2015 y en el 2016 un 89%. Esta cuestión nos lleva a preguntar: ¿quién odia a quién?

Por John Andrew Morrow

1° de Julio de 2017

Aunque algunos terroristas, que ya eran propensos al extremismo, han encontrado un hogar confortable en el literalismo Takfiri-Wahabí, la mayoría de ellos son, simplemente, criminales de baja estofa, traficantes de drogas, adictos, proxenetas, pedófilos, violadores y degenerados mentalmente trastornados. Son la escoria de Oriente y Occidente. Son perdedores en esta vida y en el más allá.

Los musulmanes y no musulmanes necesitan entender que los terroristas takfiritas tienen muy poco que ver con el Islam, más allá de una fachada ritualista (grotesca). Aunque a algunos de ellos les han lavado el cerebro y los adoctrinaron en el gueto salafista, los otros son simplemente mercenarios que asesinan por dinero. En la mayoría de los casos notorios, los agresores no son más que instrumentos. Los verdaderos delincuentes son los expertos que llevan adelante las operaciones clandestinas, es decir, quienes planean y ejecutan las operaciones (terroristas) de bandera falsa.

El takfirismo y la islamofobia son las dos caras de una misma moneda. Ambos son impulsados por las mismas fuerzas (del mal). El denominado terrorismo islámico está orquestado por las mismas personas que se presentan como contrarias al terrorismo islámico. El takfirismo y la islamofobia fueron creados para llevar adelante planes geopolíticos de hegemonía demoníaca.

En el Oriente Musulmán, en el norte y oeste de África, los musulmanes y no musulmanes son masacrados en nombre del Islam por personas a las que generalmente se las presenta  como musulmanas a través de un cruzada llevada adelante por los principales medios de comunicación. Y digo esto porque los supuestos perpetradores de esos crímenes “aparecen muertos” antes de que pueden ser interrogados para conocer sus motivaciones, las que aún son un misterio. La región se desestabilizó y despobló de musulmanes y no musulmanes debido a las guerras por encargo entre las fuerzas autoritarias locales y las potencias totalitarias. Para estos, cientos de miles de muertes son casi nada con tal de tener acceso a los recursos energéticos y a los contratos de reconstrucción (de lo que ellos mismos destruyen).

En el mundo occidental, los no-musulmanes (junto con algunos musulmanes) son masacrados en nombre del Islam por personas a las que se considera musulmanas. El aumento de la islamofobia y los ataques contra miles de musulmanes resulta beneficioso. Ayuda a desviar la opinión pública de los crímenes cometidos por las potencias occidentales en el país y en el extranjero. Los Estados Unidos, por ejemplo,  mataron a más de 20 millones de personas en 37 naciones desde la segunda guerra mundial.

Los no musulmanes denuncian los ataques contra los Estados Unidos atribuidos a los musulmanes, pero permanecen totalmente ajeno o incluso justifican los ataques norteamericanos contra los musulmanes. La invasión y ocupación de Irak por parte de los Estados Unidos, dio lugar a la muerte de más de un  millón de musulmanes. Otro medio millón de musulmanes perdieron la vida en la llamada “guerra contra el terrorismo” llevada adelante por Estados Unidos desde el 11 de septiembre de 2001. Según los cálculos de la mayoría de los expertos, hay aproximadamente 100.000 terroristas takfiritas en el mundo. Si el mundo occidental ha asesinado a 1,5 millones de musulmanes en su intento por erradicar los 100.000 terroristas, la “guerra contra el terrorismo” ha sido un fracaso: se ha convertido en una “guerra terrorista”.

TERRORISMO FABRICADO

Hay amenazas reales y sustanciales que no necesitan ser fabricadas  y preparadas. La violencia armada común y corriente de un “lobo solitario” es para los norteamericanos una amenaza mayor que la del “terrorismo interno” según el estudio estadístico. En el período 2002-2011 hubo aproximadamente 118.000 asesinados con armas y menos de 3.000 atribuibles al terrorismo. Por eso es que no resulta difícil entender porqué el FBI está desesperadamente decidido a crear un extremismo o terrorismo nacional, al que supuestamente derrotaría, además de ocuparse del otro terrorismo (islámico).

Individuos informados y conscientes saben muy bien que las potencias occidentales convivieron “fraternalmente” con los terroristas takfiritas desde el siglo pasado, luego de la caída del sultanato otomano, hasta ahora. Es decir, respaldaron a los criminales “educados” en las madrasas financiadas por Arabia y que se esparcen por Afganistán, Irak, Siria y Yemen. Los Imperios del Mal de la Época apoyan y se oponen a la vez a los takfiritas que llevaron (y llevan) la muerte y destrucción al mundo musulmán y cristiano.

El FBI, en su último recuento, tenía más de 1.000 miembros del ISIS bajo vigilancia en los Estados Unidos. La administración de Estados Unidos, tanto bajo Obama y Trump, se negó y niega  a capturarlos, acusarlos, enjuiciarlos y castigarlos. Mientras Washington habla oficialmente de una disposición antiislámica, permite que los delincuentes del ISIS gocen de libertad para planear ataques terroristas contra la patria. Esos elementos terroristas, conocidos y vigilados por la CIA, el FBI y la NSA, cometen una y otra vez  asesinatos en masa en suelo estadounidense.

Aunque las naciones europeas se presentan en cierta manera como críticas de los Estados Unidos, comparten claramente la misma agenda encubierta. Europol informó que según sus últimos datos en la Unión Europea había 5.000 combatientes de ISIS operando sin inconvenientes. Gente que era conocida y vigilada por las agencias de inteligencia europeas y británicas, asesinaron una y otra vez a muchas personas en Europa y el Reino Unido.

Veamos las cosas como son. Vivimos en una sociedad bajo control. Julián Assange, Chelsea Manning y Edward Snowden han dejado esto muy claro. Nuestros gobiernos reúnen información de todos nosotros. Las agencias de inteligencia, como la NSA, olfatean todo, recogen todo, saben todo, procesan todo y se aprovechan de todo. Los gobiernos de los Estados Unidos, el Reino Unido y Europa occidental saben quienes son los terroristas. De hecho, los conocen muy bien, por el nombre y el apellido.

Aunque pueda ser asombroso, sorprendente o desconcertante para la mayoría, el Departamento de Estado de Estados Unidos tiene los nombres de más de cien mil terroristas en una lista secreta. Y aunque podría ser más complicado capturar a los criminales en el extranjero, es algo posible. Más aún, nada impide en verdad que los Estados Unidos detenga a mil miembros del ISIS que son ciudadanos estadounidenses y residen aquí.

En el marco de la “Lucha Contra el Extremismo Violento” (CVE), la detención y enjuiciamiento son recursos de última instancia. Para los llamados expertos dentro del gobierno de Estados Unidos, el objetivo final es ayudar a los terroristas a convertirse en miembros respetuosos de la ley y productivos para la sociedad. En vez de mostrar simpatía por las víctimas de esos subhumanos con convicciones satánicas, los personeros de la CVE se presentan piadosos con los terroristas y los comprenden porque es gente mentalmente traumatizada, estigmatizada y condenada al ostracismo por los crímenes que cometieron. O los apoyan explícitamente.

En lugar de centrarse en lo que implican, en la prevención (de sus actividades), en impedir legalmente su libre movimiento, en rehabilitarlos y reinsertarlos en la sociedad, las autoridades occidentales deben reconsiderar sus criterios ilusos y centrarse en la detención, procesamiento, encarcelamiento o ejecución (de los mismos). Si, como admiten, las agencias de inteligencia occidentales siguen a miles y miles de terroristas sanguinarios, uno debe preguntarse razonablemente: ¿a qué se debe que se nieguen a detenerlos por razones de seguridad nacional? Para los analistas de inteligencia, la respuesta es obvia: los terroristas están a su servicio. Son recursos valiosos e imbéciles útiles.

Según Fedro, “las cosas no siempre son lo que parecen; el primer aspecto engaña a muchos; lo que se ha ocultado cuidadosamente lo percibe la inteligencia de unos pocos”. Lo que estamos presenciando en el mundo es todo teatro. Estratos superpuestos de mentiras. La gente ve a las marionetas, a los títeres. Pero no ve a los titiriteros: la Mano Oculta. Si las amplísimas poblaciones  de musulmanes y no musulmanes no abren sus corazones y mentes, no se liberarán nunca del (núcleo) principal (en la sombra, los titiriteros). 

“““““

El Dr. John Andrew Morrow (Ilyas ‘Abd al-‘ Alim Islam) es nativo de la Isla de la Tortuga y un orgulloso miembro de la Nación Métis, el Michif-Otipemisiwak, el Pueblo Libre, el Pueblo sin Amos. Recibió su doctorado de la Universidad de Toronto en el año 2000. Es autor de más de 30 libros académicos, incluido el aclamado bestseller de Amazon, “Los Pactos del Profeta Muhammad con los Cristianos del Mundo”.

Su sitios web es http://www.covenantsoftheprophet.com y www.johnandrewmorrow.com.

Sus videos y conferencias pueden encontrarse en el canal en YouTube  “Los Pactos del Profeta”:

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCqM3-puvWuKuCEJsDQDZFrA.

Su cuenta de Facebook incluye @johnandrewmorrow y @covenantsoftheprophet.

Su Twitter es @drjamorrow.

Acerca de John Andrew Morrow ver:

https://crescent.icit-digital.org/authors/john-andrew-morrow

By John Andrew Morrow

Shawwal 07, 1438

“I think Islam hates us,” stated a big-mouthed billionaire buffoon on March 9, 2016, while he was running for president of the United States. Apparently, many Americans share these sentiments. Thanks to anti-Muslim propagandizing, many Americans are empowered and emboldened to hate all Muslims, openly, unabashedly, and indiscriminately.

America was built on hate: hate of American Indians; hate of African Americans; hate of Catholic Americans; hate of Hispanic Americans; and hate of Muslim Americans. The history of the United States is very much a history of hatred.

In light of its shameful legacy of intolerance and bigotry, it comes as no surprise that, as of 2017, there are 917 active hate groups operating in the United States. After all, hatred is as American as apple pie (which, of course, is really French Canadian).

According to the Southern Poverty Law Center, 130 of these hate groups belong to the Ku Klux Klan (KKK); 99 of them are neo-Nazi; 100 of them are white nationalists; 78 are racist skinheads; 21 of them are Christian Identity; 43 of them are neo-Confederate; 193 are black separatist; 52 are anti-LGBT, 101 are anti-Muslim; and a final 100 espouse hatred in general (at least they don’t discriminate in matters of hatred).

With the exception of black separatist groups such as the Nation of Islam (which has nothing to do with Islam as a world religion), cults like the Nuwaubian Nation of Moors, as well as racist and anti-Semitic groups like the New Black Panther Party, all of which developed as a natural response to white supremacy, all of the active hate groups in the US are composed of white people, most of whom identify as Christians.

Threats to the US are both domestic and international. Domestic threats come from formal right-wing hate groups, left-wing terrorists, Puerto Rican separatists, anarchists, and eco-terrorists. International threats come from groups often referred to as the radical international jihad network, and state sponsors of international terrorism that attack US interests both at home and abroad.

If al-Qaeda was the major threat to the US in the 1990s and early-2000s, the terrorist group Da‘ish (aka ISIS/ISIL) has supplanted it since. According to researchers at George Washington University’s Program on Extremism, there are 300 active ISIS recruiters operating in the US. At last count, the FBI reported that it was conducting 1,000 active ISIS probes in the country. The US government has positively identified fewer than 12 Americans who have joined ISIS.

There are over 1,000 Salafi-Wahhabi Americans who support ISIS. In contrast, there are 5,000 to 8,000 members of the KKK in the US. If we combine all anti-Muslim and white supremacist groups, we are dealing with an “Invisible Empire,” as they are called by the alt-right, but which I prefer to call the Trailer Park of Inbred Imbeciles, composed of half a million (or more) active hate-mongers and violent extremists.

There has been a 197% increase in anti-Muslim hate groups since 2015. Anti-Muslim hate crimes increased 67% in 2015. By 2016, hate crimes against Muslims had increased by 89%. The question begs to be asked: who hates whom?

By John Andrew Morrow

Shawwal 07, 1438

Although some terrorists who were already prone to extremism have found a comfortable home in Takfiri-Wahhabi literalism, most of them are merely low-life criminals, drug dealers, substance abusers, pimps, pedophiles, rapists, and mentally deranged degenerates. They are the scum of the East and West. They are losers in this life and the hereafter.

Muslims and non-Muslims need to understand that takfiri terrorists have very little to do with Islam beyond a veneer of public ritualism. Although some of them have been brainwashed and indoctrinated into Ghetto or Street Salafism, others are just mercenaries out for murder and money. In most of the high-profile cases, the perpetrators were merely pawns. The real criminals were the clandestine operations experts who planned and executed the false flag operations in question.

Takfirism and Islamophobia are two sides of the same coin. They are both fueled by the same forces. So-called Islamic terror is orchestrated by the same people who are waging the war on Islamic terror. Takfirism and Islamophobia are employed to advance a geopolitical agenda that is both hegemonic and demonic.

In the Muslim East, North Africa, and West Africa, Muslims and non-Muslims are massacred in the name of Islam by people who are generally projected to be Muslims by a crusading mainstream media (since the vast majority of them are “dead by design” before they can be interrogated, their innate motivations are still a mystery). The region is destabilized and depopulated of Muslims and non-Muslims in proxy wars between authoritarian local powers and totalitarian world powers. Hundreds of thousands of deaths are a small price to pay for access to energy resources and reconstruction contracts.

In the Western world, non-Muslims (along with some Muslims) are massacred in the name of Islam by people who are once again projected to be Muslims. The rise of Islamophobia and attacks against thousands of Muslims is but a bonus. It helps to deflect public opinion from the crimes committed by Western powers both at home and abroad. The United States, for example, has killed more than 20 million people in 37 victim nations since World War II.

Non-Muslims denounce attacks against America attributed to Muslims while remaining completely oblivious or even justifying American attacks against Muslims. The US invasion and occupation of Iraq resulted in over one million Muslim deaths. Another half a million Muslims have lost their lives in the US-led “War on Terror” since September 11, 2001. According to the calculations of most experts, there are approximately 100,000 takfiri terrorists in the world. If the Western world has murdered 1.5 million Muslims in their self-professed attempt to eradicate 100,000 terrorists, the “War on Terror” has been a failure: it has become a “War of Terror.”

Threats that are real, and substantial, do not need to be manufactured and concocted. Run-of-the-mill “lone wolf” gun violence is so much of a greater threat to Americans than “domestic terror” by every statistical metric that it is almost impossible to overstate the disparity (from 2002–2011, there were approximately 118,000 gun murders in the US as compared to less than 3,000 deaths attributable to terrorism). In that regard, it is not difficult to understand why “domestic terror” and “homegrown extremism” are things the FBI is desperately determined to create.

Informed and conscientious individuals are well aware that Western powers have been in bed with takfiri terrorists for the past century, from the fall of the Ottoman Sultanate to the present, supporting the very criminals they cultivated in the Saudi-financed madrasahs peppered across Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, and Yemen. The Evil Empires of the Age are simultaneously supporting and opposing the controlled takfiris who have rained down death and destruction in both the Muslim world and the scorched remains of the Christian world.

At last count, the FBI had over 1,000 ISIS members under surveillance in the United States. The US administration, under both Obama and Trump, refuses to round them up, charge them, prosecute them, and punish them. And while official Washington has preached about a Muslim Ban, it continues to allow ISIS-affiliated criminals the liberty to plot and plan terror attacks against the homeland. Time and again, mass murder is committed on US soil by parties who were both known and surveilled by the CIA, FBI, and NSA.

As much as they may appear critical of the United States, European nations clearly share the same covert agenda. At last count, Europol reported that there were 5,000 ISIS fighters operating freely in the European Union. Repeatedly, mass murder is committed in Europe and the United Kingdom by parties who were both known and surveilled by European and British intelligence agencies.

Let’s face facts. We live in a surveillance society. Julian Assange, Chelsea Manning, and Edward Snowden have made that abundantly clear. Our governments gather information on all of us. Intelligence agencies like the NSA sniff it all, collect it all, know it all, process it all, and exploit it all. The governments of the United States, the United Kingdom, and Western Europe know who the terrorists are. In fact, they know them on a first name basis.

While it may be startling, unnerving or perplexing to most, the US State Department has the names of over 100,000 known terrorists on a secret list. And while it might be more complicated to round up criminals from abroad, it remains within the realm of possibility. What is more, nothing truly prevents the United States from detaining those 1,000 ISIS members, both citizens and residents, who are currently on our soil.

According to the framework of “Countering Violent Extremism,” arrest and prosecution are intended as a measure of last resort. For the so-called experts at the service of the US government, the final goal is helping terrorists to become law-abiding and productive members of society. Rather than show sympathy for the victims of these sub-humans and their satanic persuasion, the proponents of CVE pity the poor little terrorists, and sympathize with the fact that they are mentally traumatized, stigmatized, and ostracized for the crimes they committed or explicitly support.

Rather than focus on engagement, prevention, intervention, interdiction, rehabilitation and integration, Western authorities should reconsider their naive notions, and focus on detention, prosecution, incarceration, or execution. If, as they admit, Western intelligence agencies are tracking thousands upon thousands of bloodthirsty terrorists, why, one must reasonably ask, do they refuse to detain them for reasons of national security? For intelligence analysts, the answer is obvious: the terrorists are at their service. They are valuable assets and useful idiots.

As Phaedrus stated, “Things are not always what they seem; the first appearance deceives many; the intelligence of a few perceives what has been carefully hidden.” What we are witnessing in the world is all theater. Layers and layers of lies. People just see the puppet patsies. They fail to see the puppet-masters: the Hidden Hand. Unless they open their hearts and minds, the masses of Muslims and non-Muslims will never free themselves from the Matrix.

Dr. John Andrew Morrow (Ilyas ‘Abd al-‘Alim Islam) is an indigenous inhabitant of Turtle Island and a proud member of the Métis Nation, the Michif-Otipemisiwak, the Free People, the People Who Own Themselves. He received his PhD from the University of Toronto in the year 2000. He is the author of over 30 scholarly books, including the critically-acclaimed Amazon best-seller, The Covenants of the Prophet Muhammad with the Christians of the World. His websites include http://www.covenantsoftheprophet.com and http://www.johnandrewmorrow.com. His videos and lectures can be found on The Covenants of the Prophet Channel on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCqM3-puvWuKuCEJsDQDZFrA. His Facebook accounts include @johnandrewmorrow and @covenantsoftheprophet. His Twitter handle is @drjamorrow.

By2017-06-29

By Alhaj A.H.M. Azwer

We celebrated Eid Ul Fitr once again by the Grace of Allah. I hope and pray that we all have strived to get the full benefits of Ramadhan this year and celebrate Eid in its true spirit.

We correct our mistakes, become new persons and lay the foundation to carry forward all those meritorious acts in the coming year. We have increased our ‘Taqwa’ (a status of being conscious of God), which is the real purpose of fasting during Ramadhan.

Muslims are tested in various ways, the latest being the fearmongering by certain groups that they will be ruled under Shariah or Islamic law in Sri Lanka and they stand to lose their freedom. This is a baseless allegation, therefore it becomes imperative for Muslims of Sri Lanka to clear this misunderstanding among non-Muslims. It is forbidden to force anything on others.

Let it be known that under an ideal Islamic Government, “non-Muslims will have the same political and cultural rights as Muslims. They will have autonomy and freedom of religion.” This clause was enshrined in the Constitution of Medina, also known as the Charter of Medina under the instructions of Prophet Mohammed (S) when it was drafted in 622 CE.

Dr. John Andrew Morrow, author of The Covenants of Prophet Muhammad (Angelico Press 2013), commends this exemplary conduct of Prophet Mohammed (S) and opined that under the Constitution of Medina:

“Identity and loyalty were no longer to be based on family, tribe, kinship, or even religion. The overriding identity was membership in the ummah (nation) of Muhammad. The Constitution of Medina decreed that the citizens of the Islamic state were one and indivisible regardless of religion. Be they heathen, People of the Book, or Muslims, all those who were subject to the Constitution belonged to the same ummah (nation). In doing so, he created a tolerant, pluralistic government which protected religious freedom. The importance of this is so extraordinary that it is often misunderstood.”

Islamic nation

Thus it is abundantly clear that in modern political parlance an Islamic nation is essentially secular in its outlook, which may come as a surprise to many. To the well-informed Muslims and non-Muslims alike this is not a surprise at all. Tolerance is important in Islam, and justice is equal to all as Andrew Murray stressed “even Muhammad the Messenger of Allah was not above the law.”

If Muslims have taken a little effort to spread this message, we would not have seen the misunderstandings that are prevalent regarding Islam in our society today. On this blessed day I urge my fellow Muslims take this as a religious duty and make a sincere effort to clear the doubts that exist among non-Muslims, not only on this issue but on countless other issues.

Overall it has been a tough year for the country. We faced many calamities including the heatwave and the flood disaster. All communities rose to the occasion as a single family and overcame the disastrous situation demonstrating that our strength lies in unity. By the Grace of God we can overcome even tougher situations and progress if we are united as one nation.

New era

Let the celebrations usher in a new era for us as Muslims of Sri Lanka. Let us learn from our mistakes and pray for peace and prosperity in our beloved Motherland. Our prayers are also for the struggling brethren in rest of the world. May Allah alleviate their sufferings and grant them success.

ahmazwer08@gmail.com

Another good article from Dr. Morrow. -KB

US Military Actively Training White Supremacist Terrorists

By Dr. John Andrew Morrow

For over a decade and a half the US claims to be engaged in a War against Terror. However, when one looks at the body count of civilian casualties, the death of each one being a crime of war, there is little doubt that the US is waging a War of Terror.

If the US Government is spreading death, destruction, and chaos internationally, it is also spreading death, destruction, and chaos nationally by permitting its military to train white supremacists and pseudo-Christian terrorists.

Take, for example, the case of Timothy McVeigh who graduated from the US Army Infantry School at Fort Benning, Georgia. Although he was repranded by the military for buying a “White Power” t-shirt at a Ku Klux Klan protest, McVeigh acquired expertise in firearms, sniper tactics, and explosives and became a top-scoring gunner. It was at Fort Benning that he befriended Terry Nichols, another white supremacist who served a one-year stint in the US Army from 1988 to 1989.

Deployed to Operation Desert Storm, McVeigh reported that he decapitated an Iraqi soldier with cannon fire on his first day and celebrated his achievement. After serving in Iraq, he was honorably discharged in 1991.

According to official accounts, on April 19, 1995, McVeigh took a truck, containing a 5,000-pound bomb he and Terry Nichols had constructed, and parked it in front of the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City. Het set a two-minute fuse and fled from the area.

At 9:02 a.m., a devastating explosion tore down the north half of the building. It destroyed or damaged over three hundred other buildings, shattered glass in over two hundred and fifty other buildings, and scorched nearly one hundred cars. The blast caused over six hundred and fifty million dollars in damage. In total, 168 people were killed, including 19 children in a day care. 684 other people were injured. Known as the Oklahoma City Bombing, it was the deadliest terrorist attack on US soil until the event of September 11th, 2001.

Timothy McVeigh was raised Catholic and received his confirmation. When interviewed after the terrorist attack, he stated that he believed in God and that he always maintained core Christian beliefs. He was strongly influenced by the Christian Identity Movement and the Turner Diaries in particular. As for Terry Nichols, McVeigh co-conspirator, he was a born-again Christian when he committed the terrorist attack.

The unrepentant McVeigh was a Christian until the moment he died. In fact, he received the Last Rites from a priest before he was put to death in June of 2001. As regards Terry Nichols, he is currently serving 161 life-sentences without possibility of parole. He is so profoundly Christian that he had worn out numerous Bibles through prayer. In fact, defense attorney Creekmore Wallace stated that “Terry Nichols’ belief in God is so firm that he believes if the rapture occurred today he is going to heaven.” By Jove! I think I have it: Christianity + White Supremacy + US Army Training = Terrorism.

While there is no doubt that Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nichols can be categorized as white supremacists and Christian fundamentalists, there are serious doubts with the official narrative. Although McVeigh may have been responsible for parking the truck, there is no evidence that he planted the other explosives that reportedly contributed to the blast.

Although there were four separate security cameras aimed at the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building at the time of the explosion, the footage from all of them is missing at points immediately before 9:02 a.m. The government alleges that the gap in footage was the result of replacing the tapes; however, it is not reasonable to believe that all four different cameras were out of operation during the critical, potentially incriminating moment, right before the bombing.

Whether McVeigh and Nichols were both connected with al-Qaedah, neo-Nazis, the CIA or the Deep State, the evidence overwhelmingly indicates that they did not act alone. Nichols is a man of limited intellectual powers while McVeigh did not have the skill set required to organize and execute a deadly conspiracy of such magnitude. If anything, they were but pawns, patsies, and scapegoats. The “other unknowns,” orchestrators and accomplices, have yet to be positively identified.

For an assessment of the evidence, readers can refer to William F. Jasper’s “Proof of Bombs and Coverup” (https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/apr/13/oklahoma-city-bombing-20-years-later-key-questions-remain-unanswered) as well as Andrew Gumbel’s “Oklahoma City Bombing: 20 Years Later” (https://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/crime/item/16440-proof-of-bombs-and-coverup).

Whether it’s the Oklahoma City Bombing, the Twin Towers, or the scores of other terrorist attacks committed in North America, Europe, and elsewhere, the official explanations from Western governments are untenable. Time and again, we are told that radicalized individuals, both Christian and Muslim, are the culprits. They are always immediately identified, with a handy passport or ID that miraculously survives, and were always “known to intelligence agencies.” If terrorists do no blow themselves into oblivion, they are killed rather than apprehended. As the saying goes, “dead men don’t speak.” In other words, they cannot identify their handlers.

Although the Western propaganda machine is obsessed with the threat of so-called radical Muslims, it pays insufficient attention to the threat of so-called radical Christians and entirely ignores the malevolent forces that foster them both. Regardless of their professed religion, terrorists are but puppets on a string.

As the FBI acknowledges, there are hundreds of white supremacists, pseudo-Christian fundamentalists, radical right-wing survivalists, and anti-government extremists in the US Armed Forces and veteran community. According to the calculations of other analysts, they number in the thousands. Between 2001 and 2008, the FBI investigated 203 cases of white supremacist extremists in the veteran community. Evidently, these hate-filled fanatics represent a tiny minority. This does not, however, minimize the threat that they pose. They have both the military means and the intent to act. 

In the words of Charles Wilson, the spokesperson for the National Socialist Movement, the largest neo-Nazi group in the United States: “We do encourage [our members] to sign up for the military. We can use the training to secure the resistance to our government. Every one of them takes a pact of secrecy … Our military doesn’t agree with our political beliefs, they are not supposed to be in the military, but they’re there, in ever greater numbers.”

A report released in 2006 by the National Gang Intelligence Center, which operates under the Department of Justice, noted that: “various white supremacist groups have been documented on military installations both domestically and internationally.”

According to Scott Barfield, a gang detective who works for the Department of Defense, Neo-Nazis “stretch across all branches of service, they are linking up across the branches once they’re inside, and they are hard-core.” In fact, as Matt Kennard revealed in 2012, the US Military has been recruiting neo-Nazis, gang-members, criminals, and the mentally-unfit to fight the War on Terror; namely, to target Muslims both at home and abroad.

The claim that Muslim servicemen in the US Armed Forces represent some sort of fifth column is false. Apart from an occasional lunatic, they are loyal and patriotic Americans. Muslims have been serving in the US military since the time of the Revolutionary War. They served in World War I and World War II. They served in the Gulf War, the Iraq War, and the War in Afghanistan. They number in the tens of thousands.

White supremacists, neo-Nazis, skin-heads, and pseudo-Christian extremists, however, have been infiltrating the US military for decades. What is more, T.J. Leyden, a former skin-head who served in the US Marines, reports that neo-Nazi groups actively attempt to recruit on-duty personnel outside of every major military installation.

Whether they enter the US military as extremists or are radicalized during their service, these anti-government white supremacists and pseudo-Christian extremists all share a common goal: acquire military experience at the expense of American tax-payers in preparation for a racial and religious war. We need not look to the Middle East for signs of Armageddon: the apocalypse is brewing in our own backyard.

If there is no place for so-called radical Muslims in the US Military, there is no place for so-called radical Christians and right-wing racists as well. Rather than open the gates of hell by training criminals, gang-members, racists, fanatics, and bigots, the Armed Forces of the United States should discharge these dangerous individuals and adopt a more selective recruitment policy. Let us not be the tools of our own destruction.

If it is ironic that so-called radical Muslims are serving the interests of the infidel elites, it is even more ironic that so-called radical Christians are serving the interests of the same infidel elites: the real “white supremacists” in the sense that they are a predominantly white elite dedicated to maintaining their global supremacy.

Just like the globalists recruit rejects from ethnic Muslim communities to launch false flag operations, they recruit rejects from Caucasian Christian communities to commit crimes on their behalf. Although they own and control both parties, they pit them against each other in a blood match.

So long as Muslims, Christians, and Jews hate one another, and blame each other for all the evils in the world, the True Masters of the World will continue to reign unfettered. The white supremacists in our military represent a real danger; however, they are merely the dogs of war of the most dangerous of white supremacists: the cabal of globalists, the 1% who control most of the world’s wealth while the 99% scramble for the scraps.

Behind every so-called white trash supremacist, there is white globalist garbage, Malthusian madmen and Mistresses of the Feast who hold all human beings in contempt regardless of race, color, nationality or religion. There is no room for us, the 99%, at the table of the 1%.

Dr. John Andrew Morrow is an Amerindian with Canadian and American citizenship. He received his PhD from the University of Toronto in the year 2000. He worked as an Assistant, Associate, and Full Professor of Foreign Languages for over a decade and a half at Park University, Northern State University, Eastern New Mexico University, the University of Virginia, and Ivy Tech Community College. He is the author of over thirty academic books in the fields of Hispanic, Islamic, and Indigenous Studies. A public figure and activist, he lectures all around the globe and acts as an advisor to world leaders. In recognition for his accomplishments, Dr. Morrow received an ISNA Interfaith Leadership Award in 2016. He may be followed on Twitter at @drjamorrow. His websites are www.johnandrewmorrow.com as well as www.covenantsoftheprophet.com. His videos can be viewed on The Covenants of the Prophet Channel on YouTube

Les statistiques du FBI de 2016 étant encore préliminaires, cette étude est basée sur les résultats complets couvrant l’année 2015. 

Si les hommes blancs, principalement chrétiens, étaient tous rapatriés en Europe ou ailleurs d’où ils sont venus, le taux de criminalité en Amérique diminuerait de près de 70%. Si nous déportons tous les chrétiens américains, y compris les Afro-Américains et les Hispano-Américains, qui constituent 71% de la population américaine, dans le cadre de ce plan de rapatriement, la criminalité serait presque éradiquée. Les statistiques parlent d’elles-mêmes.

Au cours de l’année en question, 3.908 Américains blancs ont été accusés de meurtre ou d’homicide involontaire, 11.809 ont été accusés de viol,

32.439 ont été accusés de vol,

184.024 d’agression aggravée,

112.992 de cambriolage,

621.585 de vol,

4.952 d’incendie criminel,

234.190 de crime violent,

779.529 de crime contre la propriété d’autrui,

544.870 pour d’autres types d’agression,

27.429 de faux et contrefaçon,

67.594 de fraude, 7.278 de détournement de fonds,

44.561 de vol ,

101.481 de vandalisme,

63.967 d’infractions sur les armes,

17.084 de prostitution,

28.650 d’infractions sexuelles,

803.809 de toxicomanie,

1.296 de jeux illégaux,

47.312 de crimes contre les familles et les enfants,

681.638 de conduite sous influence (alcool ou drogue),

160.628 en violation des lois sur les spiritueux ,

239.556 d’ivresse publique,

189.321 de conduite désordonnée,

13.247 de vagabondage et 17.782 de vagabondage suspect.

Les Américains de race blanche, dont 70% sont chrétiens, sont responsables d’un énorme 69,7% des crimes commis aux États-Unis en 2015. 26,7% des crimes ont été commis par des Afro-Américains, dont 83% sont chrétiens, alors que 18,4% des crimes étaient commis par des Hispaniques, dont 98% sont chrétiens. De toute évidence, certains suggèrent qu’il existerait une corrélation entre les chrétiens et la criminalité ainsi qu’une corrélation entre les Blancs et le crime. Les Indiens d’Amérique, en revanche, ont commis seulement 2,1% des crimes dans le pays. Les Blancs et les chrétiens viennent dans notre terre indigène et ne respectent pas nos lois. Plutôt que de contribuer au bonheur du pays, ils répandent la criminalité et passent leur temps à agresser sexuellement les femmes. Le taux de criminalité des blancs contre  blancs et de chrétiens contre chrétiens en Amérique est étonnant.

Si les hommes blancs, principalement chrétiens, étaient tous déportés en Europe ou dans l’île de Patmos, le taux de criminalité en Amérique diminuerait de près de 70%. Si nous déportons tous les chrétiens américains, y compris les Afro-Américains et les Hispano-Américains, qui constituent 71% de la population américaine, dans le cadre de ce plan de rapatriement, la criminalité serait presque éradiquée. Les statistiques parlent d’elles-mêmes. Sur les dizaines de milliers de femmes agressées sexuellement par des hommes misogynes violents en 2015, 57% ont été violées par des hommes blancs majoritairement chrétiens et 27% par des hommes noirs majoritairement chrétiens. Quant au reste des criminels, leur origine ethnique était inconnue ou mixte. On peut seulement supposer que beaucoup d’entre eux étaient des hommes hispaniques chrétiens.

Avec 1%, les musulmans américains sont une partie minuscule de la population. Ils ont le deuxième niveau d’éducation le plus élevé de n’importe quel groupe dans le pays, dépassé uniquement par les Juifs américains. En ce qui concerne l’éducation, les musulmans américains sont en avance sur tous les groupes dans l’égalité des sexes: les femmes musulmanes avec des diplômes universitaires sont plus nombreuses que les hommes musulmans. Les femmes musulmanes sont également plus susceptibles de travailler en tant que professionnelles que les femmes de la plupart des autres groupes religieux. Le nombre de crimes commis par les musulmans américains est microscopique. En fait, ils sont parmi les citoyens les plus honorables et respectueux des lois des États-Unis. Chrétiens blancs: cessez de blâmer les Noirs, les Latinos, les immigrants, les étrangers illégaux et les Musulmans pour la criminalité. D’un point de vue statistique, les musulmans ne sont pas une menace pour l’Amérique. Les faits sont têtus : la majorité écrasante des crimes dans ce pays sont commis par des blancs et des chrétiens. Les musulmans pourraient « vous tuer » de gentillesse et d’hospitalité. Les non-musulmans vont vous violer, vous voler et vous tuer de façon réelle.

Dr John Andrew Morrow

habitant indigène de Turtle Island. C’est un membre fier de la nation métisse, les Michif-Otipemisiwak, les Gens Libres, les Gens qui s’auto-possèdent. Il a reçu son doctorat de l’Université de Toronto en l’an 2000. Il est l’auteur de plus de trente livres scolaires, y compris le best-seller d’Amazone, les Pactes du Prophète Muhammad avec les chrétiens du monde. Ses sites Web incluent www.covenantsoftheprophet.com and www.johnandrewmorrow.com.

June 19, 2017

SHAFAQNA – Teniendo en cuenta la amnesia colectiva de la mayoría de la comunidad musulmana a lo largo del siglo pasado, el renacimiento de los Pactos del Profeta es un fenómeno de considerable importancia. En consecuencia, cuando una experta antiterrorista como Humera Khan declara “nosotros no necesitamos esos documentos”, estamos obligados a formular una pregunta esencial: ¿quiénes no los necesitan? ¿quiénes son “nosotros”?

Humera Khan es Directora Ejecutiva de “Muflehun”, organismo al que se describe como «un grupo de expertos especializados en prevenir la radicalización y combatir al extremismo violento (CEV)». Sus áreas de especialización incluyen «Combatir al Extremismo Violento (CEV), Medios de Difusión y la CEV, Estrategias de Seguridad, Estudios Islámicos, Ideología del Extremismo Violento, Las Mujeres y la Seguridad, Programas para la Juventud de CEV, Radicalización Online, Programas de la CEV para Mujeres». Humera «sirve como asesora al gobierno de Estados Unidos (incluidos el FBI, DHS, DOJ, DNI, DOS, NCTC, NSC y TSA) y a distintos organismos de seguridad europeos». En reconocimiento por sus servicios, recibió el Premio al Liderazgo Comunitario por parte del Director del FBI en 2012.

Es posible que con “nosotros” se refiera a “nosotros los musulmanes”. Entonces se podría leer: “nosotros los musulmanes no necesitamos esos documentos”. De todos modos, resulta incomprensible el motivo por el que un líder musulmán rechazaría documentos de semejante envergadura socio-política. Los Pactos del Profeta incentivan de una manera espectacular la tolerancia, la inclusión y la convivencia pacífica entre los miembros de todas las religiones. Afirmar que los musulmanes no los necesitamos, es lo mismo que decir que los países no necesitan sus respectivas Constituciones o que los seres humanos no necesitan la Declaración Universal de los Derechos Humanos.

También podría ser que “nosotros” tenga un significado más amplio. Por ejemplo, “nosotros, los seres humanos, no necesitamos esos documentos”. Es decir, quizás sean de interés para los musulmanes pero no significarían nada para los no musulmanes. Pero en este caso se estaría despreciando lo que sí fue durante mucho tiempo de una importancia vital para judíos, samaritanos, cristianos y zoroastrianos, con el valor de pólizas de seguro efectivas en lo que hacía a la protección de sus vidas, derechos religiosos, propiedad y libertades. Decir “nosotros, los seres humanos, no necesitamos esos documentos”, es privar a los no-musulmanes de su identidad y existencia en el mundo islámico.

Pero es posible que el misterioso “nosotros” tuviese connotaciones más siniestras y transmita el sentido “nosotros, el FBI o el Departamento de Estado, no necesitamos esos documentos”. Para ellos, antes que representar un beneficio, representarían una desventaja puesto que interfieren directamente en la dicotomía impuesta de “musulmanes buenos” y “musulmanes malos”. Los “buenos” serían los que promueven los planes y formas de vida de Occidente y los “malos” los que defienden la soberanía de sus tierras y las formas de vida islámicas. Hay que recordar que la mayoría de los países occidentales, incluyendo el gobierno de Estados Unidos, han aceptado los principios del CEV (Combating Violent Extremism); o sea, la Estrategia para Combatir al Extremismo Violento.

Mientras que nadie en su sano juicio se opone a la lucha contra el extremismo violento, Peter Romaniuk, en “¿Funciona la Estrategia para Combatir al Extremismo Violento? Lecciones Aprendidas del Esfuerzo Global Para Oponerse al Extremismo Violento”, llega a la conclusión de que “los logros de la CEV en la práctica, aún no son proporcionales a su importancia en el discurso público”. Que la CEV se centre en la rehabilitación y reinserción de los delincuentes violentos, es una manifestación del sinsentido liberal. No estamos tratando con jóvenes descarriados que fuman marihuana, duermen en exceso con muchachas y consumen cantidades exageradas de alcohol. Se trata de gente que viola, tortura y asesina en masa. No deberíamos tratarlos como infantes. Deberíamos eliminarlos. Aquí radica la diferencia fundamental entre los partidarios de la CEV y los partidarios de la Iniciativa de los Pactos. Estos son claros: exigen justicia. Los crímenes graves como abuso sexual, trata de personas, crímenes de guerra y genocidio, no deben quedar impunes. Y si quedan impunes ello hará temblar el Trono Majestuoso.

¿Quiénes son “nosotros”? Si algo está claro, es que “nosotros” no son “quienes” pensamos. “Nosotros” no podría ser el colectivo musulmán. El argumento de que el Corán es todo lo que los musulmanes necesitan es coránicamente inadmisible. Dice Dios Todopoderoso, “obedece a Allah y obedece al Mensajero” (3:31; 4:59; 5:92; 24:54; 64:12). Y el Corán dice explícitamente: “quien obedece al Mensajero ha obedecido a Allah” (4:79). También se establece definidamente que “quien desobedezca a Allah y a su Mensajero indudablemente está equivocado” (33:36).

Si el Corán es lo único que necesitamos los musulmanes, ¿por qué no quemar todos los libros de tradiciones? ¿Por qué no colocar los libros de jurisprudencia, exégesis, teología, historia y filosofía en la pira funeraria? Y aunque todos decimos seguir el Corán, nos dividimos en innumerables sectas, movimientos y escuelas. ¿Por qué?

Porque en la práctica, a través de los siglos, el Corán no ha sido una fuente de unidad y uniformidad en la comunidad musulmana, seguramente por aquello de “Dios une, los hombres dividen”. El Corán, con aproximadamente 1500 años de vida, no evitó que los musulmanes matasen a otros musulmanes y a no musulmanes. ¿Por qué? Porque se desobedeció un consejo-aviso clave, trascendental del Profeta de los musulmanes. Se desobedeció la reconocida tradición mutawatir, el hadiz de Ghadir Jumm.

Y el Mensajero de Dios predijo lo que sucedería debido a la interpretación errada o malévola del Corán: «pronto llegará el tiempo en que no quedará nada del Corán, salvo sus vestigios; y no quedará nada del Islam salvo su nombre. Sus mezquitas estarán llenas (de gente) pero desprovistas de orientación. Sus eruditos serán la peor gente bajo el cielo y de ellos emergerán y se expandirán las disensiones y los conflictos”. Hoy día se podría retomar la buena senda y dejar de lado las disensiones y los conflictos con solo aplicar los Pactos del Profeta.

Independientemente de que alguien ponga en duda que los Pactos del Profeta concedidos a los judíos, samaritanos, cristianos y zoroastrianos sean auténticos, contienen los mismos componentes principales que los Pactos del Profeta que sobrevivieron de manera incompleta en fuentes musulmanas censuradas. Incluso aunque alguien afirmase que todas las cartas, tratados y Pactos del Profeta en todas las fuentes son falsos, no se podría ser un musulmán de buena fe y creyente si se rechazasen los principios que propugna: el derecho a la vida, el derecho a la dignidad humana, el derecho a la devoción o culto religioso, el derecho a la propiedad y el derecho a la protección.

Realmente ¿“no necesitamos esos documentos”? Dios Todopoderoso cree que sí. De no ser así, no se los habría revelado al Profeta Muhammad –la paz y las bendiciones sean con él–. El Mensajero de Dios cree que los necesitamos. De no ser así, no los habría presentado, no los habría reproducido multiplicadamente, no habría exigido su cumplimiento por parte de una gran cantidad de sus Compañeros y no los hubiese proporcionado a las comunidades religiosas en todo el Oriente Medio.

Seamos honestos. Los musulmanes necesitamos los Pactos del Profeta. El Pueblo del Libro los necesita. Los seres humanos los necesitamos. Todos nosotros los necesitamos ahora más que nunca.

[Nota del Editor: Para mayor información, los lectores pueden consultar Power Manifestations of the Sirah: Examining the Letters and Treaties of the Messenger of Allah (2011) por Zafar Bangash, El Minarete y el Campanario: los Pactos del Profeta Muhammad con los Cristianos del Mundo por John Andrew Morrow e Islam and the People of the Book: Critical Studies on the Covenants of the Prophet (2017), escrito por el Dr. Morrow y una docena de académicos eruditos musulmanes.]

Héctor Horacio Manzolillo ha estado durante un largo período de su juventud comprometido con las necesidades de los oprimidos y explotados en Argentina. Participó activamente en el trabajo socio-político llevado a cabo por el “movimiento de sacerdotes para el tercer mundo” y fue expulsado de su país en 1975 por el gobierno, el cual se hallaba bajo presión militar. Se trata de un analista político que durante muchos años publicó artículos en dos periódicos de su provincia luego de retornar del exilio. También es autor de cientos de artículos y traductor de más de sesenta libros islámicos del inglés al español, incluido Los Pactos del Profeta Muhammad con los Cristianos del Mundo. Actualmente continúa en la misma línea de trabajo.

INVASION ALERT! White Christian criminal hordes overrun America

June 18, 2017

Paul Joseph Watson is refusing to report this breaking news story.  – Kevin Barrett, Veterans Today Editor

White Christian Crime in America

By Dr. John Andrew Morrow

Since 2016 FBI statistics are still preliminary, this study is based on the complete findings covering the year 2015. During the year in question, 3,908 white Americans were charged with murder or manslaughter, 11,809 were charged with rape, 32,439 were charged with robbery, 184,024 with aggravated assault, 112,992 with burglary,  621,585 with larceny, 4,952 with arson, 234,190 with violent crime, 779,529 with property crime, 544,870 for other types of assault, 27,419 with forgery and counterfeiting, 67,594 with fraud, 7,278 with embezzlement, 44,561 with theft, 101,481 with vandalism, 63,967 with weapons offenses, 17,084 with prostitution, 28,650 with sex offenses, 803,809 with drug abuse violations, 1,296 with illegal gambling, 47,312 with crimes against families and children, 681,638 with driving under the influence, 160,628 with violating liquor laws, 239,556 with public drunkenness, 189,321 with disorderly conduct, 13,247 with vagrancy, and 17,782 with loitering.

Caucasian Americans, 70% of whom are Christians, were responsible for a whopping 69.7% of crimes committed in the United States in 2015. 26.7% of crimes were committed by African American, 83% of whom are Christians, while 18.4% of crimes were committed by Hispanics, 98% of whom are Christians. Clearly, some will suggest, there is a correlation between Christians and crime as well as a correlation between Caucasians and crime. American Indians, in contrast, committed a mere 2.1% of the crime in the country. Caucasians and Christians come to our indigenous land and show no respect for our laws. Rather than contribute to the country, they spread crime and spend their time sexually assaulting women. The rate of white-on-white and Christian-on-Christian crime in America is staggering.

If white, predominantly Christian, men were all deported back to Europe or the Island of Patmos, the crime rate would drop nearly 70%. If we deported all American Christians, including African Americans and Hispanic Americans, who make up 71% of the US population, as part of this plan of repatriation, crime would be almost eradicated. The statistics speak for themselves. Of the tens of thousands of women who were sexually assaulted by violent misogynistic men in 2015, 57% were raped by white predominantly Christian men and 27% by black predominantly Christian men. As for the rest, their ethnicity was unknown or mixed. One can only assume that many of them were Hispanic Christian men.

At 1%, American Muslims are a minuscule part of the population. They have the second highest level of education of any group in the country, surpassed only by American Jews. When it comes to education, American Muslims are ahead of all groups in gender equality: Muslim women with university degrees outnumber Muslim men. Muslim women are also more likely to work as professionals than women from most other religious groups. The number of crimes committed by American Muslims is microscopic. In fact, they are among the most upstanding and law-abiding citizens of the United States. White Christians: Stop blaming Blacks, Latinos, immigrants, illegal aliens, and Muslims for crime. From a statistical standpoint, Muslims are not a menace to America. Face the facts America, the overwhelming majority of crimes in this country are committed by Caucasians and Christians. Muslims might kill you with kindness and hospitality. Non-Muslims will rape, rob, and kill you for real.

Dr. John Andrew Morrow is an indigenous inhabitant of Turtle Island and a proud member of the Métis Nation, the Michif-Otipemisiwak, the Free People, the People Who Own Themselves. He received his PhD from the University of Toronto in the year 2000. He is the author of over thirty scholarly books, including the critically-acclaimed Amazon best-seller, The Covenants of the Prophet Muhammad with the Christians of the World. His websites include www.covenantsoftheprophet.com and www.johnandrewmorrow.com. His videos and lectures can be found on The Covenants of the Prophet Channel on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCqM3-puvWuKuCEJsDQDZFrA. His Facebook accounts include @johnandrewmorrow and @covenantsoftheprophet. His Twitter handle is @drjamorrow

5/23/2017 – 8:52:00 AM

Jan Dulac *

There are eight shocking facts you did not know about violence in Christianity and Islam.

1. Hatred and violence

Western experts and historians came to a conclusion that Christian scriptures in the Bible were actually far more bloody and violent than those in the Quran. “There is a specific kind of warfare laid down in the Bible, called Consider the Book of Samuel, when God instructs King Saul to attack the Amalekites: “And utterly destroy all that they have, and do not spare them,” God says through the Prophet Samuel. “But kill both man and woman, infant and nursing child, ox and sheep, camel and donkey” (prof.Peter Jenkins, Penn State University). “The Quran explicitly condemns religious aggression and the killing of civilians.It also makes the distinction between jihad — legal warfare with the proper rules of engagement — and irjaf, or terrorism” (Waleed El-Ansary, University of South Caroline). As a general rule, the Quran instructs restraining from excessive use of force.

2. Terrorism

The FBI has concluded: most of the terrorist activity in the United States in recent years has come from radical Christians, white supremacists and far-right militia. The National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism (START) determined that out of the approximately 2,400 terrorist attacks on U.S. soil, 60 (about 2.5%) were carried out by Muslims between 1970 and 2012. Does that mean more than 95% of terror plots and acts in the US were committed by “Christian terrorists” and the rest – by “Islamic and other terrorists”? True, while Washington has spent more than 1.6 trillion USD on counterterrorism operations since 9/11, the number of terror acts worldwide has grown a dozen times.

Even then, the National Space Science Institute (USA) estimates that the odds of being killed by a terrorist attack is about the same as being hit by an asteroid. “An average Joe” can calculate, having these facts, the probability of “It’s going to be a Muslim killing me!” The odds of being killed even by a white supremacist, let alone “Islamist”, is lower than being bitten to death by Joe’s dog.

3. Tolerance

The Quran states about the “People of the Book” (Christians): “Of the People of the Scripture there is a staunch community who recite the revelations of Allah in the night season, falling prostrate (before Him). They believe in Allah and the LastDay, and enjoin right conduct and forbid indecency, and vie with one another in good works. They are of the righteous. And whatever good they do, they will not be denied the need thereof. Allah is Aware of those who ward off (evil)” (Sura3:113-115). The Achtiname of Muhammad (626 AD), or the (Holy) Testament of the Prophet Muhammad, ordered Muslims to protect and defend Christians: “Whenever monks, devotees and pilgrims gather together, whether in a mountain or valley, or den, or frequented place, or plain, or church, or in houses of worship, verily we are [at the] back of them and shall protect them, and their properties and their morals, by Myself, by My Friends and by My Assistants, for they are of My Subjects and under My Protection”.

4. Islam is derived from the word salam, meaning peace. The Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) orders in the Achtiname: “Their churches must be honored and they must not be withheld from building churches or repairing convents.” Hence, Muslims wish salam even to those European countries that ban the construction of mosques.

5. Islam is the only non-Christian faith that believes in Jesus (pbuh), whose name is mentioned 25 times in the Quran whereas the name of the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) – four times. Name of Maryam (Mary) was mentioned explicitly in the Quran 34 times in 32 verses and one chapter was completely devoted to Maryam.

6. Women rights

Maryam was the one who was given as an example for the Muslim women, and for men. “And Allah presents an example of those who believed: the wife of Pharaoh, when she said, “My Lord, build for me near You a house in Paradise and save me from Pharaoh and his deeds and save me from the wrongdoing people.” [The example of] Mary, the daughter of ‘Imraan, who guarded her chastity, so we blew into [her garment] through Our angel [i.e. Gabriel], and she believed in the words of her Lord and His scriptures and was of the devoutly obedient.” [Quran 66:11-12]

Divorce, property issues and rights were clearly reflected in the Quran and Hadith. About 30 percent of divorces were carefully documented during the Mamluk period (1250-1517) in the urban societies. Moreover, the Quran allows inter-religious marriage: “Should any Christian woman be married to a Musulman [i.e. Muslim], such marriage must not take place except after her consent, and she must not be prevented from going to her church for prayer.” The essence of women’s “rights” compiled under English law in 1632 – “That which the husband hath is his own. That which the wife hath is the husband’s”, remained intact till early twentieth century.[6]

7. Religious beliefs and democratic principles

The majority of both, Muslims and Christians, see no disjunction here. In Jordan, for example, 54% of men and 55% of women think Sharia should be a source of legislation in their country. Likewise, a 2006 Gallup poll indicated that 46% of Americans say that they want the Bible to be a source of legislation.

8. Sharia.

There is no such thing as a movement, registered or unregistered, to impose Sharia in Europe or in the United States. Prophet Mohammed (pbuh) delivered a way of life for Muslims to follow. After a hundred years it was interpreted in Sharia law as guidance for Muslims and their daily life. Westerners might dislike it but some Muslims even clean their teeth five times a day – since Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) recommended it (using a Miswaak, the ancient “tooth brush” made of twig of arak tree).

The reasons many, including until recently – the author, did not know these and similar facts are: religious illiteracy of “the 99%” used by “the 1%” to wage information terror and to achieve political and material ends.

“The Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life study” measured Americans’ knowledge of their own belief systems and the belief systems of others conducting a survey with 32 religion-related questions, like “What is the first book of the Bible?”, “When was the Mormon religion founded?”, etc. Atheists and agnostics answered an average of 20.9 questions correctly. Jews and Mormons were scoring a 20.5 and 20.3 respectively, while Protestants as a whole got a mere 16 questions correct and Catholics only 14.7.” If Christians’ knowledge of their own religion is below 50% level, one might assume their awareness of the opposite faith is 10 to 20%, at best. Looks like Tony Blair Faith Foundation’s Education for Open minds initiative should focus on Western countries, not only Islamic ones.

Similar attitudes are present in many Muslim-majority countries, though. If you ask ten University educated individuals in Central Asia, irrespective of their age and occupation about the main principles and facts in Islam, probably, only one will manage to answer correctly (the results may vary among the countries). The challenge for the region, which is part of “the Grey zone” International Terrorist Gang threatens to destroy, is building a truly secular society.

For the notion of “tolerance”, it should be derived from a nuanced understanding of pluralism – not just from “soviet-and post-soviet-atheistic” type of tolerance and secularism prevailing among the older generation and their children. Otherwise, cases such as when people push a woman wearing a hijab out of a bus, because she is an “extremist” will become common practice, not an exception. Sociologist, Peter L. Berger, well known for his contribution to the theory of secularism, cautions that today’s trends in the Islamic and Western societies “provide a massive falsification of the idea that modernization and secularization are cognate phenomena”.

Modernity does not automatically lead to secularism. On the contrary, there is an upsurge of forces of “counter-secularism” in Islam and Christianity. In this vein, some experts wonder if authorities see a direct link between religious illiteracy, stereotyped perception of Islam and recent extremists attacks in Kazakhstan.

Ground breaking research on the anti-Muslim hate industry by the Center for American Progress focused on the 25 most vocal activists engaged in anti-Islam rhetoric, and this has revealed that only 1 (4%) had the qualifications to be considered an “expert” on Islam. It is no surprise that the majority do not have even a college degree in Islamic studies. But it does not bother the “talking heads” to assume, together with mainstream TV channels, the role of “the Ministry of Truth” where “political language is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable, and to give an appearance of solidity to pure wind.”

Another key factor, which was not addressed properly even by authoritative organizations and groups promoting a noble cause – a Dialogue of cultures and civilizations, is the role of information warfare affecting Islamophobia. Experts even consider good case studies to be equally shameless and are Western propaganda machines such as “Russia Today” (RT). The two foes’ cyber armies massively use public perception manipulation, neuro-linguistic programming, rumors development and dissemination and other modern scientific techniques of “subliminal persuasion.”

This allows, among other things, to destruct and switch, when needed, attention of the ordinary people from the exposed failures or lies of the politicians to eye-catching events – often artificially created. Ever hear that the videos presented as if they were from Belgium in the news coverage of “Brussels horror” were in fact, videos of the Moscow airport terror attacks and the Minsk Metro terror attacks in 2011? Or that the millions of euros were disbursed to fascist organizations by the EU in the years 2014–2016?

One can guess why these and many other similar outrageous facts did not make a media splash and outcry in democratic societies. Given the cynicism of the geopolitical players, it is presumed that the stand-off Russia – West, the modern version of the “Red Scare” (threat of Communism) against “Blue Scare” (Capitalism), could be replaced by their accommodation of a “mutually beneficial” “Islam(ist) Scare” at some point.

By Shaun Jex

Shortly after 9/11 I started reading the Quran.  The divisive rhetoric regarding Islam had reached a fever pitch and I wanted to better understand the faith.  What I found helped me see the dichotomy between true Islam and the extremist vision of the terrorists who co-opted the name of the religion for their own purposes.  Education dispels ignorance, which lies at the root of fear.

Sixteen years have passed and we find ourselves again in a time of schism.  Extremists from all sides attempt to appeal to our base natures and  seek to drive us into a regressive tribalism rooted in a fear of the other.  Now, as before, I think we need to be deliberate in working against this.  Knowing our history can help.

Many people know about the Crusades, the long and bloody religious war between the medieval Latin Church and Islam.  However, if we look deeper into the history of the two faiths we find a deeper history of mutual respect and brotherhood between Muslims and Christians.

The Migration to Abyssinia

 

Amrah

A coin of King Armah

In the earliest days of Islam (613 CE), followers of Muhammad found themselves facing persecution at the hands of the polytheistic residents of Mecca.  The persecution reached such a high level that Muhammad  told his followers to flee the land and to see refuge in Abyssinia (modern day Ethiopia and Eritrea) under the protection of the Christian Negus Ashama ibn Abjar (called King Armah by modern historians).  Members of the persecuting Quraysh tribe pursued the refugees and attempted to bribe the Christian king into handing them over to their persecutors.  They even appealed to the king’s faith declaring, “They have abandoned their own religion but neither accepted yours, and have invented a new faith which neither of us know.”  King Negus called the Muslims into his presence and asked them to speak of their faith.  After hearing what they had to say, and despite entreaties from his bodyguards, Negus declared that he would never hand them over and that they could remain in his kingdom in safety.

The Achtiname of Muhammad

The_Patent_of_Mohammed

The Patent of Muhammad

A decade later, Muhammad would offer similar protection to Christians.  In 625 CE, he wrote a document that has come to be known as the “Achtiname of Muhammad” or the “Covenant of the Prophet Muhammad with the Monks of Mount Sinai”.  The letter declares itself, “directed to the embracers of Islam, as a covenant given to the followers of Jesus the Nazarene in the East and West, the far and near, the Arabs and foreigners, the known and the unknown.”  It goes on to say that, “he who disobeys that which is therein will be considered a disbeliever and a transgressor to that whereunto he is commanded. He will be regarded as one who has corrupted the oath of God, disbelieved His Testament, rejected His Authority, despised His Religion, and made himself deserving of His Curse, whether he is a Sultan or any other believer of Islam.”

The letter details a list of freedoms to be guaranteed the Christians.  It begins with a broad statement that, “Whenever Christian monks, devotees and pilgrims gather together, whether in a mountain or valley, or den, or frequented place, or plain, or church, or in houses of worship, verily we are [at the] back of them and shall protect them, and their properties and their morals, by Myself, by My Friends and by My Assistants, for they are of My Subjects and under My Protection.”  After this, it states that Christians are not to be unfairly taxed.  They are not to be compelled to leave their faith or to take up arms in times of conflict, instead stating that Muslims should fight for them.  The letter also declares that if a Christian woman marries a Muslim man, she should not be hindered from practicing her Christian faith.

As broken human beings, there are times that members both faiths have failed to live up to their highest ideals.  There are now and have been in the past, fringe elements of Christianity and Islam that have sought to distort the faiths for their own personal agenda.  We need to look beyond this, to find those things that bind us together, to find the stories in our past that demonstrate that a better world is possible today.

In the words of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., “We must learn to live together as brothers or perish together as fools.”

By Dr. John Andrew Morrow

I: Introduction

From a strategic standpoint, the struggle against extremism and terrorism relies upon both soft power and hard power, the proverbial carrot or the stick. Soft power is non-coercive. It attempts to change and influence social and political opinion. It seeks diplomatic solutions. Its currency is culture, political values, and foreign policies. Hard power refers to modes of coercion, including economic sanctions and direct military confrontation. If hard power seeks to coerce, soft power seeks to co-opt.

With the exception of lawful combatants under the command of state actors who abide by the articles of war, most Muslims are not in a position to participate in direct military conflicts against Takfiri terrorists in West Africa, North Africa, the Middle East, Asia or elsewhere. Such Muslims can, however, engage in social, political, and economic activities that support the war against sub-human psychopaths who pretend to be Muslims.

If a handful of ugly ISIS losers and rejects can operate a propaganda campaign from some cesspool in Syria, producing videos and publications which are then shared to tens of thousands of other fools and failures, individual Muslims, along with Islamic organizations and associations can easily set up cyber centers that are far more efficient and professional. If a small-band of overly-hairy ISIS apes can ruin the image of Islam over the course of a few years, similar-sized brotherhoods and sisterhoods of beautiful bona fide Muslims can create a new narrative.

II: Structure

In terms of the information war or cyber jihad against ISIS and extremism, the Covenants Initiative proposes the following in terms of structure:

1) Rather than have a single, centralized, cyber center, various smaller centers should operate around the word.

2) Intelligence and computer experts estimate that ISIS employs as little as half a dozen full-time internet propagandists.  With a dedicated staff of similar size, ISIS efforts could be countered. With a larger staff, an information center could flood the field, dilute, and drown out the discourse of the extremists.

4) The possibility of coordinating efforts with media giants such as Google merits serious consideration. Private sector partners could prove particularly useful. Some of our partners are working with Google to disrupt ISIS recruiting online. Such efforts should be supported and expanded.

5) At one point, possible collaborative efforts between the various anti-ISIS information centers and law enforcement/intelligence agencies can be envisioned. While some agencies have the technological tools to target ISIS and other extremists, they do not necessarily have sufficient content knowledge to fully comprehend the enemy and to determine the most effective strategies to implement. Unfortunately, many of the major powers in the world today have a history of simultaneously supporting and opposing extremist groups. Consequently, caution is the order of the day. In most cases, Muslims should take the initiative to act independently.

III: Tools 

For Muslim contemplating the creation of counter-radicalization cyber centers, the Covenants Initiative proposes the following guidelines:

1) The soft war on terror must employ all available technology, including, but not limited to email, social media, and videos.

2) The content should be multilingual. Languages need to be prioritized on the basis of their frequency in propaganda and recruitment efforts. English and Arabic come first followed by French, German, Danish, Norwegian, Dutch, Swedish, Urdu, and Russian.

3) Bots, fake friends, or computer algorithms that act like real people, should be created by the tens of thousands to disseminate anti-extremist content.

4) Using “Artificial Intelligence-information systems,” just like a spyware or a spam or pop-up detector for online browsing, an application and/or plug-in could alert the end user if the information being read or discussed in live communication is leaning in an “ISIS-friendly” direction, say with 5 color-coded levels of alert. A smart app could then offer context-sensitive suggestions to help tackle misinformation to protect untrained minds. (This feature could be packaged along with the existing McAfee or Norton type products).

5) A plagiarism check system, such as turitin.com, could be used to identify “sources” of information shared by ISIS-friendly parties, since most of the content used by ISIS for recruitment over the internet could very well be coming from the same sources. For instance, ISIS recruiters might quote certain verses or hadiths more often; this would be an easy way to detect their presence.

6) A Checklist/Scorecard/Detection system to be developed that can be used by Muslims and Non-Muslims to quickly (with some higher level of accuracy) ascertain “ISIS-friendly” content, and clear action plan on how to deal with such people/situations.

7) Just as in the cold war era, hold exercises or drills in schools, colleges, work places, temples etc. about how to deal with “ISIS-friendly” situations. Offer training in how to conduct these drills through webinars/seminars just as courses on “responsible use of social media” are currently being offered through schools/colleges.

8) Short films could be shared on YouTube showing the public how ISIS and similar groups carry on recruiting.

9) Since 13 to 27 is likely the age group in the West most often targeted by ISIS recruiters, schools/colleges should consider offering courses like “ISIS versus Islam,” which could be a 0.5 credit hour mandatory class showing how to combat ISIS.

10) Distribute free or steeply discounted tablets with free internet access in war torn countries. Let this access be restricted so that only specific content may be viewed by young people there, making sure that ISIS and other extremist content is completely blocked. These tablets could be used to offer free degree programs to the youth, allowing them to pick up skills, advance knowledge, receive therapy etc. In other words, create other opportunities so youth have less time and inclination to connect with ISIS-friendly people or recruiters.

11) Entertainment should be one factor in any anti-extremist endeavors. Comedy, for example, is a useful tool against extremism. It has been used effectively throughout the Muslim world. Mockery and parody of extremists by comedians, artists, writers, and poets helps to ridicule them in the minds of the Muslim majority. The academic approach only tends to impact educated people but the use of entertainment reaches a much broader segment of the population. Whether it is comedy, theatre, music, videos, short films or full-length features, entertainment is a powerful tool that can be used to counter the extremist narrative.

12) While Muslim volunteers would be welcome, as seeing that ISIS does not pay its propagandists, they do it for free, cyber centers could also rely upon paid staff, even hiring non-Muslim hackers as mercenaries and allies at the service of Islam.

13) Since as little as 4% of the internet is visible to ordinary users, the rest occupying the unindexed deep web which contains mostly legitimate information, and the encrypted dark web, used by bankers, swindlers, phishers, scammers, the military, illegal pornographers, pedophiles, human traffickers, drug traffickers, hit-men, terrorists etc., computer experts should take the war to the cyber battlefield and systematically attack and expose Takfiri Satanists and their sponsors in these arenas.

IV: Conclusions

There is no good without evil and no evil without good. As the Prophet Muhammad, blessings and peace be upon him, foretold, the Kharijites would resurface sporadically from the seventh century until the end of time when they will be finally vanquished by the Messiah Jesus and the Imam Mahdi. Extremists and terrorists are the catamites of the Anti-Christ. All Muslims must fight them in the name of Allah and His Messenger. And while there is a time and place for the sword, most Muslims must rely upon the word. As the Prophet Muhammad and Imam Ja‘far al-Sadiq confirmed: “The ink of a scholar is more precious than the blood of a martyr.” As important as military might may be, it does not have the power to destroy a pernicious and perverse ideology. In a war of ideas, it is the most convincing and compelling idea that will ultimately win. Only true Islam can defeat fake Islam: “With Allah is the perfect proof and argument” (6:149). So raise your pens, Soldiers of Allah, and spill your ink in His Path!

Dr. John Andrew Morrow is Native North American a proud member of the Métis Nation. After taking his Shahadah at the age of 16, he became both a qualified Western academic and a Muslim ‘Alim. He has authored over thirty peer-reviewed books and over one hundred scholarly articles. His most influential work to date is The Covenants of the Prophet Muhammad with the Christians of the World. His websites include http://www.covenantsoftheprophet.com and http://www.johnandrewmorrow.com. His videos and lectures can be found on The Covenants of the Prophet Channel on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCqM3-puvWuKuCEJsDQDZFrA . His Facebook accounts include @johnandrewmorrow and @covenantsoftheprophet. He can be followed on Twitter @drjamorrow.

[See more at: http://newageislam.com/radical-islamism-and-jihad/islam-versus-anti-islam–simple-strategies-to-help-counter-isis-and-other-violent-extremists/d/111282#sthash.HUuuojXp.dpuf ]

13 JUIN 2017

Libnanews

Alors que les attentats terroristes se multiplient frappant indistinctement l’Occident « impie » et les pays musulmans, que les persécutions et massacres des « Koufars », des « croisés » et autres « infidèles » se multiplient, que la menace d’extinction tant physique que culturelle des chrétiens d’Orient est plus que jamais une réalité, que les ingrédients du choc des civilisations sont réunis, il serait plus opportun que jamais de rafraichir les mémoires égarées et de réhabiliter certaines vérités tant historiques que doctrinales.

Aussi j’aimerai rappeler aux fondamentalistes, aux salafistes, aux takfiristes et autres Djihadistes (sans pour autant entretenir la moindre confusion entre ces diverses appellations) mais aussi à l’ensemble des musulmans et des non musulmans, la promesse de protection qu’aurait faite le Prophète de l’Islam en 625/628 aux chrétiens d’Egypte. Des chrétiens encore marginalisés aujourd’hui, considérés comme des citoyens de seconde zone; qui sont soumis à des vexations, des interdits et des persécutions en tout genre ; dont les lieux de culte sont la cible constante d’attentats;  qui sont  menacés dans l’exercice de leur foi et jusque dans leur intégrité physique Rien qu’en 2017 les Coptes ont connu trois vagues d’assassinats successives.

Il s’agit du Pacte du prophète Mahomet avec les moines du mont Sinaï attribué à Muhammad ibn ‘Abd Allah, le Messager d’Allah. Le Monastère de Sainte Catherine, fondé en 527 par l’Empereur Justinien, est l’un des plus anciens encore en activité et figure sur la liste du patrimoine mondial de l’UNESCO. Situé au pied du Mont Sinaï il est doté d’une immense collection de manuscrits chrétiens, la plus grande après celle du Vatican.

Le document aurait été écrit de la main même de l’Imam Ali au cours de la quatrième ou de la septième année de l’Hégire, autour de 625 ou de 628 de l’ère chrétienne. Il porte en lieu de signature l’empreinte de la propre main de Muhammad trempée dans l’encre. La date exacte semble faire divergence parmi les historiens, certains affirment même que ce pacte daterait de l’an 2 de l’hégire, d’autres avancent une autre date, postérieure, après le traité d’Hudhaybiyya qui eut lieu en l’an 8 de l’hégire.[1]

Plus connu sous le nom de Ashtiname –  mot perse signifiant « Livre de la Paix » – mais aussi de « Testament sacré de Muhammad » ou « Traité Eternel de Muhammad », ce contrat s’étendrait à tous les chrétiens quelque soit le lieu ou le temps. Considéré comme un texte fondateur de la jurisprudence islamique, ses prescriptions sont conformes à l’esprit du Coran, des hadiths, de la Sunna ainsi que d’autres traités et pactes prophétiques plus réputés. Elles sont en de nombreux points similaires avec celles du Pacte de Najran (Voir annexe) mais aussi de celles de la Constitution de Médine. Quoiqu’il en soit toutes ces chartes s’accordent sur des points essentiels, à savoir : la justice, l’équité, la sécurité, l’indulgence à l’égard des chrétiens et le respect de leur personne (et plus largement de l’ensemble des « protégés). Des points faisants écho à plusieurs versets du Coran ainsi qu’à des Ahadiths dont le verset 7 de la Sourate 9 , « Tant qu’ils sont droits envers vous, soyez droits envers eux. […] » (Coran 9, 7).

Plus que le détail de ses clauses c’est l’esprit de ce document qui nous importe en ce qu’il est porteur de tolérance et de respect envers les gens du Livre.

En prendre connaissance et la rediffuser est aujourd’hui une responsabilité pour les autorités religieuses musulmanes : cette promesse pourrait avoir un impact important sur l’attitude des musulmans à l’égard des autres religions. Les musulmans respectent en général les précédents établis par leur prophète, s’en inspirent et s’évertuent à les mettre en pratique. Cela pourrait aussi contribuer à la lutte doctrinale contre l’intégrisme et à l’émergence d’un Islam des lumières.

Il s’agit surtout de s’aventurer sur le terrain des Djihadistes et de tenir le langage de tous ceux qui prônent une interprétation rigide et littéraliste du Coan et un retour à l’Islam des origines, à la pratique des premiers temps et au modèle de Médine. Ne sont-ils pas donc censés se reconnaître dans les faits et gestes du Prophète et de ses premiers compagnons, les illustres et pieux prédécesseurs, les Salaf ?

En effet, le salafisme désigne une attitude qui met l’autorité des plus proches de l’époque du Prophète (570-632) au-dessus de l’ijtihad (effort de réflexion) et du recours à la raison. Les salafistes considèrent que plus l’on s’éloigne de cette époque, de l’expérience fondatrice de l’islam et de ceux qui en furent les témoins, moins l’on peut avoir une compréhension de la religion et de ses enseignements. Aussi, le point de vue des Salaf devient l’ultime référence pour le croyant afin de comprendre le message coranique et la tradition consacrée du Prophète. N’est donc valide et recevable que ce qui a été rapporté par eux.

Puisqu’ils sont imperméables à toute remise en question et à la raison critique autant les confronter aux seules légitimité et autorité dont ils se réclament.

Je reprends dans son intégralité l’une des versions de la charte octroyée par le Prophète Muhammad et garantissant droits et protection aux chrétiens. Son contenu et la formulation de ses clauses varient légèrement selon les retranscriptions, les traductions, les transmissions et les époques ; le pacte ayant été maintes fois renouvelés et reconduits par les gouvernants musulmans.

C’est le certificat écrit par Mohammed fils d’Abdallah, le Prophète de Dieu et Son messager à toute l’humanité, livrant à la fois des promesses et des menaces, et ayant dans sa garde le dépôt de Dieu pour Sa Création, que les hommes n’aient aucun plaidoyer après la venue des messagers. Et Dieu est puissant et sage. C’est ce qu’il a écrit au peuple de la religion Chrétienne, et à ceux qui professent la religion Chrétienne dans l’Est et l’Ouest, de près ou de loin, parlant clairement et barbare, connu et inconnu. Il l’a écrit pour eux comme une charte, et quiconque viole, modifie ou transgresse l’alliance à cet égard, aura violé l’alliance de Dieu, rompu sa promesse, ridiculisé sa religion, et obtenu sa malédiction, qu’il soit un souverain ou tout autre Musulman. Si un moine ou pèlerin se retranche dans la montagne, vallée, grotte, canton, sur le sable ou à l’église, je serai derrière eux pour les défendre de tous qui vont les envier, par moi-même, par mes compagnons, par mon peuple, par ma secte et par mes disciples, dans la mesure où ils sont mes sujets et le peuple de mon alliance. Et je les dispense des contrariétés de victuailles qui sont endurées par le peuple du Pacte en ce qu’ils doivent payer la taxe, sauf dans la mesure où ils l’offrent de leur propre gré, et il doit y avoir aucune contrainte ni force utilisées. Aucun évêque sera retiré de son diocèse, ni moine de son monastère, ni ascétique de sa cellule, ni pèlerin de son pèlerinage, ni aucun de leurs lieux d’assemblée ou églises sera démoli, et nul de la richesse de leurs églises sera utilisée pour la construction de mosquées ou des maisons des Musulmans ; et celui qui fait cela aura violé la charte de Dieu et celui de Son Prophète ; en plus, aucun impôt ni amende sera pris des moines, évêques ou ministres. Je maintiendrai leur sécurité partout où qu’ils soient, que ce soit sur terre ou sur mer, à l’est, ouest, nord ou sud. Ils doivent être en tout temps et en tous lieux sous ma protecon et inscrits dans mon alliance et dans l’immunité de tout méfait. De même, les ermites dans les montagnes et les lieux bénis ne doivent pas payer l’impôt foncier, ni la dîme sur ce qu’ils sèment, ni une partie de leur part sera prise puisque celle-ci est assez juste pour leur propre bouche. Ils n’auront pas non plus l’obligation de prêter assistance au moment de la récolte, ils ne seront forcés de sortir pour le service en temps de guerre. Pas plus de douze dirhams par an seront exigés de ceux d’entre eux qui paient l’impôt foncier et des propriétaires de biens et domaines et ceux qui s’engagent dans des marchandises. Aucun d’entre eux doit être obligé de payer plus que ce qui est dû et ils ne seront pas efforcés sauf dans une bonne affaire. Ils doivent les garder sous l’aile de la miséricorde en les gardant loin de tout méfait, où qu’ils soient et où qu’ils habitent. Et si les Chrétiens habitent chez les Musulmans, ces derniers doivent les satisfaire et les permettre de prier dans leurs églises, et ne doivent pas gêner en aucune façon avec la pratique de leur religion. Et quiconque viole la Charte de Dieu et fait le contraire de celle-ci, est considéré comme un rebelle contre son alliance et contre son messager. En plus, les Musulmans doivent aider à la réparation des églises et lieux Chrétiens, qui resteront à la garde des Chrétiens à condition qu’ils maintiennent dans leur religion et qu’ils agissent selon la charte. Aucun d’entre eux ne sera contraint de porter les armes, puisque les Musulmans vont les protéger. Et personne ne violera cette charte pour tous les temps, jusqu’au Jour du Jugement et la fin du monde. (Cité. Zaydan 123-124)[2]

Il ressort clairement de ce document que la promesse revêt une dimension éternelle et universelle, en tout lieu et tout temps : Universelle, car il est bien précisé que les musulmans sont avec les chrétiens, proches ou éloignés, et donc que le Pacte ne se limite pas seulement au monastère de Sainte Catherine. Eternelle car en ordonnant aux musulmans de respecter cette charte jusqu’au jour du « Jugement dernier », il déjoue toute tentative future de révoquer ces droits désormais inaliénables. Toute désobéissance ou remise en question constituerait une violation de l’alliance avec Dieu.

Un autre aspect remarquable est qu’elle n’impose aucune condition ou contrepartie aux chrétiens en échange de ces droits, hormis bien entendu le fait de promettre fidélité aux musulmans, de ne pas se retourner contre eux et de leur prêter aide et assistance en temps de guerre.[3] Des conditions à minima que l’on retrouve dans les autres pactes de la même nature. Le seul fait d’être chrétien suffit ; il n’est pas exigé d’eux de modifier leurs croyances, de payer une contrepartie ni de se soumettre à aucune obligation. Bien qu’elle ne constitue pas une charte des droits de l’homme au sens moderne et des Lumières, elle fait preuve d’une grande modernité et n’en défend pas moins les droits à la propriété privée, à la liberté religieuse, à celle du travail ainsi que le droit à la sécurité.

Bien sûr l’authenticité absolue de ce pacte n’est pas exempte de controverses et fait encore l’objet de débats académiques et scientifiques; mais son historicité et son existence sont avérés, relayées sur des siècles par une multitude de sources tant musulmanes que chrétiennes, historiques, administratives et théologiques.[4] Elle est ainsi citée dans de nombreux documents, témoignages, traités et archives administratives musulmanes et chrétiennes.

Bien que la tradition islamique ait été transmise presque exclusivement par les musulmans, il s’agit là de l’un des rares cas dans lesquels une Sunna et un Hadith ont été transmis consécutivement par les musulmans et les chrétiens. Nonobstant le débat quand à son authenticité il est essentiel de souligner que ses clauses ont été respectées et appliquée par les dynasties successives qui ont présidé au destin de l’Islam.  Selon de nombreux documents historiques, les libertés accordées par le Prophète ont été honorés par les Califes bien-guidés Abou Bakr, Omar, Othman et Ali, ainsi que les Omeyyades, Abbassides, les Fatimides et les Ayyoubides et les Ottomans.[5]

En premier lieu, les principaux intéressés, les moines du monastère de Sainte-Catherine confirment de façon constante son authenticité depuis les premiers jours de l’Islam. D’ailleurs ils ont toujours bien vécu (au moins jusqu’au XIXe siècle) aux côtés des musulmans qui ne s’en sont jamais pris à eux ou au monastère.

Ensuite, les premières chroniques musulmanes mentionnent déjà ce pacte : Le « Pacte du prophète Mahomet avec les moines du mont Sinaï » est attesté par Muhammad ibn Saad al-Baghdadi (784-845), historien musulman et scribe de al-Waqidi (748-822), l’un des premiers historiens de l’Islam et biographe du Prophète, dans un document appelé Traité de Saint Catherine qui est cité dans son livre Kitab al-Tabaqat al-Kabir (Le Livre des cercles des compagnons). S’il est plus court que les copies existantes, il contient néanmoins, presque mot pour mot, toutes les principales dispositions. Si Ibn Saad a juste fourni un résumé des principaux points, Ismâ’îl Ibn Kathir (1301-1373), le célèbre exégète, savant de hadith, commentateur coranique, juriste et historien, décrit en détail les grandes lignes du document dans son Qasas al-Anbiya.

Outre les œuvres historiques, de nombreux firmans des autorités politiques contiennent des références directes au Achtiname. Tant les Fatimides (r. 901-1171) que les Ayyoubides (r. 1174-1249)  ont émis des décrets avec les moines du mont Sinaï qui se référaient à la sijillat al-nabawiyyah ou “prophétiques”[6]. A leur tour les Mamelouks (1250-1517) confirmeront le pacte à plusieurs reprises en 1259, 1260, 1272, 1268 / 69, 1280 et 1516 CE.

En 1517, les Ottomans l’introduiront  au Trésor royal pour le garder en lieu sûr[7] et les moines conserveront une copie certifiée qui servira de source aux autres copies dont l’authenticité était approuvée chaque année ou tous les deux ans à dater de l’année 1518 ou 1519. A partir de cette date des copies du Pacte du prophète feront l’objet d’une transmission continue et ininterrompue de son contenu.

Non seulement le Pacte du prophète a été reconnu et respecté par l’establishment politique et religieux mais il a été vérifiée de façon indépendante et sur une base régulière par les cinq écoles de jurisprudence islamique. De même, le Dr Morrow relate qu’au moins 2000 savants musulmans, du Xème siècle jusqu’au XIXème siècle ont émis des fatwas se basant sur ce traité pour instituer les normes islamiques sur les relations avec les autres communautés, principalement celles de confession chrétienne.

Le monastère de Sainte-Catherine possède ainsi près de 2 000 fatwas de savants musulmans appartenant à différents courants ou écoles juridiques (malékites, hanafites, ismaéliens, shaféites, hanbalites et autres) de 975 à 1888, reconnaissant implicitement et explicitement les droits octroyés par le Messager d’Allah aux chrétiens.

Le Ashtiname est aussi largement attesté, mentionné, cité, et entièrement traduit par de nombreux pèlerins occidentaux, des écrivains de voyage, des religieux et des chercheurs du XVIème siècle à nos jours.

Après être tombé dans l’oubli pour un temps il refait surface dans une œuvre de Feridun Ahmed Bey, célèbre pour ses ouvrages historiques, de 1583 connu sous le nom Majmû’a munsha’at al-Salatin et republiée au XIXème siècle en 1857 / 58. Cet ouvrage se compose d’une collection de lettres du/au Prophète, des califes et sultans, ainsi que des lettres des/ aux souverains de l’Europe et les traités qu’ils ont signés. Le tout compilé par le chef de la Chancellerie ottomane constitue un témoignage inestimable. Mais surtout, ce recueil contient une copie du Pacte du prophète Mahomet avec les moines du mont Sinaï tirée du Trésor du Topkapi. Le fait que cette copie provient des archives des califes et des sultans ne peut qu’en renforcer sa crédibilité et son authenticité notamment aux yeux des musulmans. Plus encore, l’original arabe cité par Feridun Bey est identique aux dizaines de copies du Pacte du Prophète trouvé à Saint Catherine et ailleurs.[8]

C’est à la fin du XIXème siècle que sera publiée la dernière copie officielle du Pacte du Prophète. C’est à cette période que, Naufal Effendi Naufal publiera une traduction turque du texte arabe et que le grand juriste musulman, Syed Ameer Ali (1849-1928) sera le premier chercheur à en exposer le contenu en anglais en 1819 dans son ouvrage intitulé L’Esprit de l’Islam.[9]

Quelques années plus tard Le « Pacte du Prophète avec les moines du mont Sinaï » paru dans la revue de L’Union Islamique / al-Ittihad al-Islami en 1898. L’article sera ressassé par la revue française Échos d’Orient dans un article intitulé « Décret de Mahomet Relatif aux Chrétiens »[10] qui fournit un résumé de la pièce originale parue dans L’Union Islamique. Il mentionne aussi que le décret original du Prophète était stocké dans la bibliothèque du Sultan et que si l’existence du Ashtiname avait été mentionné à quelques reprises en occident, son contenu précis n’avait jamais été révélé auparavant.

En termes de chaînes de transmission, le ‘Ahd, ahdname ou Ashtiname accordé aux moines du mont Sinaï semble être le plus fort de tous les Pactes du Prophète. Il a été transmis par les musulmans et non-musulmans pendant près d’un millénaire et demi. Du point de vue historique et de la science du Hadith, il atteint le plus haut degré de certitude que nous pouvons espérer d’un document datant du VIIème siècle.

Etant donné son illustre chaine de transmission, mais aussi son contenu qui est en accord avec les autres pactes prophétiques et prescriptions coraniques, il faudrait faire preuve de mauvaise foi, d’un manque flagrant d’objectivité et d’un parti pris pour le rejeter en bloc et le considérer comme étant un faux. De même à ceux qui s’évertuent à en limiter la portée aux seuls moines du Monastère de Sainte Catherine ou aux chrétiens égyptiens, et à en faire une exception valable seulement dans un temps déterminé, le contenu et l’historique du Pacte sont sans équivoques : à l’instar de celui de Najran, il est clairement stipulé que ses prescriptions s’appliquent à « tous les chrétiens pacifiques, ceux qui sont les amis et les alliés des musulmans, jusqu’à la fin des temps ».

Qui plus est, l’authenticité de l’Alliance du Sinaï pourrait conforter la crédibilité d’autres pactes existants dont la validité et de la chaîne de la transmission ne sont pas aussi bien établies.

Conclusion

Les partisans de Daesh entendent figer la cité musulmane dans un temps zéro et refusent toute lecture contextuelle du message prophétique. Leur projet théologico-politique défigure le visage de l’Islam, tant celui des origines que de la tradition, et vise par une sélection tendancieuse et une lecture partiale des versets coraniques et des références prophétiques, à lui donner un contenu terrifiant, inhumain, intolérant et violent. Ils insistent ainsi à outrance sur la dimension exclusivement guerrière du Djihad qui ne fut le plus souvent qu’occasionnelle et épisodique pour le prophète. Ils réfutent et marginalisent la diversité et la complexité des comportements du prophète et les nombreuses nuances du message coranique. Ils véhiculent l’image d’un Dieu tyrannique, au prise à la colère et assoiffé de vengeance et celle d’un prophète sanguinaire, chef de guerre sans compassion ni pitié.

Ils violent les commandements Divins, dont la sacralité de la vie humaine, et ignorent les injonctions coraniques ainsi que l’exemple du Prophète notamment dans ses relations avec les gens du Livre.

Comme le dit Mahmoud Hussein, « Daesh a mis en place une vision de l’Islam faite non pour convaincre mais pour terroriser, non pour gagner les esprits mais pour éveiller les instincts les plus primitifs et les plus meurtriers. Sa fidélité à la geste prophétique est une infidélité déguisée. Il propose une vérité défigurée du Coran et des Hadits ».[11]

Face à ce phénomène, et ses antécédents historiques, il était évident que les réponses sécuritaires et militaires seraient insuffisantes, de même que les mesures à caractère uniquement législatif ainsi que les effets d’annonce politique. Les réponses sont multiformes – économiques, sociales, juridiques et culturelles – mais pour les musulmans c’est surtout sur le champ doctrinal qu’il faut relever le défi frontal posé par Daesh, Al Qaida et tous les mouvements religieux, politiques ou militaires qui revendiquent et promeuvent une vision rigoriste de l’islam. Par delà la condamnation morale c’est sur le plan théologique que ce fera la délégitimation et la déconstruction du discours intégriste.

C’est sur ce terrain qu’ils doivent s’engager en priorité afin d’ouvrir le chantier de réformes qui devrait mener à l’aggiornamento indispensable à toute religion. Une tâche longue et ardue dont ils ne peuvent plus faire l’économie s’ils veulent mettre fin au holdup des islamistes sur les valeurs, les croyances et les convictions de milliers d’individus de culture musulmanes, pratiquants ou non, croyants ou athées.  Pour ce faire ils disposent de tous les instruments nécessaires et des arguments qu’ils peuvent puiser aux sources mêmes de la Révélation. C’est aussi l’occasion d’affirmer leur liberté de conscience et de s’émanciper d’une tradition figée par le poids du dogme et d’un postulat idéologique plaqué sur le Coran, longtemps après la disparition du Prophète, et qui en contredit l’esprit et souvent le texte. Pour ce faire, ils devront aussi, et c’est là le plus difficile, s’émanciper du mythe de l’imprescriptibilité d’un Coran qui serait incréé afin d’oser une lecture plus contextuelle et rouvrir la voie de l’Ijtihad.

On ne peut pas être contre Daesh et en même temps contre la nécessité d’une réforme. Le refus de Daesh, de ses actes et de ses préceptes, passe aussi par la condamnation de nombreux points de sa doctrine.  Aussi, le rejet du fondamentalisme implique l’adhésion à une vision plus libérale et moderne de l’Islam fondée sur une interprétation plus contextuelle, rationnelle et modérée. Une vision qui lui est endogène, qui a eu droit de citer et qui a existé de tout temps.

Annexe

Le pacte du Prophète avec les chrétiens de Najran

Au nom de Dieu clément et miséricordieux.

Cet écrit a été donné par Mohammad ben ‘Abd Allah ben ‘Abd el-Mottalib, Envoyé de Dieu auprès de tous les hommes, pour annoncer et avertir, et chargé du dépôt de Dieu parmi ses créatures, pour que les hommes n’aient aucun prétexte devant Dieu, après ses envoyés et sa manifestation, devant cet Être puissant et sage.

Au Seyyid Ibn Hareth ben Ka‘b, à ses coreligionnaires et à tous ceux qui professent la religion chrétienne, soit en Orient, soit en Occident, dans les contrées prochaines ou dans les contrées lointaines, arabes ou étrangères, connues ou inconnues.

Cet écrit qu’il leur a rédigé constitue un contrat impérieux, un diplôme authentique établi sur la charité et la justice, un pacte inviolable.

Quiconque observera cet édit, montrera son attachement à l’Islam, méritera les meilleurs bienfaits que l’Islam promet ; au contraire tout homme qui le détruira, qui violera le pacte qui y est contenu, qui l’altérera, et qui désobéira à mes commandements, violera le pacte de Dieu, transgressera son alliance, méprisera son traité et méritera sa malédiction, qu’il soit prince ou sujet.

Je m’engage à faire de la part de Dieu alliance et pacte avec eux et je les mets sous la sauvegarde de ses prophètes, de ses élus, de ses saints, les musulmans et les Croyants, les premiers aussi bien que les derniers. C’est cela mon alliance et mon pacte avec eux.

Je proclame de nouveau les obligations que Dieu imposa aux enfants d’Israël de lui obéir, de suivre sa loi et de respecter son alliance divine, en déclarant protéger par mes cavaliers, mes fantassins, mes armées, mes ressources et mes partisans musulmans, les chrétiens jusqu’aux plus éloignés, qui habitent dans les pays frontières de mon empire, dans quelque région que ce soit, lointaine ou voisine, en temps de paix ou en temps de guerre.

Je m’engage à les appuyer, à prendre sous ma protection leurs personnes, leurs églises, leurs chapelles, leurs oratoires, les établissements de leurs moines et les demeures de leurs anachorètes partout où ils seront, soit dans la montagne, ou dans la vallée, ou dans les grottes, ou dans le pays habité, dans la plaine, ou dans le désert.

Et je protégerai leur religion et leur Eglise, partout où ils se trouvent, soit sur la terre, soit sur la mer, soit en Orient, soit en Occident, avec toute la vigilance possible de ma part, de la part des gens de mon entourage, et des musulmans.

Je les prends sous ma protection. Je fais pacte avec eux, m’engageant à les préserver de tout mal et de tout dommage, à les exempter de toute réquisition et de toute obligation onéreuse, et à les protéger par moi-même, par mes auxiliaires, mes suivants et ma nation contre tout ennemi, qui m’en voudrait à moi, et à eux.

Ayant l’autorité sur eux, je dois les gouverner, les préservant de toua dommage et ne laissant pas leur arriver quelque mal qu’il ne m’ait atteint aussi, avec mes compagnons, qui défendent avec moi la cause de l’Islam.

Je défends aux conquérants de la foi de leur être à charge, lors de leurs invasions, ou de les contraindre à payer des impôts, à moins qu’ils n’y consentent : que jamais les chrétiens ne subissent tyrannie et l’oppression à ce sujet.

Il n’est pas permis de faire quitter à un évêque son siège épiscopal, ni à un moine sa vie monastique, ni à un anachorète sa vocation érémitique ; ni de détruire quelque partie de leurs églises, ni de faire entrer quelques parties de leurs bâtiments dans la construction des mosquées, ou dans celle des maisons des musulmans. Quiconque fera cela, violera le pacte de Dieu, désobéira à son Apôtre et s’éloignera de l’alliance divine.

Il n’est pas permis non plus d’imposer une capitation ni une taxe quelconque aux moines et aux évêques, ni à ceux qui, par dévotion, se vêtent de laine ou habitent solitairement dans les montagnes ou en d’autres endroits isolés de l’habitation des hommes.

Qu’on se borne à quatre dirhams qu’on demandera chaque année à chacun des autres chrétiens, qui ne sera ni religieux, ni moine, ni ermite : ou bien qu’on exige de lui un vêtement en étoffe rayée ou un voile de turban brodé du Yémen, et cela pour aider les musulmans et pour contribuer à l’augmentation du trésor public : s’il ne lui est pas facile de donner un vêtement, on lui en demandera le prix. Mais que ce prix ne soit détermine que de leur consentement.

Que la capitation des chrétiens qui ont des revenus, qui possèdent des terres, qui font un commerce important sur mer et sur terre, qui exploitent les mines de pierres précieuses, d’or et d’argent, qui ont beaucoup de fortune et de biens, ne dépasse pas, pour l’ensemble, douze dirhams par an, pourvu qu’ils habitent ces pays et qu’ils y soient établis.

Qu’on n’exige rien de semblable des voyageurs, qui ne sont pas des habitants du pays, ni des passants dont le domicile n’est pas connu.

Pas d’impôt foncier avec capitation, si ce n’est à ceux qui possèdent des terres, comme tous les occupants d’héritages sur lesquels le sultan exerce un droit : ils paieront des impôts dans la mesure ou les autres les payent, sans toutefois que les charges excédent injustement la mesure de leurs moyens, et les forces que les propriétaires dépensent à cultiver ces terres, à les rendre fertiles, et à en tirer les récoltes : qu’ils ne soient pas abusivement taxes, mais qu’ils payent dans la mesure imposée aux autres tributaires leurs pareils.

Les hommes de notre alliance ne seront pas tenus de sortir avec les musulmans pour combattre leurs ennemis, les attaquer et en venir aux mains. En effet, ceux de l’alliance n’entreprendront pas la guerre. C’est précisément pour les en déchargé que ce pacte leur a été accordé, et aussi pour leur assurer aide et protection de la part des musulmans. Et même qu’aucun chrétien ne soit contraint de pourvoir à l’équipement d’un seul musulman, en argent, en armes ou en chevaux, en vue d’une guerre ou les Croyants attaquent un ennemi, a mois qu’il n’y contribue de son gré. Celui qui aura bien voulu faire ainsi, et contribuer spontanément, sera l’objet de la louange et de la gratitude, et il lui en sera tenu compte.

Aucun chrétien ne sera fait musulman par force : Ne discutez que de la maniera la plus honnête [29 :46]. Il faut les couvrir de l’aile de la miséricorde, et repousser tout malheur qui pourrait les atteindre partout où ils se trouvent, dans quelque pays qu’ils soient.

Si l’un des chrétiens venait à commettre un crime ou un délit, il faudrait que les musulmans lui fournissent l’aide, la défense, la protection ; ils devront excuser son délit et amener sa victime à se réconcilier avec lui, en l’engageant à lui pardonner ou à recevoir une rançon.

Les musulmans ne doivent pas abandonner les chrétiens et les laisser sans secours et sans appui, parce que j’ai fait ce pacte avec eux de la part de Dieu pour que ce qui arrive d’heureux aux musulmans leur arrivât aussi, et qu’ils subissent aussi ce que subiraient les musulmans, et que les musulmans subissent ce qu’ils subiraient eux-mêmes, et cela en vertu du pacte par lequel ils ont eu des droits inviolables de jouir de notre protection, et d’être défendus contre tout mal portant atteinte à leurs garanties, de sorte qu’ils soient associés aux musulmans dans la bonne et dans la mauvaise fortune.

Il ne faut pas que les chrétiens aient à souffrir, par abus, au sujet des mariages, ce qu’ils ne voudraient pas. Les musulmans ne devront pas prendre en mariage les filles chrétiennes contre la volonté des parents de celles-ci, ni opprimer leurs familles, si elles venaient à leur refuser les fiançailles et le mariage ; car de tels mariages ne devront pas se faire sans leur agrément et leur désire, et sans qu’ils les aient approuvés et y aient consenti.

Si un musulman a pris pour femme une chrétienne, il est tenu de respecter sa croyance chrétienne. Il la laissera libre d’écouter ses supérieurs comme elle l’entendra, et de suivre la route qui lui indique sa religion. Quiconque malgré cet ordre, contraindra son épouse à agir contre sa religion en quelque point que ce soit, enfreindra l’alliance de Dieu et entrera en rébellion contre le pacte de son Apôtre, et Dieu le comptera parmi les imposteurs.

Si les chrétiens viennent à avoir besoin de secours et de l’appui des musulmans pour réparer leurs églises et leurs couvents, ou bien pour arranger leurs affaires et les choses de leur religion, ceux-ci devront les aider et les soutenir. Mais ils ne doivent pas faire cela dans le but d’en recevoir rétribution, mais par aide charitable pour restaurer cette religion, par fidélité au pacte de l’envoyé de Dieu, par pure donation, et comme acte méritoire devant Dieu et son apôtre.

Les musulmans ne pourront pas dans la guerre entre eux et leurs ennemis se servir de quelqu’un des chrétiens pour l’envoyer comme messager, ou éclaireur, ou guide, ou espion, ou bien l’employer a d’autre besognes de guerre. Quiconque fera cela a l’un d’eux, lésera les droits de Dieu, sera rebelle a son Apôtre, et se mettra en dehors de son alliance. Et rien n’est permis à un musulman (vis-à-vis les chrétiens) en dehors de l’obéissance a ces prescriptions que Mohammed ben ‘Abdi Allah, apôtre de Dieu, a édictées en faveur de la religion des chrétiens.

Je leur fais aussi des conditions et j’exige d’eux la promesse de les accomplir et d’y satisfaire comme le leur ordonne leur religion. Entre autres choses, qu’aucun d’eux ne soit éclaireur ou espion, ni secrètement ni ouvertement, au profit d’un ennemi de guerre, contre un musulman. Que personne d’entre eux ne loge les ennemis des musulmans dans sa maison, d’où ils pourraient attendre l’occasion de s’élancer à l’attaque. Que ces ennemis ne fassent point halte dans leurs régions, ni dans leurs villages ni dans leurs oratoires, ni dans quelque lieu appartenant à leurs coreligionnaires. Qu’ils ne prêtent point appui aux ennemis de guerre contre les musulmans, en leur fournissant des armes, ou des chevaux ou des hommes ou quoi que ce soit, ou en leur donnant de bons traitements. Ils doivent héberger trois jours et trois nuits ceux des musulmans qui font halte chez eux, avec leurs bêtes, et leur offrir partout où ils se trouvent et partout où ils vont la même nourriture dont ils vivent eux-mêmes, sans toutefois être obliges de supporter d’autres charges gênantes et onéreuses.

S’il arrive qu’un musulman ait besoin de se cacher dans leurs demeures, ou dans leurs oratoires, ils doivent lui donner l’hospitalité, lui prête appui, et lui fournir de leur nourriture tout le temps qu’il sera chez eux, s’efforçant de le tenir cache, de ne point permettre à l’ennemi de le découvrir, et pourvoyant a tous ses besoins.

Quiconque transgressera une des ordonnances de cet édit, ou l’altérera, se mettra en dehors de l’alliance de Dieu et de son Envoyé.

Que chacun observe les traités et les alliances qui ont été contractés avec les moines, et que j’ai contractée moi-même, et tout engagement que chaque prophète a contracte avec sa nation, pour leur assurer la sauvegarde et la fidèle protection, et pour leur servir de garantie.

Jusqu’à l’heure de la Résurrection cela ne doit être ni viole ni altère, s’il plait Dieu.


[1] Le traité d’Houdaybiya est un pacte signé en 628 entre Muhammad et les autorités mecquoises qui devaient permettre au Prophète et à ses fidèles de se rendre en pèlerinage à La Mecque pendant trois jours l’année suivante. Il prévoyait également une période de paix de dix ans entre les deux parties. Mais les Mecquois brisèrent le traité l’année suivante et en janvier 630 Muhammad décide de conquérir la ville .

[2] Zaydan, Jurji. Omeyyades et Abbassides : Être la quatrième partie de l’histoire de Jorge Zaydan de la civilisation islamique. Trans. DS Margoliouth. Leyden: EJ Brill; London: Luzac & Co., 1907.

Il existe une autre version plus étendue de cet acte (qui serait daté du 8 Octobre 625) retranscrite par J.G. Pitzipios-Bey dans L’Orient, les réformes de l’Empire byzantin, E.Dentu, Paris, 1858.

Cette transcription est tirée de la traduction française par Pierre Briot (Histoire juridique de l’empire mahométan publié en 1670) de l’Histoire de l’état présent de l’Empire ottoman du Chevalier Paul Rycault paru en Anglais et publié en 1668. . A noter que l’ouvrage en question date le Pacte au 8 Octobre 625 soit la quatrième année de l’Hégire.

[3] Ainsi dans la transcription de Pitzpios-Bey,le Prophète engage en conscience les chrétiens à respecter les conditions suivantes :

1 – « Qu’aucun chrétien n’entretienne un soldat ennemi des musulmans ; qu’il ne donne aucune retraite à un ennemi des musulmans, et qu’il ne souffre point qu’il fasse séjour dans leurs maisons, dans leurs églises ou dans leurs couvents de religieux ; qu’il ne fournisse point sous main le camp de leurs ennemis, d’hommes, d’armes et de chevaux, et n’ait aucune correspondance ou engagement avec eux… »

2- « Qu’ils fournissent pendant trois jours à chaque musulman les choses nécessaires pour sa subsistance et pour celle de ses bêtes, et cela honnêtement et en différentes sortes de viandes ; qu’ils fassent aussi tout pour les défendre si on les attaque et pour les garder de tous accidents fâcheux. C’est pourquoi si quelques musulmans souhaitent de se cacher dans quelques-unes de leurs maisons, ils le cacheront de bon cœur, et le tireront du péril où il se trouvera sans le découvrir de son ennemi. »

3- Si les chrétiens gardent la foi de leur côté, ceux qui violeront ces conditions, quels qu’ils puissent être, et feront quelque chose de contraire, seront privés des avantages contenus dans l’alliance de Dieu et de son messager, et seront indignes de jouir des privilèges accordés aux évêques et aux moines chrétiens, de même que les croyants seront privés des avantages contenus dans le Coran. »

[4] Sur la question de l’authenticité de ce Pacte et la réfutation des allégations de faux, voir la longue étude historique qui lui a été consacrée par le Dr John Andrew Morrow dans son ouvrage publié en 2013, « The Covenants of the Prophet Muhammad with the Christians of the World. Kettering ».

[5] C.f, Andrew Morrow, op.cit.

[6] Des décrets datant de 965, 1109, 1110, 1134, 1135, 1154 et 1156 CE. Le calife fatimide al-Hafiz ordonna à ses gouverneurs de respecter le Pacte Sinaï en 1134 CE. Les Ayyoubides ont renouvelé l’alliance avec les moines du Sinaï en 1195, 1199, 1201 / 02 et 1210 / 11 CE.

[7] Avant 1517, le décret prophétique d’origine était conservé au monastère de Sainte-Catherine. En 1517 un Firman de Selim I confirme qu’il a pris connaissance du pacte, l’a présenté à un comité de chercheur qui l’ont trouvé conforme et digne de foi et qu’il l’a remplacé par une copie conforme certifiée.

[8] John Morrow, op.cit.

[9] Ce dernier place l’alliance du Sinaï après le conflit de Mahomet avec les Juifs, à savoir autour du traité de Hudaybiyyah, ce qui est cohérent avec la datation d’Ibn Kathir.  Et surtout il affirme que « son document remarquable a été fidèlement conservés par les annalistes de l’Islam”.

[10] Décret de Mahomet relatif aux chrétiens, Echos d’Orient, Vol 1, Numéro 6, p.p 170-171, année 1898.

[11] Mahmoud Hussein, les musulmans aux défis de Daesh, Gallimard, 2016.

Analyste, chercheur, consultant et journaliste politique basé entre Genève et Beyrouth. Auteur d’études, de rapports, d’articles de presse et pour revues spécialisées, d’éditoriaux, de chroniques. D.E.A en Science politique et relations internationales – Université de Genève. Domaines de spécialisation : Les rapports entre la culture, la religion, identité et la politique – Les minorités religieuses, culturelles, ethniques du monde arabe – Les relations islamo-chrétiennes – le christianisme dans le monde arabe – Laïcité, communautarisme et multiculturalisme – Le Vatican – Le système politique libanais, les institutions et la démocratie – De nombreuses problématiques liées au Moyen Orient (Liban, Syrie, conflit israélo-arabe).

By Dr. John Andrew Morrow

As if the mass rapes committed by self-professed Islamists in Syria, Iraq, and Nigeria did not suffice, I am saddened to report a long string of attacks in another nation. According to confirmed reports, as many as one hundred and forty-eight women and girls have been abducted, tortured, hanged to death or burned alive. In some cases, the victims were sexually assaulted as part of the process. In at least four cases, the victims were pregnant. Some of them had their stomachs slit open.

The first case involves a young woman who supposedly gave a glass of poisoned lemonade to a teenage extremist. Although the terrorists tried to force her to confess, she steadfastly refused and was hanged.

The second case involves a woman accused of killing a terrorist who supposedly stumbled upon some stolen goods in her home. The terrorists murdered her 15-year old son in front of her eyes although he was not involved in any theft or murder. The boy was killed to traumatize his mother. After gang-raping the accused woman, they wrapped a rope around her neck and hanged her from a bridge.

The third case involves a mentally ill woman who was accused of murdering her female employer. In festive mood, local terrorists placed in a car, tied a rope around her neck, and fastening it to a tree limb. They cheerfully drove off at high speed, strangling her to death. Her body was dragged out of the car, her eyes were blown out with pistols, and her body literally cut in half by a shower of shot-gun pellets and riffle bullets.

The fourth case deals with a seventeen-year old girl who was sexually assaulted by two terrorists who broke into her home. Her brother responded to her cries and maimed or murdered one of the rapists. The courageous young girl reported her sexual assault to authorities, believing that the culprits would be put to death according to religious law. Rather than punish the rapists, the authorities accused the victim of fornication and placed her in prison. Frustrated that the victim’s brother escaped retaliation, a dozen terrorists dragged the young girl out of prison and hanged her in his place.

The fifth case involves a brave woman who denounced the murder of her husband to the authorities. After one of their men was murdered, the terrorists started randomly murdering any men who might have been involved, including the husband of the woman in question. To punish her for speaking out, the terrorists hanged her by her feet, doused her with gasoline and oil, and set her body on fire. One terrorist took out a long knife used to disembowel animals by butchers and slit her stomach open. The baby of the victim, who was eight months pregnant, tumbled to the ground with a “little cry.” With shouts of joy, the terrorists tramped the baby to death then sprayed bullets into the blistered body of its dying mother.

The sixth case deals with two young men and two young women. The older man, who was twenty, was accused of murdering a terrorist for sexually assaulting the young women in question. They placed his testicles in the jaws of a vice and slowly closed them until he confessed to murder. Both he and his younger brother were instantly put to death. The women were to be hanged from a bridge as a warning to other women. The older woman, who was four-months pregnant from her rapist, fell from a bridge twice as she tried to escape. The final fall would prove fatal. The terrorists laughed at how difficult it was to kill such a big woman. The younger sister, who was only 14, was almost full term when she was murdered by the terrorists. Since nobody claimed to bodies, some terrorists decided to bury the remains of the young girl on the second of her murder. One witness claimed that the movements of the unborn child could still be detected.

The seventh case involves a young married woman. Armed extremists broke into her home, threatened her husband with rifle barrels to his head, and abducted her. The bloodthirsty mob of terrorists took her outside of town, stripped her naked, subjected her to mass rape, and hanged her from a tree. Thousands upon thousands of villagers witnessed the gruesomely horrific scene.

The eighth and final case involves a husband and wife who were accused of murdering a man. One thousand terrorists hunted them down and tied them to trees. Their fingers were cut off, one at a time, and their ears were chopped off. In an orgy of blood and gore, the terrorists used bore screws to extract pieces of raw, quivering, flesh from their arms, legs, and bodies, which they then kept as souvenirs. If one wandered through town, human remains in jars of alcohol were proudly displayed on the windowsills of terrorists.

This war against women, waged by misogynistic men, has cost the lives of nearly one-hundred-and-fifty daughters, wives, and mothers. The crimes were committed in Syria and Iraq between 2012 and 2017. The perpetrators of these atrocities all belonged to the same race. They all belonged to the same religion. Their actions were widely supported by religious and political leaders. The perpetrators were all Arabs and Muslims. The victims were Jamilah Salim, Layla Nur, Naylah Badawi, Maryam Salaam, Mariyyah Samir, Habibah Halabi, Ruh Husayn, and Karimah Hindi. Surely, Islam and Muslims are to blame.

In reality, the crimes were committed in the United States of America in the early decades of the 20thcentury. The perpetrators of these atrocities were all white, Anglo-Saxon, Protestant Christians. They acted with the active and passive support of judges, police officers, and politicians. The victims were all African American women: Jennie Steers, Laura Nelson, Anne Barksdale, Marie Scott, Mary Turner, Miss Holbert, Maggie Houze, Alma Houze, and Cordella Stevenson. White Christian Americans: you have been served your own bitter medicine. Let it be a lesson to you all.

“How can we, white Christian Americans, be held accountable for crimes that we never committed?” you may ask. You cannot and neither can we as Muslims. “Well, why don’t you Muslims speak out against terrorism?” We do, but what about you? Why didn’t your ancestors speak out against slavery, segregation, racism, discrimination, and mass lynching? Slavery in America lasted from 1501 to 1865. Why did it take your good Christian ancestors three hundred and fifty years to stop it? Segregation lasted until 1964. Why did it take your Christian parents and grandparents nearly a century to put an end to such a despicable and dehumanizing practice?

If Islam is to blame for every crime committed by Muslims then Christianity is to blame for every crime committed by Christians. African Americans, Catholic Americans, and Native Americans were murdered, in the name of Christ, with crosses blazing, by the thousands. Millions upon millions of human beings were murdered by Christians during colonialism, imperialism, World War I, World War II, the Korean War, the Vietnam War, the Afghan War, and the Iraq War. The criminals self-identified as Christians. They attended church services. They received the blessings of army chaplains. They even identified some of the conflict in question as Crusades, Christian holy wars against non-Christians. So how dare you, self-professed Caucasian Christians, scapegoat all Muslims and lay the burden of blame on the religion of Islam. Learn something from the Christ you claim to follow: “Do not do unto others as you would not them to do unto you.”

As horrific and hard-hitting as these accounts may be, they serve as a sober reminder that the human condition is the same in all places and among all people regardless of their religious background. Since history is written to serve the interests of people in power, the barbarity of white Christians has always been minimized, including the savagery of the First and Second World Wars, while the barbarity of black Africans, Amerindians, and Asians, who were defending themselves from white aggression, has always been exaggerated. Whether it was in Europe, Africa, Asia or the Americas, white, so-called Christians, committed crimes beyond belief, both maliciously and hypocritically, “in the name of Jesus.”

Dr. John Andrew Morrow is an Amerindian with Canadian and American citizenship. He received his PhD from the University of Toronto in the year 2000. He worked as an Assistant, Associate, and Full Professor of Foreign Languages for over a decade and a half at Park University, Northern State University, Eastern New Mexico University, the University of Virginia, and Ivy Tech Community College. He is the author of over thirty academic books in the fields of Hispanic, Islamic, and Indigenous Studies. A public figure and activist, he lectures all around the globe and acts as an advisor to world leaders. In recognition for his accomplishments, Dr. Morrow received an ISNA Interfaith Leadership Award in 2016. He may be followed on Twitter at @drjamorrow. His websites are www.johnandrewmorrow.com as well as www.covenantsoftheprophet.com. His videos can be viewed on The Covenants of the Prophet Channel on YouTube.

By Hanan al-Harbi

On May 31, 2017, an article was published by Turkish-American journalist Melek Kaylan in Forbes Magazine. Titled “The Hidden Documents of Islam that can Help Defang Islamic Terror,” the piece marks the moment that the Covenants of the Prophet pierced the major, mainstream, media. Even though the documents in question have been consecutively transmitted by Jewish, Samaritan, Christian, Muslim, and Zoroastrian sources from the 7th century to the 21st century, and that they were attested and authenticated by hundreds of scholars, they lingered in the background, hidden in plain sight, like the Sun behind the clouds, waiting to spread their socio-political and spiritual rays as a precursor to the return of the Prophet Jesus and Imam Mahdi.

Rather than rejoice that a positive image of Islam was being presented to a worldwide audience, Rebecca Masterton, a British Shiite Muslim convert, proclaimed in pontifical fashion that the Covenants of the Prophet were believed to be 12th century forgeries. Like the fleeting whisperer, she shed doubts on the documents, without providing any proof to support her baseless contentions. If the Covenants of the Prophet were authentic, argued Masterton, then provide carbon-dating evidence that they date back to the 7th century. Such ill-intended ignorance is staggering.

Dr. Masterton affirms that the Covenants of the Prophet are 12th century forgeries. The original copy of the Covenant of Najran was found in the House of Wisdom in the 9th century. How, then, can this document be a 12th century forgery? The Covenant with St. Catherine’s Monastery was described in detail in the firmans of the Fatimid Caliphs dating as far back as the 10th century. How, then, can this document be a 12th century forgery?

Masterton also ignores that the existence of the original was confirmed by Sultan Selim and subsequent Ottoman authorities. The original, issued by the Prophet and handwritten by Imam ‘Ali, was also viewed in the Ottoman Treasury by Muslim and non-Muslim scholars from the 16th century until the early 20th century.

As can be evidenced by her comments, Masterton is obviously oblivious to the fact that other Covenants of the Prophet survive to this day in Syria, Palestine, Turkey, Iran, and India. These documents have been examined by experts who concluded that they date back to the 7th century. Whether these are originals or first hand copies of originals is subject to debate and has yet to be definitively determined. They are, nonetheless, some of the earliest documents in the history of Islam.

To suggest that the Covenants of the Prophet are forgeries unless they are confirmed to be carbon-dated to the 7th century is both ignorant and ill-intended. Rather than demand the results of scientific-dating methods, why doesn’t Dr. Masterton bring forth the original 7thcentury copy of the Qur’an that was revealed to the Prophet and written down by his scribes?

If she were a Sunni, she could be called upon to provide original 7th century copies of the prophetic sayings found in Bukhari, Muslim, Tirmidhi, Abu Dawud, Ahmad, Nasa’i, Ibn Majah, and Malik. Problem is, they date from the 8th, 9th, and 10th centuries.

Since she is a Shiite, perhaps she can provide the original sources of the traditions found in Nahj al-Balaghah, which was only compiled in the 10th century. While she is at it, where are the original sources used by Kulayni, Ibn Babawayh, and al-Tusi in works that were compiled in the 10th and 11th century? Where is the original, carbon-dated, copy of the Sahifah al-Sajjadiyyah by Imam ‘Ali Zayn al-‘Abidin? Or does she accept Majlisi’s Bihar al-Anwar as authentic? The work in question was completed in the 17th century, in 1698, a full 1066 years after the passing of the Prophet.

Rebecca Masterton readily accepts copies of copies of copies of copies of copies of copies of copies that were transmitted orally from narrator to narrator to narrator to narrator to narrator to narrator to narrator to narrator to narrator to narrator as authentic; however, she rejects primary documents as well as first, second, and third copies of primary documents as dubious forgeries.

Rebecca Masterton prefers to swim in the swamp of lies produced a millennium after the passing of the Prophet rather than accept copies of manuscripts that were dictated directly by the Messenger of Allah, handwritten by Imam ‘Ali and Mu‘awiyyah, and witnessed by dozens of Companions of the Prophet. People like Masterton live in the world of an imaginary Islam, accepting legends and myths as authentic, while rejecting the most significant of historical documents.

If Masterton believes that the Covenants of the Prophet are forgeries merely because some of the surviving copies supposedly date to the 12th century, and if she believes that every source is false unless we have original carbon-dated copies, she is completely and utterly ignorant of the Islamic textual tradition. After all, as the aphorism goes, “Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.”

Considering the comments that Dr. Rebecca Masterton has made regarding the Covenants of the Prophet, her qualifications to comment on the subject of Arabic historiography can, and should, be called into question. In fact, at the 2015 Muslim Congress, she admitted to Dr. Morrow that “I am not an ‘alimah. I do not consider myself a scholar of Islam.” I could not agree with her more. However, who am I to judge? I defer the ultimate decision to Muhammad, the Messenger of Allah, who clearly stated in the Covenant of Najran:

He who breaks it, opposes it or changes it, will carry his crime on his head for he will have betrayed the Covenant of Allah, broken his faith, resisted His Authority and contravened the will of His Messenger: he will thus be an imposter in the eyes of Allah. For protection is obligatory in Allah’s religion and the Covenant is confirmed. He who does not abide by this Covenant will have violated his sacred obligations, and he who violates his sacred obligations is unfaithful and will be rejected by Allah and by all sincere Believers. (Morrow, John Andrew. The Covenants of the Prophet Muhammad with the Christians of the World. Tacoma, WA: Angelico Press and Sophia Perennis, 2013: 293)

Hanan al-Harbi is a Danish-Syrian journalist who is deeply devoted to Classical Islam. She is a graduate of the University of Iceland, in Reykjavík, where she studied Political Science. She spends her summers in Greenland where she finds solace in the island’s solitude and breathtaking beauty. She is a contributor to Veterans Today, Katehon, and The Muslim Post, among other publications.  

The Growing Movement to Inform the World of Prophet Muhammad’s Covenants With Christians

Forbes just published an article by Melik Kaylan which caught my attention and the attention of some of my colleagues. Kaylan refers to The Covenants Initiative, a body of scholars in the West which is spearheading a movement to promote Prophet Muhammad’s Covenants with the Christians of his time. These Covenants have been well documented by scholars, primarily by John Andrew Morrow, who brought them to life back in 2013 with his groundbreaking book.

As Kaylan mentions in his piece, successive Caliphs renewed the Covenants, which can be read here, because they provided explicit declarations of tolerance or, as some have theorized it – religious pluralism.

According to Kaylan, the Covenants demonstrate “incontrovertibly that the basic Wahhabist or Salafist notion of indiscriminate jihad amounts to heresy.” He proceeds:

… in the context of ISIS specifically, which purports to be a Caliphate founded on strict adherence to originalist tenets – [the Covenants are] a bombshell. With Mohammad’s own imprint on them they represent the strictest orthodoxy. There’s nothing mysterious about why people, and governments, forgot about the Covenants in the largely secular twentieth century… As sharia makes a widespread comeback in the Islamic world, the message of the Covenants becomes acutely germaine.

In his interview with Morrow, Kaylan asked several pertinent questions to which Morrow responded with clarity and courage. Morrow states in the writeup: “There’s a lot of money spreading dangerously partial knowledge [of Islam]. Our aim is to turn a scholarly pursuit into a movement to raise awareness worldwide among Muslims and non-Muslims alike.”

The Covenants Initiative, Morrow explains, has dozens of contributors and academics in many countries that are translating the Covenants into many languages. “It’s a pretty young endeavor but we’re gaining ground,” Morrow adds.

Kaylan ends his review of the Covenants Initiative by stating the following: “It’s really astonishing, not to say egregious, that we in the West are not mobilizing this resource with so much at stake. What have we got to lose?”

Indeed, what have we got to lose?

I cover conflicts, frontiers and upheavals mired in history.

Forbes Magazine

May 31, 2017

In fact, there are three such original documents in existence with the prophet’s own signature, actually his thumbprint, authenticating them. They were always legally binding on Muslims and exact copies were officially issued down the centuries with calligraphic precision by successive Caliphs. Oddly enough, their obscurity is only a relatively recent phenomenon. In the days of religious empires, up to World War 1, the world knew about them – they’re well documented in the historical record – as did the Muslim faithful and their leaders who publicly abided by them. In our time, they have become more relevant than ever, and, despite considerable resistance, a movement spearheaded by scholars in the West (the Covenants Initiative) is pushing to return them to prominence. According to experts and increasing numbers of prominent Imams the message in the texts have the potential to halt the dynamics of radicalization in the Muslim world.

The documents are known as Covenants, specifically Covenant dispensations granted originally by the Prophet vouchsafing the protection of Christians and Jews by Muslims. Successive Caliphs then renewed the Covenants – explicit declarations of tolerance – down to the Ottoman period until the abolition of the Caliphate by the Turkish republic of Ataturk. The Covenants demonstrate incontrovertibly that the basic Wahhabist or Salafist notion of indiscriminate jihad amounts to heresy. And in the context of ISIS specifically, which purports to be a Caliphate founded on strict adherence to originalist tenets – they’re a bombshell. With Mohammad’s own imprint on them they represent the strictest orthodoxy. There’s nothing mysterious about why people, and governments, forgot about the Covenants in the largely secular twentieth century. There was no need for Islamic law to protect minorities when most states adopted civil codes. Those that didn’t, like the Saudis, had always resisted central authority and followed their own heterodox code, one that became – with the support of oil money – the standard for madrassas globally. As sharia makes a widespread comeback in the Islamic world, the message of the Covenants becomes acutely germaine.

Below is the text of the Covenant in the Ottoman archives, actually an extract from the full text which is much longer. It was given by the Prophet in Medina to the visiting representatives of St.Catherine’s (Christian) monastery in Egypt’s Sinai where it remained until the Ottoman Sultan Selim 1 conquered the Middle East and claimed the Caliphate. He gave them a fresh declaration in 1517 with his imprimatur and took the original back to Constantinople. The monks still possess the Sultan’s version.

This is a message from Muhammad ibn Abdullah, as a covenant to those who adopt Christianity, near and far, we are with them.

Verily I, the servants, the helpers, and my followers defend them, because Christians are my citizens; and by Allah! I hold out against anything that displeases them.

No compulsion is to be on them. Neither are their judges to be removed from their jobs nor their monks from their monasteries. No one is to destroy a house of their religion, to damage it, or to carry anything from it to the Muslims’ houses.

Should anyone take any of these, he would spoil God’s covenant and disobey His Prophet. Verily, they are my allies and have my secure charter against all that they hate.

No one is to force them to travel or to oblige them to fight. The Muslims are to fight for them. If a female Christian is married to a Muslim, it is not to take place without her approval. She is not to be prevented from visiting her church to pray. Their churches are to be respected. They are neither to be prevented from repairing them nor the sacredness of their covenants.

No one of the nation (Muslims) is to disobey the covenant till the Last Day (end of the world).

Two other comparable original documents remain extant, according to the leading academic in the field Dr. John Andrew Morrow, a Canadian convert to Islam from Toronto who now lives in Indiana, director of the Covenants Initiative and author of seminal books on the subject since 2013. One document belongs to a Christian monastery in Syria which, under threat from ISIS, is now in a secret location. The other belongs to an Armenian monastery in Jerusalem and is closely guarded. Dr. Morrow’s research has also unearthed the texts of ancient Covenants with Jews retained down the centuries by communities from Yemen and Egypt. According to Dr.Morrow, “very few Muslims today are aware of the Covenants generally. Most Muslim Seminaries don’t teach them for whatever reason – willful amnesia perhaps. There’s a lot of money spreading dangerously partial knowledge. Our aim is to turn a scholarly pursuit into a movement to raise awareness worldwide among Muslims and non-Muslims alike. We have dozens of contributors, academics in many countries, working with us, translating into numerous languages. It’s a pretty young endeavor but we’re gaining ground.” Dr.Morrow has visited the White House and the Pope was photographed holding up one of his books. He lectured crowds and gatherings of Imams in the Gulf in 2015 and many other conferences since. “It’s amazing that we need to do this at all,” says Dr.Morrow, “but these Islamist extremists don’t read books. They’re thugs who find an excuse to wield power. It’s the age-old ignorance and bloodshed cycle that we’re trying to break.”

It’s a very odd circumstance that mainstream media in the West have almost totally ignored the Covenants despite growing awareness and numerous overtures by Dr.Morrow and others (including myself) to publicize their existence and spread their message. On at least one occasion a reluctant editor openly admitted that his publication didn’t want to wade into ‘fatwa territory’. Yet the story itself is a sufficiently compelling one having all the elements of a historical, archeological, investigative yarn that has acute relevance in the present, may indeed save lives. One newspaper turned it down as too academic. And there’s the rub because most mainstream media in the West wont wade into intra-Islamic controversy for fear of making mistakes or offending minority sensibilities. As the Covenants website shows, no such fastidiousness prevents the rest of global media from taking notice of the movement or its aims. According to Dr.Morrow, the Covenants are supposed to be as important as the Koran to Muslim doctrine. They are, at the very least, a legitimizing instrument on the side of any Imam facing down his extremist rivals in a community or country. It’s really astonishing, not to say egregious, that we in the West are not mobilizing this resource with so much at stake. What have we got to lose?

By Charles Upton for New Age Islam

30 May 2017

The Covenants Initiative has recently been approached by various people who were obviously hoping to insert the Covenants of the Prophet Muhammad, peace and blessings be upon him, into this or that worldly agenda: that of Russia, that of Saudi Arabia and Qatar, that of Iran. Since these people have identified themselves to us as Muslims, we feel justified in addressing them in terms of the spiritual duties incumbent upon all Muslims according to the norms of our religion.

What many Muslims may not understand about the Covenants of the Prophet is that they are nothing less, under prevailing conditions, and given the present state of Islam, than a call to repentance. We have no interest in making them “acceptable” to various interests within the Muslim world who seem to believe that the clear word of the Prophet can be made consistent with, and even used to empower, various pseudo-Islamic ideologies that contradict it at every point. It is the fond hope of hypocrites, of worldly human beings pretending to religion that Truth and falsehood are, or can be made to be, fundamentally compatible. Hasn’t life as they have lived it proved this hypothesis? In their daily experience they have found truth useful for some things, falsehood a better approach for others, clarity appropriate in certain situations, ambiguity and prevarication the tools of choice for still others. This is simply the actual nature of human life in the world; it comprises a set of standards that both honest worldlings and religious hypocrites implicitly accept as the highest law, the de facto Shari’ah that determines and judges all their actions. Unfortunately for them—and most especially for the hypocrites—it is not the law of Allah. Because the indisputable fact is that the commandments issued by the Prophet Muhammad in his Covenants, which he made binding upon all Muslims “until the coming of the Hour”, are clearly and diametrically opposed to many of the teachings of terrorist ideologues such as Ibn ‘Abd al-Wahhab and Ibn Taymiyyah.

The Covenants Command:

Defend the Christians from their enemies; never fight them unless they have first taken up arms against you; never damage their buildings; don’t prevent your Christian wives from going to church—and never under any circumstances kill or persecute someone simply because he or she refuses to convert to Islam! Ibn ‘Abd al-Wahhab and Ibn Taymiyyah, on the other hand, teach that the blood of Christians is Halal simply because they are not Muslims. It is therefore as clear as day that if you accept the one, you are duty bound to reject the other. Truth has come and falsehood has vanished away; certainly falsehood is ever bound to vanish (Q. 17:81). Anyone who still has the temerity to claim that it is possible to accept both the validity of the Covenants of the Prophet and the orthodoxy of Ibn ‘Abd al-Wahhab or Ibn Taymiyyah after being confronted with these facts has begun the process, not only of perverting his or her own conscience, but of destroying his or her own mind. And this is a trajectory that, once embarked upon, is very hard to reverse. O believers! if you obey some amongst those who have received the Scripture, after your very Faith will they make you infidels! (Q. 3:100)

Is there any way out of this impasse for those who have not been able to summon up sufficient moral courage to reject much of what they have heretofore erroneously believed to be the teachings of their own religion, the fundamental principles of Islam?

As I see it, only two ways are open to them. The first is to characterize, and accept, the Prophet Muhammad, peace and blessings be upon him, as a liar and a hypocrite, one who made reassuring overtures of friendship to Christians and Jews and Sabaeans and Zoroastrians when it suited his purposes, and felt no qualms about stabbing them in the back when the winds had changed and another approach was called for. This “version” of the Prophet of Islam—which, by the way, is identical to that of the Islamophobes—presents certain apparent advantages to those Muslims who adopt it, since it allows Muhammad to act as the archetype and justification for their own cunning and dishonesty, their own cruelty and treachery. Unfortunately for them, the picture of the Prophet transmitted by both the Qur’an and the Prophetic Covenants gives the lie to this self-serving perversion of the peerless stature and unblemished reputation—unblemished in the sight of Allah if not in that of the dunya—of him who was sent “as a mercy to all the worlds”. It is clear as daybreak that those who take this approach have no fear of Allah, and consequently—unless they repent—they must encounter a painful doom.

The other way of escaping this impasse—the second brand of “wiggle-room”—is simply to assert that the Covenants are forgeries. This is a much more straightforward and honest approach; however, it has the drawback of committing those who adopt it to a rather exhaustive and time-consuming course of study and research—one that has thankfully been made much easier, however, by the work of Dr. John Andrew Morrow in his The Covenants of the Prophet Muhammad with the Christians of the World, as well as the upcoming two volume anthology he contributed to and edited, Islam and the People of the Book: Critical Studies on the Covenants of the Prophet. It is our stated position that these works have proven, beyond any reasonable doubt, the substantial validity of the majority of the documents presented as Covenants of the Prophet, and of the rightly-guided caliphs. Let those who reject this conclusion, reassured and empowered by the certainty that they are right, proceed to confront our arguments, and refute them, one by one, marshalling the same thoroughness and accuracy of scholarship that we have employed in establishing their validity.

If, however, they shy away from taking on this task, which could certainly prove onerous, what can be said about them? At this point let there be no mistake: the Covenants of the Prophet are dangerous documents. If they are in fact legitimate, they will require many Muslims to change many things in both their communal and their personal lives. And if any Muslim merely suspects that these documents may be genuine, but says to himself, “they might be valid, but finding out for sure means more labour and inconvenience than I’m willing to put up with”, then that Muslim has shown himself to be a hypocrite in the Presence of Allah—and when are we ever not in that Presence?

Those who know too much have lost the right to make excuses. Any Muslim as ignorant of his or her religion as most Wahhabi/Salafi “authorities” might conceivably be exonerated under the “acts are judged by their intent” rule. But whoever has heard of the Covenants of the Prophet, and given even a cursory glance at Dr. Morrow’s research, already knows too much, which means that the person in question knows either that he has no interest in learning the truth of his religion; that he is lying to himself; or that he has deliberately destroyed the part of his mind that could ever inform him that he is lying to himself, and has thereby demonstrated that he has no fear of Allah. Certainly he fears the Dunya; he fears those who have the power to deprive him of his livelihood if not his life; such fear is understandable, maybe even (under some circumstances) excusable. But as for Almighty Allah, the Abaser, the Avenger, the Knower of Each Separate Thing, the All-Just, such a Muslim has proved that this Incomparable Reality is worth no more to him than a momentary shrug of the shoulders—and for this there is no excuse.  It is not their eyes that are blind but the hearts in their breasts that are blind (Q. 22:46). There are many who firmly believe that they believe in Allah, but in fact do not. How can we be sure that such people exist? Their existence is clearly demonstrated by the fact that actions speak louder than words.

In light of these facts, we would suggest that anyone who does not want to place his or her immortal soul in greater jeopardy than it is already threatened with should stay far, far away from the Covenants of the Prophet: we would suggest this, except for the fact that even to have heard news of them places the obligation on every Muslim to determine for him- or herself whether or not they are true. Anyone who shirks this duty, having thereby proved that the commandments of the Prophet and the Will of Allah are matters of indifference to him, will find him- or herself among the losers—not by defeat, but by default. It is our duty to issue this warning on pain of being charged with leading the Muslims astray.

Furthermore, just as any prophetic Hadith which flatly contradicts the Noble Qur’an must immediately be discarded, we also need to seriously consider reviewing the entire body of Ahadith literature dealing with the proper relations between Muslims and other religious believers in light of the Covenants of the Prophet. The Hadith collections we possess were codified around three centuries after Muhammad’s death, while the historical and textual trail establishing the substantial validity of most of the documents claiming to be Prophetic Covenants stretches all the way back to the Prophet’s lifetime. They have been referenced in both Muslim and Christian sources as well as being periodically renewed by caliphs and sultans; we even know the identity of several of the scribes the Prophet dictated them to, notably ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib. Consequently, a case can be made that they possess a degree of authority greater than the Ahadith, second only to the Qur’an itself.

So we have now stated our position as clearly as we know how. There is no need for us to further repeat ourselves; it is our duty to warn, but it is not our duty to nag. We would only conclude by saying, to those who have made desire their god (45:23), the ones who are daily walking in the all-too-common dream that they will never die, never step into one pan of the Scales to be weighed against a feather, never be burned to the bone of their living souls by the steady gaze of the All-Seeing, but who depend upon the belief that they have time, time, infinite time to treat the world as a joke and a jest, a game and a pass-time, in safety, in security, in peace, in rest, in sleep—to these we say: sleepers, awake! Because there are some—all too many, in fact—to whom Mercy can come only as a warning: “Friend! Don’t step on that snake! His bite is venomous, and could well be fatal.”

And to those who, while they are not yet convinced, one way or the other, of the truth of the Covenants, have begun to fear in the secrecy of their hearts that we might be right, we only say: Alhamdulillah! Fear is Mercy! Your fear is the sign that Allah has not abandoned you.

—-

Charles Upton was born in 1948. His books include Day and Night on the Sufi Path, Virtues of the Prophet, Reflections of Tasawwuf, The System of Antichrist, and, with Dr. John Andrew Morrow, The Words of Allah to the Prophet Muhammad: Forty Sacred Sayings. He is also the conceiver of the Covenants Initiative, an international movement of Muslims to protect persecuted Christians, based on Dr. Morrow’s book The Covenants of the Prophet Muḥammad with the Christians of the World. In 1988, he embraced Islam. Since that time, under two shaykhs, he has followed the Sufi path. The website of the Covenants Initiative is http://www.covenantsoftheprophet.com.

URL: http://www.newageislam.com/islamic-ideology/charles-upton-for-new-age-islam/the-covenants-of-the-prophet-muhammad–a-call-to-repentance/d/111342

– See more at: http://www.newageislam.com/the-covenants-of-the-prophet-muhammad–a-call-to-repentance/islamic-ideology/d/111342#sthash.L0yxaH7V.dpuf

John Andrew Morrow for Crescent International

 “Where are the Moderate Muslims?” is a 4:57 minute video that has been watched by millions of people (https://www.prageru.com/courses/political-science/where-are-moderate-muslims). It is spreading like a deadly virus and that is exactly what it is: a politically transmitted disease. The video, which was produced by Prager University, immediately poses a problem of credibility. To commence with, Prager is not a university. It is merely a YouTube channel and a website. It is the mouthpiece of Dennis Prager, a conservative radio host, Republican, and Zionist who excoriated Keith Ellison for taking his oath of office on the Qur’an. Prager “University” is not in the business of education. It is in the business of propaganda, much of which could be labeled hate propaganda despite its professional production qualities. How anyone could consider Prager “University” a credible source is beyond comprehension. The fact that the video has drawn the attention of so many viewers is cause for concern. It highlights a lack of critical thinking capacity.

Although the video is polished, the same cannot be said of the speaker: Hussein Aboubakr. To all appearances, the man in question has no terminal degree and lacks scholarly credentials. He is a pro-Israel speaker, a Zionist troll, and an agent of Israel. He was featured in the video to provide “local color,” to give him “credibility” as a dark-skinned Arab with an accent who denounces Islam and Muslims. He is a member of JIMENA: Jews Indigenous to the Middle East and North Africa. The man is either a Jew posing as a Muslim or a former Muslim. As much as he pretends to be “liberal” and promote “reform,” the man is a hate-monger: nothing less. He specializes in antagonizing Muslims and inciting Islamophobia. He even wrote a piece about the “Holy (Anti-Semitic) Month of Ramadan.” Unlike other scholars who distinguish between the moderate Muslim majority and the extremist minority composed of Takfiri-Wahhabis, Hussein Aboubakr puts all Muslims in the same basket. Gross generalizations of this kind have no place in legitimate scholarly or political discourse. Demonizing entire populations is the work of demagogues, dictators, mass murderers, and genocidalists.

Aboubakr, who looks and sounds the part of the stereotypical immigrant taxi driver, claims to have grown up in a middle-class family. Although his family supposedly consisted of “moderate” Muslims, they were committed to the caliphate and believed that Muslims lost a place of prominence in the world when they stopped fighting, killing, and converting the infidels. If what he claims is true, and it is not merely an act to set the stage, then he was not from a mainstream Muslim family. He was from a Salafi-Jihadi family. He was from an Ikhwani or Muslim Brotherhood family. He was from an Islamist and Arab nationalist family. Although he can speak for himself and his potentially fictitious experience, he cannot speak for a billion and a half other Muslims who certainly do not share his views.

To give credibility to his claim that there are no moderate Muslims, Aboubakr relies on “data.” Polls, however, can be designed to obtain desired outcomes. They ask questions in a way that will elicit a specific response. Even when the polls are properly conducted, people can spin them. That seems to be the case here. If people want a sense on what Muslims think, they can consult Who Speaks for Islam? What a Billion Muslims Really Think by Dr. John Esposito and Dalia Mogahed. The research conducted by Gallup and Pew is routinely used to highlight the moderation of most Muslims. Statistics show that less than 0.001% of Muslims are terrorists and that only 7% of Muslims support Islamism or Jihadism. That is not to say that they are terrorists; however, they do indeed support Islamist opposition movements.

Considering that Muslims have lived under brutal monarchs and military dictators since the end of colonialism, and that their rulers are notorious for violating fundamental civil and human rights, it is understandable that some of them would express solidarity with those who seek to overthrow oppressors. Most Muslims, however, recognize that the cure is worse than the disease and that however bad some of their leaders may be, the Islamist terrorists who fight them can only take them from purgatory to hell.

Understanding full well that viewers and listeners need to be provided with key terms or slogans that will linger with them, Aboubakr invokes the threat of Shari‘ah, a term that has been maligned and demonized over the past few decades. When Islamophobes speak of Shari‘ah, they think about stoning people to death, lashing people, beheading them, and burning them alive. However, shari‘ah (in the literal sense) simply means law. So, yes, most Muslims believe in obeying the law. When Muslims say that they follow the Shari‘ah, they mean that they pray, fast, pay charity, and perform the pilgrimage. It means that they are practicing Muslims. A Muslim who believes in the Shari‘ah is like a Jew who follows the Halakhah and a Catholic who follows the Canon Law. In other words, when Muslims are asked about the Shari‘ah, they have one thing in mind; however, when non-Muslims think of the Shari‘ah, they have an entirely different idea in mind.

Although virtually all Muslim-majority countries have inherited the legal systems of their Western European colonizers, and that only Saudi Arabia and Iran claim to implement Islamic law, the former in a barbaric 7th century style, and the latter according to a modernized model that differs little from most countries in most matters, Aboubakr invokes so-called Shari‘ah punishments in order to appeal to anger and outrage. He fails to mention that the Shari‘ah law was codified over 1,000 years ago. This is like citing medieval European law and blaming it on Christianity. These legal codes were the product of their period. If the legal system in the Christian world had the opportunity to evolve, the same cannot be said of the legal system in much of the Muslim world, the natural evolution of which was stunted as a result of colonialism and imperialism. Although Shari‘ah has become stagnant in much of the Sunni world, the process of ijtihad or interpretation of the law provides an avenue through which it could potentially be applied to changing times and circumstances.

As anyone who has studied comparative religion will acknowledge, some ancient Islamic punishments are comparable to ancient Jewish punishments. In many cases, Muslim law is far more moderate. Unlike Jews, Muslims are not commanded to kill their children if they disobey their parents (Deuteronomy, 21:18–21). Unlike the Bible, the Qur’an does not command Muslims to slaughter infants and nursing children (1 Samuel, 15:3). It does not praise the dashing of babies against rocks (Psalms, 137:8–9) or ripping open the stomachs of pregnant women (Hosea, 13:16; 2 Kings, 15:16). Compared to medieval Christian law, which was devoid of justice or reason, Islamic law was extremely sophisticated and civilized. Muslims had a highly developed legal system while the Anglo Saxons were tossing accused witches into ponds: innocent if she drowns but guilty if she floats, in which case she would be burned alive.

Although the corporal punishments formed part of the code of law, they were rarely implemented. They acted as a deterrent. They were relics of nomadic Bedouin times when justice needed to be swift and when other modes of punishment, such as incarceration, were non-existent. When Muslims became sedentary, their judges were urged to err on the side of mercy. They were encouraged to avoid administering corporal punishments by ambiguities. For example, a list of conditions needs to be fulfilled to amputate a person’s hand for theft. The guilty party needed to be an adult. The adult needed to be sane. The stolen object had to be of a certain value. For example, it could not be an apple. The crime had to be premeditated. The thief could not be poor or needy. Although a man or woman who committed adultery could, theoretically face the death penalty, the burden of proof was virtually impossible to meet as it required four eyewitnesses to the repeated act of penetration. With the exception of Takfiri-Wahhabis, these types of corporal punishments are not implemented in Muslim-majority nations.

Islamophobes also ignore the fact that there is no single Shari‘ah or legal code in Islam. There are over half a dozen major schools of law in Islam. They have different punishments for different crimes. Some schools of thought avoided corporal punishments. They replaced them with fines and prison terms. Although it is not permissible to make what is illegal legal or vice versa, it is permissible to apply different punishments to different crimes. What is more, certain schools of jurisprudence, like the Maliki one, believed that Muslims could adopt pre-existing legal systems so long as they did not contradict basic moral principles. As for Muslims in non-Muslim lands, their obligation was not to impose the Shari‘ah on non-Muslims: it was to obey the law of the land.

Aboubakr claims that the Shari‘ah calls for the death penalty for adultery and apostasy when both these issues are disputed by Muslim jurists. Although some traditions speak of stoning, they are related to Jewish women who demanded that they be punished according to the laws of the Torah. As for the Qur’an, it mentions 100 lashes for fornication/adultery (24:2). While it is true that many Muslims believe adulterers should be stoned to death according to Islamic Law, most Jewish people would also admit that Jewish Law calls for the same punishment (Deuteronomy, 22:22). Although it is true that some Muslim jurists ruled that homosexual relations merited the death penalty, the same can be said of the Bible. As we read in Leviticus, “If a man has sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They are to be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads.” (20:13). Aboubakr cannot be anti-Muslim without also being anti-Christian and anti-Jewish.

As for leaving Islam, some scholars equate apostasy with desertion and treachery. If people left the Muslim community, and waged war alongside the enemies of Islam, then, and only then would they merit the death penalty. Historically, this is the same punishment that most nations have had in place for treason, desertion, and espionage. What is more, the Shari‘ah states that the punishment for apostasy only applies to adults who were born and raised Muslim, who were men, who were sane, and who refused to repent. Converts and women were generally excluded. Women, in particular, were only punished if they rejected Islam on three different occasions and then so, only by imprisonment. Many religions, including Zoroastrianism, Judaism, and Catholicism, have condemned apostates to death. Other religious groups resort to shunning. Finally, not all Muslim scholars believe in putting to death people who leave the Islamic faith. After all, the Qur’an states, “There is no coercion in matters of conviction” (2:256).

Laws are used to promote what a society values and to discourage what it detests. If the Shari‘ah provides severe punishments for fornication, adultery, and sexual assault, it is because Islam places tremendous value on chastity and sexual purity. If the Shari‘ah provides severe punishments for insulting God and the Prophet (pbuh), it is because it has a strong sense of the sacred. The real issue is not the crime but rather the punishment. The issue is the death penalty. Many Muslims, like many Americans, believe in the death penalty for serious crimes such as homicide, armed robbery, kidnapping, sexual assault, drug-trafficking, pimping, and the sexual exploitation of children. For most of history, the most efficient method of putting a person to death was by beheading or by hanging. The Western world has been hanging and beheading people for thousands of years. When they developed bullets, some countries started to use the firing squad. Some countries use lethal injection or electrocution. Countries with the highest number of executions include the US, China, Saudi Arabia, and Iraq. Either you are for the death penalty or you are against it; 62% of Americans support the death penalty. Does that make them extremists?

In an act of academic dishonesty, Aboubakr selectively cites and misrepresents the findings of the Pew Forum. He focuses on a few issues in a few countries while ignoring the dozens of other countries that were surveyed. He stresses that large numbers of Egyptians and Jordanians believe in the death penalty for leaving Islam; however, he conveniently hides the fact that most Lebanese, Iraqis, and Tunisians oppose this view and that the overwhelming majority of Muslims in southeastern Europe, Central Asia, and parts of Southeast Asia are also opposed to executing people for rejecting Islam.

For anyone interested in an honest assessment of the findings in question, he can refer to the interpretation of the data provided by the Pew Forum itself: http://www.pewforum.org/2013/04/30/the-worlds-muslims-religion-politics-society-beliefs-about-sharia/.

The inarticulate Hussein Aboubakr continues his campaign of misinformation by asserting that Muslims are extremists because they oppose “gay rights.” If that is the case, most religious Christians and religious Jews are extremists as well. 61% of Americans support gay rights as do 77% of secular Jewish Americans. Does that mean that 39% of Americans and 23% of secular Jews are extremists? If 54% of all American Christians support gay marriage, does that mean that the 46% that do not are extremists? To top it all off, he claims that Muslims responded to the 9/11 attacks “with joy” when, in reality, they were widely condemned, even by Islamists. For Aboubakr, however, most Muslims are extremists, even young, educated, westernized Muslim women who do not wear hijab and who, unlike himself, speak perfect English. Rather than target the real culprits, the Takfiri-Wahhabis and those who sponsor them, Aboubakr wants non-Muslims to fear all Muslims.

The enemy has breached the gate. All Muslims, regardless of how westernized they appear and how moderate they may pretend to be, are extremists on the inside. This is a recipe for Islamophobic violence. This is the same sort of language that was employed by the propagandists of the Third Reich. It did not end well for the Jews. However, it did not end well for the propagandists either.

Most Muslims are not extremists. In fact, it is outrageous that Muslims are expected to prove they are moderates and loyal to the Western countries in which they live. If anything, non-Muslims need to prove that they are not extremists. They are by word and by action. Are Muslims risking a nuclear war with North Korea and China? No. Are Muslims risking a nuclear war with Russia? No. According to Statistica, 28,328 people died as a result of terrorism between 2006 and 2015. The so-called American Christians in the US armed forces have killed over 20 million people, 90% of them civilians, in 37 nations, since World War II. Belgian Christians under Leopold II committed one of the worst genocides in history, torturing, mutilating, and murdering more than 10 million human beings over the course of 20 years, leaving Congo virtually devoid of native inhabitants. Christians are therefore in no moral position to accuse Muslims of being “extreme.”

Islam does not need to further reject terrorism. Islam rejects terrorism inherently. Islam does not speak for itself: Muslims speak for Islam. And Muslims have been denouncing terrorism incessantly. The corporate-controlled media simply refuses to cover it. Although a few independent and alternative media outlets cover Muslim voices, they are small; hence, our voices get lost in the chorus. The statistics, however, speak for themselves. As the Pew Research Center has shown, Muslim views of ISIS are overwhelmingly negative. The huge majority of Muslims reject extremism and terrorism. If the Western world is so concerned about “radical Islam,” why is it in bed with the Saudis and the Qataris? They have been funding “Islamic terrorism” to the tune of billions of dollars for decades.

Although some Westerners are open to listening to the Muslim side of the story, most Trumpians, Republicans and Tea-Baggers have already concluded that “Islam is of the Devil.” The very fact that the video in question is circulating in the millions does not bode well for what was once a great nation. Even if someone succeeded in convincing major Western leaders that most Muslims are moderates, they remain surrounded by very influential people who are not exactly favorable to the idea of portraying Muslims in a positive light. Most presidents and prime ministers serve the interests of the global elites, not those of the citizens they are supposed to represent, not those of their countries, and most certainly not those of humanity.

The problem is not the person who pretends to have power. The problem is the System. Like Medusa’s head, it has snakes for hair. Even if one succeeded in cutting the head of a serpent, there are a thousand more that will remain to turn the passive masses to stone.

Finally, it is important to realize that the small percentage of people who support ISIS and other terrorist groups are all partisans of the Takfiri-Wahhabi ideology. In other words, they have been indoctrinated into the pseudo-Islam that is spread around the world by certain sectors. Consequently, if the center of Takfiri-Salafism is isolated and its influence blocked, the financial and ideological support that creates terrorists and terrorist sympathizers will disappear.

Let us learn a lesson from Vietnam. Ho Chi Minh used to tell his combatants that they had to move like fish in water. Clearly, for Ho Chi Minh, water represented the people, the huge mass of people. The US failed to win the trust of the people of North Vietnam. In short, they failed to deprive the fish of its water. It is for this reason that Ho Chi Minh won. It was not communism that won since communism is a negation of itself. This is evidenced by Vietnam after the triumph of Ho. This is evidenced by the disappearance of the former USSR.

Should we not learn lessons from a historical conflict that resulted in the loss of so many American lives? We must deprive the terrorist shark of its water. To achieve this goal, we must shut down the institutions of fake-Islam of the Takfiris. We must shut down the websites and social media sites that are financed by the Takfiris. We must shut down the terrorist training camps in various parts of the world. If we do not drain the swamp of takfiri terrorists, however small they may be numerically when compared to the world population of Muslims, they will continue to cause immense damage, engaging in all sorts of horrific atrocities, destroying entire groups of people and nations while devastating the environment. Basta ya basta. Enough is enough. The moderate true Muslims must revolt against the immoderate fake Muslims. Then, and only then, will truth stand in contrast to falsehood.

Let us “cast truth against falsehood so that it breaks its head and vanishes” (21:18). Then, and only then, will we, Muslims, no longer be subjected to the indignity of being asked, “Where are the Moderate Muslims?”

25 de mayo de 2017

SHAFAQNA – El último crítico en confrontar Los Pactos del Profeta Muhammad con los Cristianos del Mundo antes de la publicación de El Islam y la Gente del Libro es José Carlos Martínez Carrasco, quien publicó una revisión de la versión española, que apareció bajo el título El minarete y el campanario: los pactos del Profeta Mahoma con los cristianos del mundo. Lo hizo en Miscelánea de estudios árabes y hebraicos (Vol. 66: 348-351) del corriente año.

Más que enfocar cuestiones de contenido, como lo haría cualquier revisor de buena reputación, Martínez Carrasco acomete un ataque personal poniendo en duda mis credenciales y manifiesta que nunca ha sido más importante conocer al autor antes de conocer su trabajo. Alega que la traducción al español de Los Pactos del Profeta Muhammad con los Cristianos del Mundo “no es un estudio académico al uso, con una metodología acorde con el campo de estudios al que a priori pertenecería.”

Martínez Carrasco afirma que la revisión de mi CV demuestra que la formación académica que poseo tiene poco o nada que ver con el área de Estudios Árabes e Islámicos. Observa, con razón, que soy un profesor de lenguas extranjeras, un experto en la lengua española y estudios hispánicos y que completé una tesis doctoral sobre La Presencia Indígena en Rubén Darío y Ernesto Cardenal (2000). También afirma que mi interés en un campo que es tan diferente al de área de competencia profesional es el resultado de mi conversión al Islam a la edad de 16 años, algo que me lleva a profundizar los estudios relativos a la tradición islámica, tanto dentro como fuera del mundo académico.

Según Martínez Carrasco yo manifiesto que el Imam ‘Ali dijo a los Jariyitas: “En lo que dicen hay verdad y hay mentira.” Es cierto que terminé una licenciatura en español y francés, lengua y literatura, junto con una M.A. (Maestría) y un Ph.D. (Doctorado) en literatura hispanoamericana. Nunca oculté mis logros académicos.

El motivo por el que completé las especialidades de grado y posgrado en el Departamento de Español de la Universidad de Toronto se debió a que era el único lugar donde podía especializarme en los tres campos que más me fascinaban: estudios hispánicos, estudios nativos y estudios islámicos.

Como hispanista estudié el idioma y la lingüística española. Tomé cursos de historia española y logré una gran instrucción respecto de la influencia árabe en la lengua española. Como parte de mi formación, estudié cultura, historia y civilización española, incluidos los casi 800 años de gobierno árabe musulmán en al-Andalus. Por lo tanto, estoy perfectamente versado en la historia de la España islámica.

Obviamente, estudié literatura española y la influencia recibida de la literatura árabe e islámica. Esto se llama literatura comparada. Es lo que hacen eruditos como Luce López-Baralt. No se pueden comparar dos tradiciones literarias a menos que se sea experto en ambas. En consecuencia, no solo estoy muy bien preparado en literatura española sino que también lo estoy en literatura árabe. En consecuencia, soy hispanista y arabista.

Siendo estudiante de grado fui introducido a la literatura morisca por el distinguido Dr. Ottmar Hegyi. Fue él quien me animó a entrar en la escuela de posgrado y terminar una tesis sobre literatura aljamiada. Pasé más de una década investigando el tema en la preparación de mi tesis pero mi mentor, el profesor Hegyi, se retiró antes. Ese trabajo Shi’ismo en el Magreb y en al-Andalus, se publicará en un futuro cercano. Lo investigué y redacté mientras era estudiante de posgrado en la Universidad de Toronto.

Desde el retiro de mi mentor –una eminencia en literatura Aljamiada-morisca y la influencia del Islam en la literatura española– me quedé sin director de tesis. Entonces decidí completar una tesis sobre La presencia e influencia islámica en la América precolombina, una obra que relacionaba los estudios hispánicos e islámicos. Completé las investigaciones necesarias y escribí una parte importante del trabajo para enterarme que un sector de eruditos no lo consideró “políticamente correcto.” Sostuvieron de manera dogmática la idea de que antes de Colón nadie había entrado en contacto con las Américas. Mi trabajo, en su opinión, era revisionista histórico. Estoy seguro que padecieron ataques de ansiedad al establecerse que los escandinavos ya habían andado por estas tierras en el siglo x. Lance aux Meadows (en la isla de Terranova) debe haber sido una pesadilla para ellos. Aunque creo que algunos musulmanes y los nacionalistas negros exageran groseramente los reclamos de los contactos de africanos y árabes con las Américas, no dudo que algunos de los mismos cruzaron el Atlántico antes que Colón.

Decidí entonces seleccionar un tema aceptable para todos los miembros de la Facultad en el Departamento: La presencia indígena en Rubén Darío y Ernesto Cardenal. Este tema vinculaba dos elementos: el mundo hispano y el mundo indígena. Y aunque la conexión islámica no se presente evidente a los neófitos, cabe señalar que la obra de Ernesto Cardenal está influenciada por el sufismo y el Islam político. El hecho de que me especializase en la obra de Ernesto Cardenal explica mi redacción de Religión y revolución: el Islam espiritual y político en Ernesto Cardenal, una obra que sólo podía realizar una persona especialista en literatura hispánica e islámica.

Martínez Carrasco podría argumentar que yo carezco de preparación académica formal en el campo de la religión o estudios islámicos, pero no es así. En la Universidad de Toronto cursé filosofía, estudios religiosos y estudios islámicos. Uno de mis profesores fue el académico egipcio-armenio cristiano Dr. Solomon Alexander Nigossian, quien dictó cátedra en el Departamento de Religión de la Universidad de Toronto durante décadas y es autor de muchas obras sobre Islam. Fue él quien me enseñó la metodología empleada en el campo de los estudios islámicos y religiosos.

Martínez Carrasco tampoco menciona que completé estudios postdoctorales en árabe en varios institutos de idiomas en los Estados Unidos y Marruecos, por lo que no soy únicamente profesor de español sino también de francés y árabe. Fui quien concibió, planificó la totalidad del programa de árabe para una Universidad estatal, incluidas todas las ofertas de curso. Más aún, fui contratado por la Universidad de Virginia para enseñar estudios religiosos. Impartí un curso sobre Ibn Battutah, así como un curso sobre el Islam para su semestre en el Programa de Mar. Por último, todos mis cursos en cultura y civilización española incluyen un componente sobre la historia de al-Andalus.

Aunque Martínez Carrasco no le da importancia, también realicé el ciclo completo de estudios islámicos tradicionales de manera independiente y de la mano de eruditos musulmanes sunitas, shiitas y sufíes. Soy ampliamente reconocido como ustad [profesor de Islam], sheik [líder religioso musulmán], ‘alim [erudito religioso islámico] y hakim [fitoterapeuta o entendido en hierbas islámico]. No se trata de nominaciones asumidas con arrogancia sino otorgadas por mis pares.

El Imam Ilyas Fawzy de la Universidad al-Qarawiyyin afirmó respecto a mi persona: “su conocimiento de Islām es profunda.” Al-Sheij al-Habib ‘Ali al-Jifri dijo: “El Doctor John es extraordinariamente sólido en estudios islámicos.” Soy convocado para revisar obras de juristas musulmanes. Los responsables religiosos me consideran una autoridad religiosa. Esto debería ser suficiente como prueba de mis calificaciones. No considero necesario citar más elogios a mi persona de mis colegas y pares académicos. No obstante, Martínez Carrasco podría afirmar que las personas citadas son clérigos y no académicos. Pero todos saben que hay sacerdotes, rabinos y muftis eruditos.

Además, estoy muy lejos de ser el único que maneja los estudios hispánicos e islámicos. Hay otros eruditos en la materia: Ottmar Hegyi, Luce López-Baralt, María Rosa Menocal, J.T. Cutillas-Ferrer, María Luisa Lugo Acevedo, Francisco Marcos Marín, T.B. Irving, L.P. Harvey, Gerald Albert Wiegers, A.G. Chejne, Vincent Barletta, Karima Bouras y muchos más que se especializan en la literatura morisca-aljamiada y de la España islámica. Yo soy un aljamiadista y eso me hace hispanista, islamólogo y arabista. 

De todos modos, Martínez Carrasco repite: “no considero El minarete y el campanario… sea un estudio se ciña a criterios científicos, sino que se trata más bien de una apología religiosa cubierta de una retorica pseudo-histórica.” En otras palabras, el hecho de que yo sea musulmán me excluye automáticamente de ser un académico objetivo basado en una metodología científica. Esto es lisa y llanamente intolerancia. Es un decreto discriminatorio dictado desde un podio de prejuicios. Si ser musulmán me descalifica de escribir objetivamente sobre el Islam, ser no musulmán descalifica a Martínez Carrasco de escribir sobre Islam. Se trata de una persona que hace juicio de valores motivados en sentimientos y manifiesta hostilidad hacia el Islam.

Después de describir brevemente el contenido del libro, Martínez Carrasco afirma que “Ya desde las primeras páginas del libro, queda patente el objetivo que J. A. Morrow persigue con El minarete y el campanario…: lavar la imagen de los musulmanes en América y defenderse de quienes los tachan de extremistas”

Martínez Carrasco afirma que Los Pactos del Profeta es una respuesta a quienes acusan a Muhammad de ser un asesino sangriento que expande el Islam por medio de la espada. Por esta razón, afirma al crítico español, yo me centro exclusivamente en los Pactos con los Cristianos en tanto soy mucho más crítico de los judíos. Al parecer, eso se debería a que vivo en “un ambiente eminentemente cristiano.”

No soy un apologista. No tengo una agenda. Soy un académico. Estudio fuentes y dejo que hablen por sí mismas. Escribí y me referí a la gestación de Los Pactos del Profeta Muhammad con los Cristianos del Mundo. Martínez Carrasco debería haber realizado algunas investigaciones antes de hacer tales acusaciones engañosas. Aunque intentó a su manera verificar mis antecedentes y juzgó mi libro, no pudo darse cuenta que los pactos del Profeta con los judíos, samaritanos y zoroastrianos me interesan tanto como los pactos con los cristianos.

Martínez Carrasco se queja de que “[t]odo el libro gira en torno a la idea del Islam como religión de paz, aglutinadora y superadora de los monoteísmos anteriores.” Y en base a eso argumenta que Héctor Horacio Manzolillo y yo destacamos la necesidad de un entendimiento interreligioso frente a nuevos desafíos, como el ecogenocidio que enfrenta el planeta. En otras palabras, Manzolillo y yo somos, en realidad, islámicos dominionistas (Nota del traductor: Dominionismo es un término usado para describir la filosofía de cristianos conservadores políticamente activos que, según se cree, buscan ejercer influencia o control sobre el gobierno civil secular a través de la acción política, especialmente en los EEUU, y cuyo objetivo es el establecimiento de una nación gobernada por cristianos, o de una nación gobernada por una comprensión cristiana conservadora de la ley bíblica. El uso y la aplicación de esta terminología es controvertida y existe un debate en curso acerca de la utilidad de este término). Dice Martínez Carrasco:

A pesar de ese afán por ir más allá de las diferencias entre cristianos, judíos y musulmanes, las páginas objeto de análisis esconden un mensaje un tanto peligroso sobre el que hay que llamar la atención. Quizás convenga recordar que se trata de una obra escrita por un converso al Islam. Subyace una carga ideológica que culpa de todos los males al materialismo de la civilización occidental, que se contrapone a la espiritualidad de un mundo árabe tomado (erróneamente) como un bloque homogéneo. Esta idea convierte a Morrow, a su pesar y de manera inconsciente, en rehén de una visión colonialista que hace de los árabes un pueblo ahistórico, ajeno a los cambios experimentados en el mundo a lo largo de los siglos, que los mantiene en un estado de «inocencia».

Nunca he visto tal interpretación retorcida en mi vida. ¿Desde cuando confundo árabes con musulmanes? La distinción la hago muy claramente. Soy el último que podría idealizar a los árabes y musulmanes. Acepto absolutamente al Profeta Muhammad. Respeto a otras autoridades del Islam clásico. Y fustigo a cualquiera que no adhiera a los principios éticos primordiales.

¿Qué tipo de persona considera que los pactos del Profeta con la Gente del Libro son peligrosos? Por el contrario, sostengo que los que se les oponen son particularmente peligrosos. Y en tanto yo culpo a Occidente por sus pecados y deficiencias, también soy el primero en alabarlo. Y lo mismo se aplica para el Este, el Norte y el Sur. Digo lo que es. Alabo cuando corresponde y critico cuando me veo obligado a hacerlo. Es mi deber como estudioso y académico responsable.

Martínez Carrasco alega que la crítica de Manzolillo a la democracia, utilizada como una panacea, es una indicio del tono general de la obra. ¿Cómo es posible que haga de un comentario en el prefacio algo valedero para lo esencial de la obra? Tal comentario no tiene que ver con la médula del trabajo. Al parecer, el crítico le dio tanta importancia al mismo, que pide a los lectores que (en base a eso) saquen “sus propias conclusiones.” En otras palabras, Morrow y Manzolillo se oponen a la democracia. Los juicios del crítico apestan a kilómetros de distancia.

Si Martínez Carrasco llevó a cabo la investigación adecuada, sabría perfectamente que Manzolillo y yo apoyamos firmemente la democracia participativa y representativa y que nos oponemos a toda forma de dictadura y despotismo. El hecho de criticar a la seudo-democracia de los antiguos griegos y romanos y las democracias de hoy que están controladas por corporaciones no nos hace anarqistas o totalitarios en nuestros criterios políticos.

Los comentarios de Manzolillo ciertamente tocaron una fibra sensible que a Martínez Carrasco afectan como un hueso en la garganta. Afirma que en lo esencial el libro consiste en una comparación entre las democracias occidentales, liberales y parlamentarias con el Islam a fuer de una entidad político-religioso. Manifiesta el crítico:

Argumenta J. A. Morrow que la democracia grecorromana era esclavista y profundamente desigual, mientras que el Islam, desde sus inicios, se mostró contrario a la esclavitud y propició la igualdad de todos, creyentes o no, independientemente de la edad o el género, lo que lleva inmediatamente, según este autor, a la superioridad del Islam frente a las democracias. Quizás olvide que, a día de hoy, se sabe que en el mundo islámico pervive el tráfico de esclavos, si bien se desconoce su volumen; como también quizás olvide Morrow que puede escribir libros como este gracias a los derechos que le garantiza un sistema tan pernicioso como la democracia.

No tengo la más mínima duda que la revelación del Islam promulgada por el Profeta Muhammad es muy superior a las llamadas democracias de los griegos y romanos. De hecho, cuando a los judíos, samaritanos, cristianos de Oriente Medio, norte de África y la Península Ibérica se les da a elegir entre los gobiernos islámico y bizantino de entonces, la mayoría optó por el régimen islámico, a pesar de que había pocos o ningún gobernante de los musulmanes que aplicase los estándares establecidos por el Mensajero de Allah. Así y todo, con sus deficiencias, el sistema de gobierno aplicado en las tierras musulmanas garantizaba los derechos, las libertades y la protección que recién emergió en el mundo Occidental en el siglo XX.

Si Martínez Carrasco es sincero, debería distinguir entre las enseñanzas del Islam predicada por el Profeta y las prácticas no islámicas de pseudo-musulmanes. El Profeta Muhammad nunca poseyó esclavos. Nunca animó a sus compañeros a que posean esclavos. Dijo que los traficantes de esclavos eran lo peor de la raza humana. Promovió e incluso impuso la liberación de los esclavos. Él y sus compañeros liberaron decenas de miles de esclavos. Basándose en una investigación de las primeras fuentes, se estima que liberaron 39.000 seres humanos esclavizados.

En lugar de atacar el Islam por el hecho de que algunos bárbaros en lugares como Sudán, Chad y Malí apañan la esclavitud, podría mirarse en el espejo de Occidente, donde las mujeres y niños son esclavizados en enormes cantidades. En los Estados Unidos se venden para la esclavitud sexual más de 100.000 niñas por año. En Europa los números son parecidos. La esclavitud sexual que practica el ISIS concita una gran atención de la prensa. Sin embargo, es un pálido reflejo de lo que abarca la esclavitud sexual en las democracias occidentales. Si bien en parte del Africa negra hay esclavos, esa situación prácticamente no se ha modificado desde la época medieval. Pero la esclavitud sexual en Europa Occidental y en los Estados Unidos –autoproclamados bastiones de la democracia y de los derechos humanos– es bastante distinta, independientemente de que ambas, las de Oriente y de Occidente, son absolutamente condenables.

Martínez Carrasco afirma: “[c]on estas premisas como punto de partida, es legítimo pensar que no se trata de un estudio científico acerca de unos hechos históricos en base a evidencias textuales. Por el contrario, lo que articula Morrow es un discurso netamente religioso, que no busca establecer un conocimiento más o menos riguroso del pasado, sino una Verdad teológica, con todo lo que ello implica.”

Martínez Carrasco insiste en que en el discurso teológico de Los Pactos del Profeta Muhammad con los Cristianos del Mundo es evidente el uso incorrecto –por ignorancia– de la terminología histórica, que se interpreta continuamente de manera religiosa. El crítico afirma que mi abordaje de las fuentes islámicas casi siempre es acrítica y que cualquier hipótesis que cuestione el Canon islámico se desestima rápidamente porque sería producto de “eruditos espiritualmente inseguros.”

Aunque no tengo un título en historia, estoy formado en metodología histórica. Sé muy bien cómo manejar las fuentes. Cientos de académicos, incluidos historiadores, han elogiado y aprobado los Pactos del Profeta Muhammad con los Cristianos del Mundo. Por supuesto, estos hechos son ignorados por algunos cavernícolas españoles. Y en el caso de Carrasco, non capire que los pactos muhammadianos no forman parte del Canon islámico. Fueron ignorados. Fueron suprimidos. Fueron extirpados. Y ahora están siendo recuperados. Si el crítico se tomó la molestia de leer el libro en su totalidad, en lugar de centrarse en unas pocas palabras del traductor, sabría que no defiendo el status quo. Por el contrario, sostengo que los pactos del Profeta fueron ocultados por los supuestos dirigentes musulmanes que querían libertad de acción y no tomar verdaderamente en consideración los principios proféticos. En verdad, soy implacable en mi crítica al literalismo, al fundamentalismo y al extremismo.

Martínez Carrasco afirma que yo añoro “la «edad de oro» que representa el período profético durante el que Muhmmad ejerció el gobierno; un Muhammad presentado como un hombre de paz, anti-colonialista, pero que al mismo tiempo se muestra como gran estratega militar.”

Ni Manzolillo ni yo añoramos una “edad de oro” del Islam. No somos salafistas que sueñan con una imaginaria, legendaria y mítica utopía musulmana del siglo VII. Valoramos los aspectos positivos. Criticamos los aspectos negativos. Nos damos cuenta que nada es perfecto. Puesto que vivimos en el presente y planificamos para el futuro, no vivimos en el pasado. Sin embargo, estudiamos el pasado para obtener conocimiento, evitar errores anteriores y adoptar estrategias que resultarían exitosas. No pretendemos imitar. Tratamos de no reproducir. Buscamos derivar principios y aplicarlos.

En cuanto a Muhammad, el hombre era completo, polifacético. Era tanto un místico como hombre de pueblo. Era analfabeto y a la vez erudito. Era poderoso pero humilde. Podía transmitir conceptos tanto a estudiosos especializados como a simples pastores. Era cariñoso y compasivo pero podía ser feroz en la batalla. La guerra y la paz van de la mano. Si quieres la paz, lo mejor es que te prepares para la guerra. Se trata de la realidad. El propio Profeta Muhammad dijo: “sonrío y lucho.” Vino con la palabra y con la espada. Pero se trataba de la espada de la justicia social.

Continuando con el mismo postulado ridículo, Martínez Carrasco advierte: “El discurso queda enmascarado tras una pretendida equidistancia entre la «leyenda negra» y la «leyenda rosa.” Pero lo que realmente ofrece es una actualización de la segunda adornada con una argumentación que no se sostiene ante un análisis crítico, como la afirmación de que fue Muhammad quien elaboró el dogma de la Inmaculada Concepción.”

A menos que se esté familiarizado con la historia hispánica, la referencia a la “leyenda negra” y la “leyenda rosa” no será comprendida por la mayoría de los lectores. En el contexto hispano, la “leyenda negra” se refiere a las afirmaciones que los españoles cometieron genocidio contra los habitantes indígenas de las Américas. En el contexto musulmán, la “leyenda negra” mencionado por Martínez Carrasco sería la demonización del Islam y los musulmanes, algo común a lo largo de la historia europea, mientras que la “leyenda rosa” es la presentación del Islam –particularmente en la Península Ibérica–como una especie de “Edad de oro.”

En la mente del crítico, Los Pactos del Profeta Muhammad con los Cristianos del Mundo es simplemente una versión reenvasada de la “leyenda rosa” que no resiste el análisis valorativo. Una vez más, si el crítico realmente leyó o en verdad entendió lo leído, sabría que elogio los principios y las protecciones que aplicó el Profeta en sus pactos con los judíos y los cristianos, a las que  considero deslumbrantes, impactantes. Y estoy positivamente asombrado por los líderes musulmanes que se ciñeron a ellos. En resumen, son la prueba de fuego que utilizo al evaluar la islamicidad de los llamados gobernantes islámicos.

En cuanto a la afirmación de Martínez Carrasco respecto a que yo dije que fue Muhammad quien elaboró el dogma de la Inmaculada Concepción, dejo que mi libro hable por sí mismo: “Aunque la mayoría de los musulmanes y los cristianos no son conscientes de esto, la primera persona en formular la doctrina de la Inmaculada Concepción fue Muhammad, algo reconocido por teólogos tanto católicos como protestantes (Grassi 74). Algunos pueden afirmar que el Profeta había aprendido tales doctrinas de los cristianos orientales cuando, en realidad, fueron ellos los que las aprendieron de él” (13). Pero, como cualquier lector inteligente observa, no soy yo quien hace la afirmación sino M. Grassi (Alfio) en su Charte Turque ou Organisation religieuse, civile et militaire de l ‘empire ottoman, publicada en París en 1826. Yo digo, simplemente, que hay una fuerte evidencia que apoya esta afirmación. No obstante, el comentario en cuestión es totalmente periférico en el estudio como un todo. ¿Estúpido o artero? Citando a Carrasco, dejaré que los lectores “saquen sus propias conclusiones.”

Para concluir lo que sería su revisión islamofóbica, Martínez Carrasco escribe: “El minarete y el campanario… habría que inscribirlo en el extremo opuesto a las obras de aquéllos revisionistas que cargan las tintas sobre los aspectos negativos del Islam. Persigue un objetivo legítimo, pero lo hace a costa de falsear el pasado, lo cual no conduce a un mejor conocimiento de la realidad islámica, sino a su conversión en una suerte de «paraíso perdido», en una utopía difícilmente realizable, repitiendo el tópico de la escasa capacidad de adaptarse a los cambios por parte de los musulmanes, siempre pendientes de un pasado que los paraliza.”

Aunque prácticamente no concuerdo con nada de lo que dice Martínez Carrasco, me siento orgulloso en coincidir en que Los Pactos del Profeta Muhammad con los Cristianos del Mundo es una obra muy alejada de las revisionistas, es decir, la de académicos come papeles, musulmanes o no, decididos a destruir los fundamentos del Islam. Lejos de “falsificar el pasado”, lo ilumino intensamente, lo revivo y lo reivindico. Presento el Islam auténtico: como era, como es y como siempre debería ser. No será el “Islam” de los saudíes, los salafistas, los fundamentalistas, los extremistas, los literalistas, los absolutistas o los liberales, las feministas y los reformistas. Pero sí es el Islam del Profeta: sin condicionamientos, añadidos o peros.

En cuanto a la crasa generalización de que los musulmanes, en general, son incapaces de adaptarse al cambio y la modernidad, promueve estereotipos impropios de un erudito de categoría y renombre. Los musulmanes enfrentan muchos desafíos. Han luchado frente al colonialismo e imperialismo. Sufren la intervención extranjera en sus asuntos internos. Sufren el hedor que asfixia el espíritu, proveniente del libertinaje occidental, el materialismo, el hedonismo y el nihilismo. Y no obstante sobreviven, prosperan y están llenos de aspiraciones. Independientemente de lo “retrógrado” que puedan ser muchos musulmanes y a pesar de sus defectos morales, me enorgullece que representan el único gran grupo que niega someterse al secularismo militante, en tanto otras poblaciones se arrodillan precipitadamente con entusiasmo y ansias a los pies de Mammón.

Creo que el mayor punto débil de Martínez Carrasco es que se centra en la crítica a las intenciones del autor y del traductor. Por eso mismo se centra bastante en el prólogo. Pero aparte de mencionar los capítulos del libro y de qué trata cada uno, no hace ninguna crítica, ningún comentario, no aporta nada -ya sea a favor o en contra- a lo escrito en el libro. En vez de juzgar la obra juzga la intencion con la que se redactó la obra. O sea, a él no le importa la obra, no le importa la documentación, sino solamente desprestigiar la misma en base a las supuestas intenciones que tendría el trabajo, pero no por lo que dice el trabajo sino por lo que escribe Manzolillo y por que Morrow se convirtió al Islam a los16 años. Además, al proceder así es él quien muestra sus verdaderas intenciones.

Y ya que Carlos Martínez Carrasco comenzó su reseña del libro cuestionando mis acreditaciones, es lógico que concluya mi refutación con una revisión de sus títulos o diplomas. O falta de ellos. El señor Carrasco es “licenciado en historia por la Universidad de Granada.” O sea, no tiene una maestría ni un doctorado; no tiene un posgrado. El señor Carrasco es “investigador del Centro de Estudios Bizantinos, Neogriegos y Chipriotas.” En otras palabras, es un investigador en esos campos pero no tiene preparación académica formal en estudios religiosos, árabes o islámicos. El señor Carrasco no es profesor adjunto. Y sin duda, no es profesor titular. Simplemente, es adjunto en el Departamento de Historia Medieval de la Universidad de Granada. En cuanto a sus logros académicos, es autor de diez artículos, dos reseñas de libros y una conferencia. También escribió una novela.

Si Carlos Martínez Carrasco quiere criticar mi trabajo, que complete una maestría y doctorado en estudios religiosos, estudios árabes y estudios islámicos. En concreto, en cualquier grado superior de un campo relacionado en las humanidades. Y como también soy sheij, además de ser académico, permitamos que el señor Carrasco también se convierta en sacerdote católico o, si prefiere, en rabino. De ese modo, si no puede criticar mi trabajo como académico, por lo menos podrá criticarlo como clérigo. Y mientras se ocupa de eso, que se supere en las filas académicas convirtiéndose en profesor adjunto, profesor asociado y luego full professor o, como se denomina en España, Profesor Titular. Debería publicar también un centenar de artículos académicos, presentar docenas de revisiones bibliográficas de sus pares y realizar conferencias. Entonces y solo entonces José Carlos Martínez Carrasco sería uno de mis pares y estaría calificado para la revisión de mis libros. Y Dios es Justo; Todo lo Oye, Todo lo Ve.

El Doctor John Andrew Morrow es una autoridad religiosa, un académico y un activista. Ha publicado numerosos libros en el campo de los Estudios Islámicos. Su obra más elogiada por la crítica es El minarete y el campanario : los pactos del Profeta Muhammad con los cristianos del mundo. 

La cuenta de Twitter del Doctor John Andrew Morrow es @drjamorrow. Sus cuentas de Facebook son @johnandrewmorrow and @covenantsoftheprophet. Sus sitios de internet incluyenwww.johnandrewmorrow.com as well as www.covenantsoftheprophet.com. Sus videos pueden verse en la siguiente estación: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCqM3-puvWuKuCEJsDQDZFrA

By Dr. John Andrew Morrow for New Age Islam

25 May 2017

Introduction

Preventing, combating, and countering radicalization is a complex matter without simple solutions. Consequently, a multi-pronged approach must be employed. The information war against Takfirism represents but a single piece of the puzzle. Extremism, fanaticism, and terrorism are simply symptoms of a broader problem. Unless all the causes are addressed simultaneously, subject to certain parameters, the war against Takfirism is ultimately bound to fail.

Whether it is ISIS, Boko Haram, al-Shabab or other similar groups, terroristic nihilism feeds on ignorance, poverty, as well as socio-economic and political injustice. There is no band-aid solution to these problems. There are no short-term solutions. They require long-term strategies.

Ignorance needs to be addressed through education. While some Muslim countries have excellent secular education, their religious education is lacking or indoctrinates students into intolerant, radical, and violent interpretations of Islam. If Islamic education is to be provided in the Muslim and non-Muslim world, it is traditional, civilisational, and classical Islam that is to be taught, not Salafism/Wahhabism/Takfirism/Jihadism/Islamism or Political Islam.

Strategies

In the struggle and information war against extremism and terrorism, we propose that the following strategies be adopted:

1) All efforts should be rooted in traditional, civilisational, and classical Islam. The content should promote an Islam without extremes. It should present the full spectrum of Islamic opinion. It should encourage Muslims to move from the fringes, restore the balance, and stick to the center.

2) The message should promote Islamic unity, oppose sectarianism, and encourage Taqrib or rapprochement between the various schools of thought. This is not to suggest that all schools of thought should merge; however, it should be stressed that diversity and difference is a blessing. There can be unity without uniformity. There can be unity within diversity.

3) Since the focus is on presenting Universal Islam, an Islam that embraces a full range of positions, the Muslim faith should not be promoted as a foreign faith, but the last chapter of a Divine Message that started eons ago. It may be time to look at Faith and Religion, not from a religious perspective, but from God’s viewpoint.

4) Promote The Study Qur’an, edited by Sayyid Hossein Nasr, as it provides a full spectrum of interpretations of the Qur’an. This can counter the one-sided, absolutist, approach taken by religious extremists.

5) Spread the traditional teachings of Islam to counter so-called Political Islam.

6) Disseminate the Constitution of Medina. Islamists claim that they wish to create an Islamic State; however, they ignore the fact that the Prophet Muhammad produce the first political constitution in the history of humanity, an inclusive and pluralistic Political Charter that granted equality to all citizens regardless of religion, race, or gender.

7) Disseminate the covenants and treaties that the Prophet Muhammad concluded with Christian, Jewish, and Zoroastrian communities. These include the Treaty of Maqnah, the Treaty of Najran, the Covenant with Monks from Mount Sinai, the Covenant with the Christians of Persia, the Covenant with the Assyrian Christians, the Covenant with the Armenian Christians, the Covenant with the Coptic Christians, the Covenant with the Syriac Orthodox Christians, and the Covenant with the Parsis, among others.

8) Disseminate the covenants that the Caliphs and Sultans concluded with non-Muslim communities. These include the Covenant of Abu Bakr with the Christians, the Covenant of ‘Umar with the Christians of Jerusalem, the Covenant of ‘Ali with the Christians, the Covenant of Salah al-Din with the Christians, the Covenant of Sultan Mehmet with the Franciscan Catholics of Bosnia…

9) Familiarize Muslims, and non-Muslims, with the over three hundred initiatives against extremism and radicalization, including:

ISNA’s Muslim Code of Honor?

A Common Word between Us and You

Shoulder to Shoulder

Dr. Qadri’s Fatwa against Terrorism and Suicide Bombing

Dr. Qadri’s Fatwa against ISIS

The Covenants Initiative

The Genocide Initiative

Shaykh Bin Bayyah’s Fatwa against ISIS

The Letter to Baghdadi

The Amman Message

The Statement by the Organization of Islamic Cooperation

The Fatwa from Al-Azhar

The Statement from the Arab League

The Fatwa of Mufti Mehmet Gormez

The Statement of CAIR

The Statement of the Muslim Council of Great Britain

The Fatwa of the Fiqh Council of ISNA

The Joint Sunni-Shiite Fatwa by 100 UK Imams

The Statement from the Muslim Public Affairs Council

The Statements from Nahdlatul Ulema from Indonesia

Shaykh Yaqubi’s Refuting ISIS

The Muslim Youth Group’s Jihad Against Extremism

The Statement by Dr. John Andrew Morrow

The Mass Fatwa by 100,000 Muslim Clerics from India, Bangladesh, and beyond

The Marrakesh Declaration

The Grozny Declaration

10) Expose the historical and current ties between “radical jihadis” and Western imperialists; namely, the use of the Wahhabis by the British Empire in order to undermine the Ottoman Empire; the use of “Jihadists” by all parties in the First and Second World Wars; particularly, the ties of so-called “Islamists” with the Third Reich during the Second World War; the CIA-support of the “Mujahidin” and al-Qaedah in Afghanistan; the CIA-support of “Jihadists” in Bosnia and Kosovo; and the continued support of the United States for “radical Islamists” who serve their geo-political interests. Show to Muslims that the “radical Jihadi” approaches benefit the enemies of Islam, so much so that those enemies facilitate or fabricate Jihadi groups and attacks.

11) Teach critical thinking to Muslims. Provide them with the tools to distinguish between Traditional Islam and so-called “Radical Political Islam,” better known as Salafism/Jihadism/Takfirism.

12) Educate Muslims on the true meaning of Jihad and the rules of just war to which all combatants are bound. Disseminate the commands that Abu Bakr and ‘Ali used to give to their fighters, prohibiting them from killing non-combatants, abusing women, destroying property, etc.

13) Enlist Muslim athletes and celebrities to promote traditional, civilisational, and classical Islam. Getting these artists/celebrities involved is another way of cracking the media.

14) Educate Muslims about the history of Islam in the Western world, from Muslims who accompanied European explorers to African Muslim slaves to the large waves of Muslim pioneers from Syria and Lebanon who settled the American Mid-West.

15) Showcase examples of coexistence between Muslims and the People of the Book throughout Islamic history, focusing on the Golden Age of al-Andalus, Sicily, and the Ottoman Empire.

16) Present positive quotes about the Prophet and Islam made by non-Muslims. This helps boost Muslim pride and illustrates that not all non-Muslims are enemies of Islam and Muslims.

17) Spread Qur’anic verses and prophetic traditions, particularly hadith qudsi, that focus on values, ethics, morals, compassion, mercy, and love. However, balance the focus on Mercy with the same focus on Justice.

18) Highlight contemporary cases of Muslims helping non-Muslims along with non-Muslims helping Muslims. This might include Muslim efforts to rebuild churches that were burned to the ground, cases of Muslims surrounding synagogues to protect them; instances in which Jews and Christians surrounded mosques to defend them from armed racists and Islamophobes.

19) Tell the full truth about the evils of imperialism and Zionism, that the USA and other Western governments are the world’s biggest terrorists, etc. so that (justifiably) angry individuals find mainstream Muslims to be legitimate. If orthodox Muslims stood up for justice as they are Qur’anically-commanded, fewer “idealistic” young people would be drawn into the ranks of Islamist terrorists. When Muslims listen to Uncle Tom Muslims on NPR, etc. it makes some of them want to join the global “jihad.” Many “moderate” voices contribute to the radicalization of young Muslims who have legitimate grievances against capitalism, secularism, and imperialism.

20) Allow Muslims to express their legitimate grievances against their governments peacefully and constructively and pressure such Muslim-majority States to abide by the traditional principles of Islam.

21) Expose the injustice, discrimination, racism, political and economic violence that is directed toward Muslim minorities in certain parts of the Western world. Support the struggle of such Muslims and provide them with the means to pressure their governments and improve their well-being by grass-roots, community, economic, and political efforts.

22) Support the legitimate aspirations of 2/3rds of the world’s Muslims for the re-establishment of the Muslim Ummah, a sane one, not the lunatic anti-Islamic ISIS version, which was created precisely to cast aspersions on the whole notion of a Caliphate. Although it can take many forms, an Islamic State must be based on the foundations of traditional, mainstream, classical Islam, and should be modeled on the Constitution of the Medina and the Covenants of the Prophet Muhammad. It must be a tolerant, inclusive, and pluralistic state based on the spirit of Islamic values and ethics; and not on fossilized medieval interpretations of Islam.

23) Muslims must attain and maintain independence, namely, they must not depend on the support, financial or ideological, of foreign or domestic regimes. Otherwise, they lose all credibility in the eyes of disaffected and disenfranchised youth.

24) Chanel the legitimate frustration and grievances of Muslims constructively instead of destructively. Get them engaged in political and social activism, locally, regionally, nationally, and internationally. Organize Muslim missionary work. Create a Muslim Peace Corp. Many methods can be employed to exact desired change.

25) Provide educational opportunities to Muslim youth at home and abroad. Provide them with job opportunities. Encourage entrepreneurship. Help them build up businesses. Help them form families. People who have hope do not kill themselves and others. Extremism and violence feed on chaos and despair. Proper social, psychological, and spiritual services can prevent young people from descending into the darkness of extremism, fanaticism, and nihilism.

26)  Remember that as terrible as Takfiri terrorism may be, it forms part of an even more horrific plan; a genocidal agenda on the part of Western imperialists. The essence of this plan is to exterminate 80% of the world population, the “human surplus” which is increasingly being replaced by technology. If these elitist globalists, who wish to turn the planet into their own personal resort, have spread terrorism in the Muslim world to help cull its population, they have spread drugs, along with material and moral corruption, in the Western world to destroy it from within.

Conclusions

The Muslim Ummah is currently in conflict. A battle is being waged for the heart and soul of Islam. In some cases, the forces of True Islam and Fake Islam are facing off in full-fledged civil wars. In most instances, the overwhelming majority of orthodox Muslims are being assailed by a fringe minority of violent heretics. If anything prevents mainstream Muslims from cleaning up camp, it is the fact that they are powerless and at the mercy of oppressive leaders who have traditionally supported Takfiri terrorists to do their dirty geo-political work covertly while simultaneously condemning them overtly. It is shameful that a billion-strong majority of Muslim tigers are being pestered by one hundred thousand rats. It is time for them to act like big cats, as opposed to kittens, and to consume the rodents before they reproduce more and spread the bubonic plague. And when the tigers terminate the rats, they will need to turn their claws and jaws on those who released the rats in the first place. Then, and only then, will balance return to the ecosystem of Islam.

—-

Dr. John Andrew Morrow is Native North American a proud member of the Métis Nation. After taking his Shahadah at the age of 16, he became both an academic and a Muslim ‘Alim. He has authored over thirty peer-reviewed books and over one hundred scholarly articles. His most influential work to date is The Covenants of the Prophet Muhammad with the Christians of the World. His websites include http://www.covenantsoftheprophet.com and http://www.johnandrewmorrow.com. His videos and lectures can be found on The Covenants of the Prophet Channel on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCqM3-puvWuKuCEJsDQDZFrA . His Facebook accounts include @johnandrewmorrow and @covenantsoftheprophet. He can be followed on Twitter @drjamorrow.

– See more at: http://newageislam.com/radical-islamism-and-jihad/islam-versus-anti-islam–simple-strategies-to-help-counter-isis-and-other-violent-extremists/d/111282#sthash.s9RAl941.dpuf

By Kevin Barrett on May 24, 2017

Editor’s note: I hate the Empire’s “good Muslims vs. bad Muslims” BS. It is a direct descendent of the “good injuns vs. bad injuns” dichotomy that fueled the genocide of Native Americans. “Good injuns” were the ones that sold out to the whites and were complicit in their own genocide. “Bad injuns” were the ones who resisted the genocide.

So I consider myself a “bad Muslim,” following in the warpath of the “bad injuns.” I am at all out war with the genocide against Islam and Muslims launched by the false flag atrocity of 9/11/2001. I support legitimate armed resistance against aggression everywhere. And I have eyes and can see that virtually the entire Islamic world is locked in a struggle against outside aggression. As Huntington said, “Islam has bloody borders” – because the Muslim-majority lands are weak and vulnerable to predation by aggressors. I strongly support an emergency military build-up by the Muslim Ummah, using asymetrical warfare of various kinds (mainly ideological and based on speaking truth to power) to put an end to that aggression. The obvious focal point of this jihad is in Occupied Palestine.

So I don’t consider myself “moderate” in the sense of “willing to tolerate aggression, oppression, and injustice.” I would much rather die fighting back than cave in to injustice, and in that event would be happy to take as many oppressors with me as possible. I believe the Qur’an’s promise that those who die resisting oppression have been promised a very high station in Paradise.

The whole ideological war on Islam is designed to legitimize aggression against Muslims and to criminalize Muslim self-defense. That is what 9/11 was designed to achieve. It did not succeed. Aggression is and will always be the supreme war crime, hated by God. And self-defense is by definition legitimate.

That said, I am appalled by examples of idiocy, obscurantism and cruelty, regardless of whether or not the culprits are Muslim. And there are plenty of cruel, obscurantist idiots hiding their ugly actions behind “religious” rationalizations. As John Andre Morrow suggests in this article, it is indeed people whose interpretation of Islam follows the Salafi-Wahhabi-Takfiri orientation who are disproportionally represented among the cruel, obscurantist idiots. Fortunately these people are in a small minority. Unfortunately, they are backed by vast amounts of Rothschild-petrodollar-supporting oil money from the Persian Gulf, mainly “Saudi” Arabia.

One of the worst aspects of some Salafi-Wahhabi-Takfiris is their violation of traditional Islamic tenets against targeting civilians (i.e., terrorism). Terrorism is an age-old military tactic, and it is being used wholesale against Muslims today. But it is wrong,  haram, hated by God. We must only target the enemy, the guilty, the oppressors – never the innocent.

In the article below, Dr. Morrow points out that the vast majority of  “Islamic terrorism” today targets Muslims, who make up 90% of its victims. That is because it is engineered synthetic terrorism, a strategy created by Benjamin Netanyahu and Bernard Lewis at the 1979  Jerusalem Conference on International Terrorism to wage war on Islam in general, and Israel’s enemies in particular. 9/11 was the propaganda stunt that launched their orchestrated campaign to link the concepts “Islam” and “terror.”

In any event, it takes at least moderate courage to criticize the Salafi-Wahhabi-Takfiris and their powerful Saudi masters. So I salute eloquent Muslim scholars like my recent radio guest Dr. Khaled Abou El Fadl, and the author of the article below, John Andrew Morrow, who are sounding the alarm about this pernicious fifth column afflicting the Muslim Ummah.

Kevin Barrett, Veterans Today Editor

How Moderate are Moderate Muslims? The Facts Speak for Themselves

(A Refutation of Hussein Aboubakr’s Video “Where are the Moderate Muslims?”)

By Dr. John Andrew Morrow

After every new terrorist attack in the West, that is falsely committed in the name of Islam by so-called Muslims, some left-wing liberal politicians reassure us that the crime in question does not reflect the true nature of mainstream Islam while some right-wing conservative politicians seize the opportunity to scapegoat all Muslims and demonize an entire world religion.

There are 1.6 billion Muslims in the world today. The believe in One God. They believe in the Prophets of God, including Adam, Noah, Abraham, Moses, Jesus, and Muhammad. They believe in the Books of God, the Torah, the Gospel, and the Qur’an. They believe in the Day of Judgment and Heaven and Hell. Muslims pray, fast, give charity, perform pilgrimage to the Holy land, promote the good, and forbid the wrong.

When I speak, I speak for over 1 billion Muslims: followers of traditional, civilizational, and classical Islam. For some, however, Muslim moderates are few and far between, if not entirely non-existent. If they support terrorism and the shariah, and oppose fundamental rights and freedoms, where, then, are the moderate Muslims? The facts, the full facts, speak for themselves.

According to Europol, there were 2,131 terrorist attacks in the EU between 2006 and 2010. So-called Muslims committed 0.3% of them. Between 2011 and 2014, there were 747 attacks: less than 1% of them were attributed to so-called Muslims. According to the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism, there were 2,400 terrorist attacks on US soil between 1970 and 2012: 60 of these were committed by so-called Muslims, namely, 2.5%.

According to the FBI, the Global Terrorism Database, and other reliable sources, terrorists represent approximately 0.001% of the population of the Muslim world. According to the Gallup Poll, so-called Muslim extremists, who are not terrorists per se, account for 7% of the population. There is no doubt that most Muslims are moderate, law abiding, citizens. Anyone who argues otherwise is dishonest, duplicitous, and deceptive.

How moderate are moderate Muslims? Given the allegations made by Islamophobes, it would seem to be a fair question. Let me start by telling you something of my own story. I was raised in a middle-class home in Montreal, Quebec, Canada. I am Michif-Otipemisiwak, the Free People, the People who own themselves, Les Gens Libres, a proud member of the Métis Nation, an Amerindian, an indigenous person, and a Muslim.

I am one of the millions of Westerners who have embraced Islam over the past century. 80% of converts to Islam in the West are women and many of them are university-educated professionals. We are not extremists. When I speak, I speak for over 1 billion Muslims: followers of mainstream, traditional, civilizational Islam; the majority of Muslims: followers of Classical Islam.

Anyone who claims that “every day that passes on the Islamic Nation without a Caliphate is a sin;” anyone who claims that “the failure and miseries of the Muslim world started the moment we Muslims gave up conquests and wars against infidels;” anyone who claims that “our prosperity depended on conquering new lands and converting new believers;” and anyone who claims that “anyone who leave the faith must die” does not come from a moderate Muslim family.

Why do I distinguish between Muslims and so-called Muslims? The reason is simple. Almost 100% of terrorist actions committed in the name of Islam are committed, not by Muslims, but by Salafi-Wahhabi-Takfiris.

93% of the Islamic World is made up of orthodox Muslims: Sunnis, Shiis, and Sufis. 7% of the Islamic World is made up of Salafi-Wahhabi-Takfiris. They are the people that are referred to in the West as Islamists, Jihadists, and Islamo-Fascists.

They are the followers Muhammad ibn ‘Abd al-Wahhab, a radical reformist from Arabia, who lived two hundred years ago. These heretics believe that they are the only true believers and that orthodox Muslims are infidels whose should be put to the sword.

Whether it is the Taliban, al-Qaedah, Boko Haram, al-Shabab, al-Nusrah or ISIS, all these terrorists share the same Satanic ideology. According to a Gallup Poll, over 93% of Muslims condemn these criminals and extremists.

Did Muslims celebrate 9/11 with joy? Absolutely not. Did Takfiri-Wahhabi terrorists relish in the death and destruction of September 11th. I am sure they did.

According to the Gallup Poll, however, so-called Muslim radicals account for 7% of the Muslim population. Over 93% of Muslims condemn these extremists. Why? Because Muslims bear the blunt of their terror.

In 2011, the US government’s National Counter-Terrorism Center reported that “Muslims suffered between 82 and 97% of terrorism-related fatalities over the past five years.”

The Takfiris or “Radical Islamists” target Christians and Yazidis; however, most of their victims are orthodox, mainstream, Muslims. In fact, Muslims make up 95% of the victims of terrorism.

While it is true that some, but not all Muslim jurists, believed that adulterers should be stoned to death, that is the very same punishment found in the Bible. As we read in Deuteronomy 22:22: “If a man is discovered committing adultery, both he and the woman must die. In this way, you will purge Israel of such evil.”

And while it is true that some, but not all Muslim jurists, believed that the punishment for homosexual intercourse was death, that is the very same punishment found in the Bible. As read in Leviticus 20:13: “If a man has sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They are to be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads.” (Leviticus 20:13)

If Islam is extreme, then so is Judaism and Christianity. If there are no moderate Muslims, then there are no moderate Jews and Christians.

While it is true that large numbers of Muslims in Egypt, Pakistan, Jordan, and Nigeria believe that apostates should be put to death, the very same punishment exists in Judaism.

Most Muslims, like most Jews, would recognize that rejecting belief in One God, and becoming an atheist or a polytheist, results in spiritual death, few of them, however, would pick up a rock and stone someone.

There are those who, in acts of academic dishonesty, focus on the fact that many Muslims from the Middle-East and South Asia support the death penalty for apostasy. However, they conveniently ignore the broader picture.

71% of Tunisian Muslims, 73% of Thai Muslims, 78% of Tajik Muslims, 83% of Turkish Muslims, 82% of Indonesian Muslims, 85% of Bosnian and Russian Muslims, 89% of Kosovar Muslims, 92% of Albanian Muslims, and 96% of Kazakh Muslims oppose the death penalty for people who leave Islam.

The problem is not religious. The problem is a combination of cultural, historical, political, economic, and educational factors. The problem is complex. However, there is a direct correlation between Saudi influence and the spread of extremism. There is also a direct link between military intervention in the Muslim world and the spread of terrorism in the region. Conflict and chaos are the breeding ground for Islamist terrorists.

Rather than try to terrify non-Muslims by claiming that most Muslims believe in the shariah, we need to define our terms. When Islamophobes speak of the shariah, they invoke medieval corporal punishment: lashing, stoning, and beheading. When Muslims speak of shariah, they speak of the law. So, yes, most Muslims believe in obeying the law.

When a Muslim asks another Muslim whether he follows the shariah, he is asking whether that person prays, fasts, and gives charity; not whether that person goes around chopping off hands and heads. The shariah is to Muslims what the Halakha is to Jews or Canon Law is to Catholics. It’s like asking: “Do you keep kosher?” or “Do you go to mass?”

According to the Pew Research Center, 60% of white evangelical Protestants say that the Bible should be the guiding principle in making laws in the United States. One Public Policy Poll found that 57% of Republicans wanted to dismantle the Constitution and establish Christianity as the official religion and the Bible as the law of the land.

Are Evangelical Christians who wish to live a Biblical life extremists? Are Orthodox Jews who live according to the Torah and Talmud extremists? Are the Amish, Mennonites, and Hutterites extremists because they live according to Biblical principles? The real extremists, some would argue, are the secular fundamentalists who wish to deprive believers of their religious rights.

When Muslims say that they favor making the shariah the official law in their country, they are not speaking of the perverted version of the shariah proposed by “Islamo-Fascists.” They are speaking about the traditional interpretations of Islamic law which are updated and adapted to modern times.

In fact, when surveyed, Muslims express widespread support for democracy and religious freedom. When tallied, over 60% of Muslims support democracy. When asked about religious freedom, 92.6% of Muslims asserted that it was a good thing.

When Muslims speak of shariah, they speak of a free, democratic state, which protects religious freedom, but which is based on the moral and ethical principles found in the Judeo-Christian-Muslim tradition. They believe in an Islam that provides rights as opposed to a fake Islam that deprives people of rights.

Anyone who claims that “most of the world’s Muslims believe that any acts of violence against Israel, including suicide bombers in buses and restaurants, are justified” is a liar. As the Pew Research Center confirms, most Muslims oppose extremism, terrorism, and suicide bombing. If one were to dig deeper, one would find that virtually all the so-called Muslims who support indiscriminate violence and terror are radical Islamists and Jihadists with ideological roots in Saudi Arabia.

If there are no Muslim moderates, or Muslim moderates are few and far between, why is it that the overwhelming majority of Muslims have a negative view of ISIS?

According to the Pew Research Center, 79% of Indonesians, 84% of Palestinians, 95% of Jordanians, and 100% of Lebanese Muslims repudiate the death-cult that is Daesh. As the Pew Research Center confirms, most Muslims oppose extremism, terrorism, and suicide bombing.

In some cases, Muslims are more moderate than non-Muslims. Take, for instance, the issue of military attacks against civilians. 78% of American Muslims oppose them compared to 58% of American Christians and 52% of American Jews.

As for the stereotype that Muslims are all anti-Israel, think again. According to a Gallup Poll, 81% of Muslim American and 78% of Jewish Americans believe that an independent Palestinian state should co-exist alongside of Israel.

Saying that Radical Islamists and Jihadists are terrorists does not make one an Islamophobe. I do it all the time and I am a committed Muslim.

Putting all Muslims in the same boat, painting them with the same brush, falsifying facts, and trying to convince people that even educated, unveiled, and accent-free Muslim women are extremists is the epitome of Islamophobia.

It is Islamophobic to assert that the Muslim world, as a whole, is currently dominated by bad ideas and bad beliefs.

It is Islamophobic to assert that millions of Muslims fail to denounce terror because they, themselves, are not moderates. They do so all the time. Muslim voices, however, are muffled out by the mainstream media.

It is Islamophobic to assert that the word “moderate,” as we understand it in the Western world, does not apply to Muslims.

It is also Islamophobic to assert that Muslims collectively oppose fundamental rights and freedoms.

Moderate Muslims do not number in the millions. There is over one billion of them. They are the critical mass.

The Muslim world is not a grey zone where you cannot distinguish between friend from foe. It is critical to distinguish between the masses of Muslim human beings from the tiny minority of sub-human terrorists.

The traditional values of Islam are perfectly compatible with the traditional values of the Western world; Judeo-Christian values and Humanitarian values.

The principles of the Prophet influenced the European Renaissance, the Napoleonic Code, the American Constitution, and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

The Prophet Muhammad produced the first constitution in the political history of humanity. The Covenants of the Prophet were the first to enshrine modern notions of civic and human rights.

Radical Fake Islam is a deadly disease. It is a cancerous tumor that is attached to the body of Islam. It is a contagious virus that has entered the bloodstream of Islam. It does not belong to the body. It will debilitate, destroy, and kill it. It must be amputated. It must be annihilated by means of antibiotics. The sooner that the cancerous tumor is surgically removed; the sooner that the bloodborne pathogen is neutralized, the better it will be for both Muslims and non-Muslims.

Dr. John Andrew Morrow (al-Ustadh al-Duktur Ilyas Islam) is an Amerindian Muslim leader and a proud member of the Métis Nation. After embracing Islam at the age of 16, he became both a Western academic and a traditional Muslim scholar. He is the author of a large body of scholarly works, the most influential of which is The Covenants of the Prophet Muhammad with the Christians of the World. His websites include www.covenantsoftheprophet.com andwww.johnandrewmorrow.com. His videos and lectures can be found on The Covenants of the Prophet Channel on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCqM3-puvWuKuCEJsDQDZFrA. His Facebook accounts include @johnandrewmorrow and @covenantsoftheprophet. He can be followed on Twitter @drjamorrow.

Related Posts:

By Kevin Barrett on May 24, 2017

Editor’s note: I hate the Empire’s “good Muslims vs. bad Muslims” BS. It is a direct descendent of the “good injuns vs. bad injuns” dichotomy that fueled the genocide of Native Americans. “Good injuns” were the ones that sold out to the whites and were complicit in their own genocide. “Bad injuns” were the ones who resisted the genocide.

So I consider myself a “bad Muslim,” following in the warpath of the “bad injuns.” I am at all out war with the genocide against Islam and Muslims launched by the false flag atrocity of 9/11/2001. I support legitimate armed resistance against aggression everywhere. And I have eyes and can see that virtually the entire Islamic world is locked in a struggle against outside aggression. As Huntington said, “Islam has bloody borders” – because the Muslim-majority lands are weak and vulnerable to predation by aggressors. I strongly support an emergency military build-up by the Muslim Ummah, using asymetrical warfare of various kinds (mainly ideological and based on speaking truth to power) to put an end to that aggression. The obvious focal point of this jihad is in Occupied Palestine.

So I don’t consider myself “moderate” in the sense of “willing to tolerate aggression, oppression, and injustice.” I would much rather die fighting back than cave in to injustice, and in that event would be happy to take as many oppressors with me as possible. I believe the Qur’an’s promise that those who die resisting oppression have been promised a very high station in Paradise.

The whole ideological war on Islam is designed to legitimize aggression against Muslims and to criminalize Muslim self-defense. That is what 9/11 was designed to achieve. It did not succeed. Aggression is and will always be the supreme war crime, hated by God. And self-defense is by definition legitimate.

That said, I am appalled by examples of idiocy, obscurantism and cruelty, regardless of whether or not the culprits are Muslim. And there are plenty of cruel, obscurantist idiots hiding their ugly actions behind “religious” rationalizations. As John Andre Morrow suggests in this article, it is indeed people whose interpretation of Islam follows the Salafi-Wahhabi-Takfiri orientation who are disproportionally represented among the cruel, obscurantist idiots. Fortunately these people are in a small minority. Unfortunately, they are backed by vast amounts of Rothschild-petrodollar-supporting oil money from the Persian Gulf, mainly “Saudi” Arabia.

One of the worst aspects of some Salafi-Wahhabi-Takfiris is their violation of traditional Islamic tenets against targeting civilians (i.e., terrorism). Terrorism is an age-old military tactic, and it is being used wholesale against Muslims today. But it is wrong,  haram, hated by God. We must only target the enemy, the guilty, the oppressors – never the innocent.

In the article below, Dr. Morrow points out that the vast majority of  “Islamic terrorism” today targets Muslims, who make up 90% of its victims. That is because it is engineered synthetic terrorism, a strategy created by Benjamin Netanyahu and Bernard Lewis at the 1979  Jerusalem Conference on International Terrorism to wage war on Islam in general, and Israel’s enemies in particular. 9/11 was the propaganda stunt that launched their orchestrated campaign to link the concepts “Islam” and “terror.”

In any event, it takes at least moderate courage to criticize the Salafi-Wahhabi-Takfiris and their powerful Saudi masters. So I salute eloquent Muslim scholars like my recent radio guest Dr. Khaled Abou El Fadl, and the author of the article below, John Andrew Morrow, who are sounding the alarm about this pernicious fifth column afflicting the Muslim Ummah.

Kevin Barrett, Veterans Today Editor

How Moderate are Moderate Muslims? The Facts Speak for Themselves

(A Refutation of Hussein Aboubakr’s Video “Where are the Moderate Muslims?”)

By Dr. John Andrew Morrow

After every new terrorist attack in the West, that is falsely committed in the name of Islam by so-called Muslims, some left-wing liberal politicians reassure us that the crime in question does not reflect the true nature of mainstream Islam while some right-wing conservative politicians seize the opportunity to scapegoat all Muslims and demonize an entire world religion.

There are 1.6 billion Muslims in the world today. The believe in One God. They believe in the Prophets of God, including Adam, Noah, Abraham, Moses, Jesus, and Muhammad. They believe in the Books of God, the Torah, the Gospel, and the Qur’an. They believe in the Day of Judgment and Heaven and Hell. Muslims pray, fast, give charity, perform pilgrimage to the Holy land, promote the good, and forbid the wrong.

When I speak, I speak for over 1 billion Muslims: followers of traditional, civilizational, and classical Islam. For some, however, Muslim moderates are few and far between, if not entirely non-existent. If they support terrorism and the shariah, and oppose fundamental rights and freedoms, where, then, are the moderate Muslims? The facts, the full facts, speak for themselves.

According to Europol, there were 2,131 terrorist attacks in the EU between 2006 and 2010. So-called Muslims committed 0.3% of them. Between 2011 and 2014, there were 747 attacks: less than 1% of them were attributed to so-called Muslims. According to the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism, there were 2,400 terrorist attacks on US soil between 1970 and 2012: 60 of these were committed by so-called Muslims, namely, 2.5%.

According to the FBI, the Global Terrorism Database, and other reliable sources, terrorists represent approximately 0.001% of the population of the Muslim world. According to the Gallup Poll, so-called Muslim extremists, who are not terrorists per se, account for 7% of the population. There is no doubt that most Muslims are moderate, law abiding, citizens. Anyone who argues otherwise is dishonest, duplicitous, and deceptive.

How moderate are moderate Muslims? Given the allegations made by Islamophobes, it would seem to be a fair question. Let me start by telling you something of my own story. I was raised in a middle-class home in Montreal, Quebec, Canada. I am Michif-Otipemisiwak, the Free People, the People who own themselves, Les Gens Libres, a proud member of the Métis Nation, an Amerindian, an indigenous person, and a Muslim.

I am one of the millions of Westerners who have embraced Islam over the past century. 80% of converts to Islam in the West are women and many of them are university-educated professionals. We are not extremists. When I speak, I speak for over 1 billion Muslims: followers of mainstream, traditional, civilizational Islam; the majority of Muslims: followers of Classical Islam.

Anyone who claims that “every day that passes on the Islamic Nation without a Caliphate is a sin;” anyone who claims that “the failure and miseries of the Muslim world started the moment we Muslims gave up conquests and wars against infidels;” anyone who claims that “our prosperity depended on conquering new lands and converting new believers;” and anyone who claims that “anyone who leave the faith must die” does not come from a moderate Muslim family.

Why do I distinguish between Muslims and so-called Muslims? The reason is simple. Almost 100% of terrorist actions committed in the name of Islam are committed, not by Muslims, but by Salafi-Wahhabi-Takfiris.

93% of the Islamic World is made up of orthodox Muslims: Sunnis, Shiis, and Sufis. 7% of the Islamic World is made up of Salafi-Wahhabi-Takfiris. They are the people that are referred to in the West as Islamists, Jihadists, and Islamo-Fascists.

They are the followers Muhammad ibn ‘Abd al-Wahhab, a radical reformist from Arabia, who lived two hundred years ago. These heretics believe that they are the only true believers and that orthodox Muslims are infidels whose should be put to the sword.

Whether it is the Taliban, al-Qaedah, Boko Haram, al-Shabab, al-Nusrah or ISIS, all these terrorists share the same Satanic ideology. According to a Gallup Poll, over 93% of Muslims condemn these criminals and extremists.

Did Muslims celebrate 9/11 with joy? Absolutely not. Did Takfiri-Wahhabi terrorists relish in the death and destruction of September 11th. I am sure they did.

According to the Gallup Poll, however, so-called Muslim radicals account for 7% of the Muslim population. Over 93% of Muslims condemn these extremists. Why? Because Muslims bear the blunt of their terror.

In 2011, the US government’s National Counter-Terrorism Center reported that “Muslims suffered between 82 and 97% of terrorism-related fatalities over the past five years.”

The Takfiris or “Radical Islamists” target Christians and Yazidis; however, most of their victims are orthodox, mainstream, Muslims. In fact, Muslims make up 95% of the victims of terrorism.

While it is true that some, but not all Muslim jurists, believed that adulterers should be stoned to death, that is the very same punishment found in the Bible. As we read in Deuteronomy 22:22: “If a man is discovered committing adultery, both he and the woman must die. In this way, you will purge Israel of such evil.”

And while it is true that some, but not all Muslim jurists, believed that the punishment for homosexual intercourse was death, that is the very same punishment found in the Bible. As read in Leviticus 20:13: “If a man has sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They are to be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads.” (Leviticus 20:13)

If Islam is extreme, then so is Judaism and Christianity. If there are no moderate Muslims, then there are no moderate Jews and Christians.

While it is true that large numbers of Muslims in Egypt, Pakistan, Jordan, and Nigeria believe that apostates should be put to death, the very same punishment exists in Judaism.

Most Muslims, like most Jews, would recognize that rejecting belief in One God, and becoming an atheist or a polytheist, results in spiritual death, few of them, however, would pick up a rock and stone someone.

There are those who, in acts of academic dishonesty, focus on the fact that many Muslims from the Middle-East and South Asia support the death penalty for apostasy. However, they conveniently ignore the broader picture.

71% of Tunisian Muslims, 73% of Thai Muslims, 78% of Tajik Muslims, 83% of Turkish Muslims, 82% of Indonesian Muslims, 85% of Bosnian and Russian Muslims, 89% of Kosovar Muslims, 92% of Albanian Muslims, and 96% of Kazakh Muslims oppose the death penalty for people who leave Islam.

The problem is not religious. The problem is a combination of cultural, historical, political, economic, and educational factors. The problem is complex. However, there is a direct correlation between Saudi influence and the spread of extremism. There is also a direct link between military intervention in the Muslim world and the spread of terrorism in the region. Conflict and chaos are the breeding ground for Islamist terrorists.

Rather than try to terrify non-Muslims by claiming that most Muslims believe in the shariah, we need to define our terms. When Islamophobes speak of the shariah, they invoke medieval corporal punishment: lashing, stoning, and beheading. When Muslims speak of shariah, they speak of the law. So, yes, most Muslims believe in obeying the law.

When a Muslim asks another Muslim whether he follows the shariah, he is asking whether that person prays, fasts, and gives charity; not whether that person goes around chopping off hands and heads. The shariah is to Muslims what the Halakha is to Jews or Canon Law is to Catholics. It’s like asking: “Do you keep kosher?” or “Do you go to mass?”

According to the Pew Research Center, 60% of white evangelical Protestants say that the Bible should be the guiding principle in making laws in the United States. One Public Policy Poll found that 57% of Republicans wanted to dismantle the Constitution and establish Christianity as the official religion and the Bible as the law of the land.

Are Evangelical Christians who wish to live a Biblical life extremists? Are Orthodox Jews who live according to the Torah and Talmud extremists? Are the Amish, Mennonites, and Hutterites extremists because they live according to Biblical principles? The real extremists, some would argue, are the secular fundamentalists who wish to deprive believers of their religious rights.

When Muslims say that they favor making the shariah the official law in their country, they are not speaking of the perverted version of the shariah proposed by “Islamo-Fascists.” They are speaking about the traditional interpretations of Islamic law which are updated and adapted to modern times.

In fact, when surveyed, Muslims express widespread support for democracy and religious freedom. When tallied, over 60% of Muslims support democracy. When asked about religious freedom, 92.6% of Muslims asserted that it was a good thing.

When Muslims speak of shariah, they speak of a free, democratic state, which protects religious freedom, but which is based on the moral and ethical principles found in the Judeo-Christian-Muslim tradition. They believe in an Islam that provides rights as opposed to a fake Islam that deprives people of rights.

Anyone who claims that “most of the world’s Muslims believe that any acts of violence against Israel, including suicide bombers in buses and restaurants, are justified” is a liar. As the Pew Research Center confirms, most Muslims oppose extremism, terrorism, and suicide bombing. If one were to dig deeper, one would find that virtually all the so-called Muslims who support indiscriminate violence and terror are radical Islamists and Jihadists with ideological roots in Saudi Arabia.

If there are no Muslim moderates, or Muslim moderates are few and far between, why is it that the overwhelming majority of Muslims have a negative view of ISIS?

According to the Pew Research Center, 79% of Indonesians, 84% of Palestinians, 95% of Jordanians, and 100% of Lebanese Muslims repudiate the death-cult that is Daesh. As the Pew Research Center confirms, most Muslims oppose extremism, terrorism, and suicide bombing.

In some cases, Muslims are more moderate than non-Muslims. Take, for instance, the issue of military attacks against civilians. 78% of American Muslims oppose them compared to 58% of American Christians and 52% of American Jews.

As for the stereotype that Muslims are all anti-Israel, think again. According to a Gallup Poll, 81% of Muslim American and 78% of Jewish Americans believe that an independent Palestinian state should co-exist alongside of Israel.

Saying that Radical Islamists and Jihadists are terrorists does not make one an Islamophobe. I do it all the time and I am a committed Muslim.

Putting all Muslims in the same boat, painting them with the same brush, falsifying facts, and trying to convince people that even educated, unveiled, and accent-free Muslim women are extremists is the epitome of Islamophobia.

It is Islamophobic to assert that the Muslim world, as a whole, is currently dominated by bad ideas and bad beliefs.

It is Islamophobic to assert that millions of Muslims fail to denounce terror because they, themselves, are not moderates. They do so all the time. Muslim voices, however, are muffled out by the mainstream media.

It is Islamophobic to assert that the word “moderate,” as we understand it in the Western world, does not apply to Muslims.

It is also Islamophobic to assert that Muslims collectively oppose fundamental rights and freedoms.

Moderate Muslims do not number in the millions. There is over one billion of them. They are the critical mass.

The Muslim world is not a grey zone where you cannot distinguish between friend from foe. It is critical to distinguish between the masses of Muslim human beings from the tiny minority of sub-human terrorists.

The traditional values of Islam are perfectly compatible with the traditional values of the Western world; Judeo-Christian values and Humanitarian values.

The principles of the Prophet influenced the European Renaissance, the Napoleonic Code, the American Constitution, and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

The Prophet Muhammad produced the first constitution in the political history of humanity. The Covenants of the Prophet were the first to enshrine modern notions of civic and human rights.

Radical Fake Islam is a deadly disease. It is a cancerous tumor that is attached to the body of Islam. It is a contagious virus that has entered the bloodstream of Islam. It does not belong to the body. It will debilitate, destroy, and kill it. It must be amputated. It must be annihilated by means of antibiotics. The sooner that the cancerous tumor is surgically removed; the sooner that the bloodborne pathogen is neutralized, the better it will be for both Muslims and non-Muslims.

Dr. John Andrew Morrow (al-Ustadh al-Duktur Ilyas Islam) is an Amerindian Muslim leader and a proud member of the Métis Nation. After embracing Islam at the age of 16, he became both a Western academic and a traditional Muslim scholar. He is the author of a large body of scholarly works, the most influential of which is The Covenants of the Prophet Muhammad with the Christians of the World. His websites include www.covenantsoftheprophet.com andwww.johnandrewmorrow.com. His videos and lectures can be found on The Covenants of the Prophet Channel on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCqM3-puvWuKuCEJsDQDZFrA. His Facebook accounts include @johnandrewmorrow and @covenantsoftheprophet. He can be followed on Twitter @drjamorrow.

Related Posts:

mercredi 24 mai 2017
Par John Andrew Morrow
SHAFAQNA – Après chaque nouvelle attaque terroriste en Occident, faussement commise au nom de l’Islam par des hérétiques ou des mercenaires, des politiciens tentent de profiter de la tragédie en faisant de tous les musulmans des boucs émissaires et en diabolisant toute une religion mondiale, alors même que plus de 90% des victimes de Daech sont des musulmans, qu’ils sont en première ligne pour les combattre et que les crimes commis par l’Occident ou Israël, principaux soutiens du takfirisme et du wahhabisme, ne sont (légitimement) pas imputés au christianisme ou au judaïsme. Le Dr John Andrew Morrow présente des faits avérés sur l’Islam et les musulmans.
Traduction : fr.shafaqna.com
Selon le Pew Research Center, 93% du monde islamique est composé de sunnites, chiites et soufis. Ce sont les musulmans orthodoxes. 7% du monde islamique sont composés de Salafistes, Wahhabis et Takfiris. Ce ne sont pas des musulmans orthodoxes. Ce sont des hérétiques. Ce sont les personnes désignées en Occident comme des islamistes, des jihadistes et des islamo-fascistes. En termes statistiques, il n’y a absolument aucun doute que l’écrasante majorité des musulmans sont tout aussi respectueux des lois que les membres de toute autre foi monothéiste. Quiconque prétend autre chose est malhonnête et trompeur…
[Ceux qui stigmatisent les musulmans] invoquent le fait que de nombreux musulmans du Moyen-Orient et de l’Asie du Sud soutiennent la peine de mort pour l’apostasie. Cependant, ils ignorent commodément l’image plus large. 71% de musulmans tunisiens, 73% de musulmans thaïlandais, 78% de musulmans tadjiks, 83% de musulmans turcs, 82% de musulmans indonésiens, 85% de musulmans de Bosnie et de Russie, 89% de musulmans du Kosovo, 92% de musulmans albanais et 96% des musulmans kazakhs s’opposent à la peine de mort pour les personnes qui quittent l’Islam…
Plus de 60% des musulmans soutiennent la démocratie. Si cela semble faible pour certains, c’est parce que les musulmans ont été victimes de fausses démocraties depuis la fin de l’époque coloniale. Si 40% s’opposent à la démocratie, c’est la « démocratie » des dictateurs et des monarques militaires à laquelle ils s’opposent, ainsi que la « démocratie » de l’invasion et de l’occupation occidentales. Interrogés sur la liberté religieuse, 92,6% des musulmans ont affirmé que c’était une bonne chose. Comme le confirme le Pew Research Center, la majorité des musulmans s’opposent à l’extrémisme, au terrorisme et aux attentats suicide…
Dénoncer les islamistes radicaux et les djihadistes n’est pas un acte islamophobe. Je le fais tout le temps et je suis un musulman pratiquant. Mettre tous les musulmans dans le même sac, les peindre grossièrement, falsifier les faits et essayer de convaincre les gens que même les femmes musulmanes éduquées, non voilées et sans accent sont des extrémistes, c’est l’exemple même de l’islamophobie. Il est également islamophobe de prétendre que les musulmans ne se mobilisent pas pour dénoncer la terreur islamiste parce qu’ils ont secrètement une sympathie pour les terroristes. Faux ! Ils le dénoncent tout le temps, par millions. Les voix musulmanes, cependant, sont systématiquement censurées par les médias dominants.
Combien de personnes ont entendu parler du Code d’honneur musulman de l’ISNA (Société Islamique d’Amérique du Nord)? Il dénonce l’extrémisme et la violence.

Combien de personnes ont entendu parler de la Fatwa contre le terrorisme et les attentats-suicides ? Publiée par le Dr Muhammad Tahir al-Qadri en 2010, elle affirme que « le terrorisme est le terrorisme, la violence est la violence, ils n’ont pas leur place dans l’enseignement islamique et aucune justification ne peut être fournie pour eux. » En 2014, il a affirmé que « L’idéologie de Daech revient à de la mécréace pour l’Islam. C’est un anti-Islam, opposé aux enseignements du Prophète de l’islam. »
Combien de personnes ont entendu parler de l’Initiative des Pactes ? Inspirée par Les Pactes du Prophète Muhammad avec les Chrétiens du monde, ce mouvement international de musulmans est impliqué dans la protection des juifs, des chrétiens et des musulmans persécutés et a été à l’avant-garde de la guerre idéologique contre Daech.
Combien de personnes ont entendu parler de la Fatwa de Bin Bayyah ? En septembre 2014, Cheikh Abdallah Bin Bayyah, l’un des savants les plus influents de l’Islam sunnite, a promulgué une longue fatwa condamnant Daech.
Combien de personnes ont entendu parler de la Lettre à Baghdadi ? Sortie en septembre 2014, c’est une réfutation méticuleuse de Daech. Elle a été signée par plus d’une centaine d’éminents spécialistes de l’Islam et dirigée personnellement vers le chef du faux Etat islamique.
Combien de personnes ont entendu parler du Message d’Amman ? Publié en novembre 2004 et signé par 200 chercheurs islamiques de plus de 50 pays, il appelle à la tolérance dans le monde musulman.
Combien de personnes ont entendu parler de la Déclaration de l’Organisation de coopération islamique ? Publiée en 2014, elle déclare que Daech n’a « rien à voir avec l’Islam » et a commis des crimes « qui ne peuvent être tolérés ».
Combien de personnes ont entendu parler de la Fatwa d’al-Azhar ? Émise en 2014, elle affirme que Daech est « un danger pour l’Islam ».
Combien de personnes ont entendu parler de la Déclaration de la Ligue arabe ? Publiée en 2014, elle dénonce les « crimes contre l’humanité » commis par Daech.
Combien de personnes ont entendu parler de la Fatwa qui a été émise par le premier clerc turc, le Mufti Mehmet Gormez ? Émise en 2014, elle affirme que Daech « fait des dégâts considérables» contre l’Islam et les musulmans.
Combien de personnes ont entendu parler des condamnations contre Daech émises par le CAIR (Conseil pour les relations islamo-américaines) ? Depuis 2014, ils ont condamné à maintes reprises Daech comme « non-islamique et moralement répugnant ».
Combien de personnes ont entendu parler de la Déclaration faite par le Conseil musulman de la Grande-Bretagne ? Emise en 2014, elle affirme que « la violence n’a pas sa place dans la religion. »
Combien de personnes ont entendu parler de la Fatwa publiée par le Conseil de jurisprudence de la Société islamique d’Amérique du Nord ? Publiée en 2014 et signée par 126 éminents musulmans, elle affirme que les actions de Daech ne sont en aucun cas représentatives des enseignements de l’Islam.
Combien de personnes ont entendu parler la Fatwa commune sunnite-chiite édictée par 100 Imams britanniques ? Emise en 2014, elle décrit Daech comme un groupe « illégitime » et « cruel ».
Combien de personnes ont entendu parler de la Déclaration publiée par le Conseil des affaires publiques musulmanes ? Publié en 2014, elle condamne Daech et appelle les musulmans à « s’opposer à l’extrémisme ».
Combien de personnes ont entendu parler de Nahdlatul Ulama ? C’est la plus grande organisation islamique au monde, représentant 50 millions de musulmans indonésiens. En 2014, la NU a lancé une campagne mondiale contre l’extrémisme et le wahhabisme.
Combien de personnes ont entendu parler des pensées de Cheikh Muhammad al-Yaqubi sur Daech ? Dans une interview menée en 2014, il a affirmé que « Daech n’a aucune nationalité. Sa nationalité est la terreur, la sauvagerie et la haine. » En outre, il a affirmé que « Baghdadi va tout droit en enfer. »
En 2015, Cheikh al-Yaqubi a publié une conférence intitulée Rejeter Daech : une réfutation de ses fondations religieuses et idéologiques. Dans sa brochure, il déclare que Daech constitue la menace la plus grave que l’Islam ait jamais rencontrée [ce qui est également la position de Sayed Hassan Nasrallah, Sayed Ali Khamenei, Sayed Sistani, etc., qui sont enpremière ligne du combat contre Daech].
Combien de personnes ont entendu parler du djihad qui a été déclaré par le Groupe de Jeunes Musulmans au Royaume-Uni en 2015 ? Ils ont déclaré que des groupes comme Daech n’ont « aucun lien avec l’islam ou la communauté musulmane ».
Combien de personnes ont entendu parler de la Fatwa de masse contre Daech ? Publiée en décembre 2015, elle a été signée par plus de 100 000 clercs musulmans en Inde, au Bangladesh et au-delà, et approuvés par des millions de musulmans.
Combien de personnes ont entendu parler de la Déclaration de Marrakech ? Publiée en 2016 et signée par des centaines de grands dirigeants musulmans, elle exprime leur engagement collectif à l’égard des droits humains, civils, religieux et aux droits des communautés minoritaires dans les pays musulmans.
Last but not least, combien de personnes ont entendu parler de la Déclaration de Grozny qui a excommunié les Salafistes-Takfiris ? Une Fatwa commune émise en Tchétchénie en 2016 par, entre autres, le Grand Cheikh d’Al-Azhar, la plus haute autorité de l’Islam sunnite, a déclaré explicitement que « les Salafistes-Takfirists, Daech (le soi-disant « Etat islamique ») et les groupes extrémistes similaires « n’étaient pas ‘musulmans’ ». [Et la liste est encore longue, et s’étend à toutes les communautés musulmanes d’Orient et d’Occident].
Il est crucial de faire la distinction entre les masses d’êtres humains musulmans et la minuscule minorité de terroristes sub-humains. Les valeurs traditionnelles de l’Islam sont parfaitement compatibles avec les valeurs traditionnelles du monde occidental : valeurs judéo-chrétiennes et valeurs humanitaires. Le Prophète Muhammad a produit la première Constitution dans l’histoire politique de l’humanité. Les Pactes du Prophète ont été les premiers à consacrer les notions modernes de droits civiques et humains. Les principes du Prophète ont influencé la Renaissance européenne, le Code napoléonien, la Constitution américaine et la Déclaration universelle des droits de l’homme.
L’Islam orthodoxe, traditionnel, dominant, civilisationnel et classique n’a pas besoin d’être réformé. Il doit être guéri d’une maladie, d’une innovation toxique, appelée salafisme takfiri, une tumeur cancéreuse attachée au corps de l’Islam. Elle n’appartient pas au corps. Elle veut affaiblir, détruire et tuer le corps. Il faut l’amputer. Plus tôt la tumeur cancéreuse sera enlevée chirurgicalement, mieux ce sera pour les musulmans et les non-musulmans.
Dr John Andrew Morrow, fier musulman, pour l’Initiative des Pactes, mouvement international de protection des victimes de Daech.

May 24, 2017

By Dr. John Andrew Morrow for the Covenants Initiative

Muslims are routinely accused of failing to denounce terrorism. In reality, they are at the forefront of over 300 efforts to oppose extremism, fundamentalism, and violent fanaticism that is committed in the name of Islam by criminals who are outside of its fold.

Although it would be overwhelming to list all these initiatives, the thirty most significant ones have been selected to share with all concerned human beings. Muslims and non-Muslims are encouraged to familiarize themselves with these efforts, to inform others of them, and to support them to the best of their abilities.

  1. ISNA’s Muslim Code of Honor: http://www.isna.net/muslim-code-of-honor
  2. A Common Word Between Us and You: http://www.acommonword.com
  3. Shoulder to Shoulder: http://www.shouldertoshouldercampaign.org/
  4. Dr. Qadri’s Fatwa against Terrorism and Suicide Bombing: http://www.quranandwar.com/FATWA%20on%20Terrorism%20and%20Suicide%20Bombings.pdf
  5. Dr. Qadri’s Fatwa Against ISIS: http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/isis-is-a-terrorist-state-not-an-islamic-one-tahir-ul-qadri/1/624929.html
  6. The Covenants Initiative: https://covenantsoftheprophet.wordpress.com/2013/08/11/the-covenants-initiative/
  7. The Genocide Initiative: https://www.change.org/p/all-political-players-the-genocide-initiative
  8. Shaykh Bin Bayyah’s Fatwa against ISIS: http://binbayyah.net/english/2014/09/24/fatwa-response-to-isis/
  9. The Letter to Baghdadi: http://www.lettertobaghdadi.com/
  10. The Amman Message: http://ammanmessage.com/
  11. The Statement by the Organization of Islamic Cooperation: http://binbayyah.net/english/2014/09/24/fatwa-response-to-isis/
  12. The Fatwa from Al-Azhar: http://english.alarabiya.net/en/News/middle-east/2015/02/04/Al-Azhar-calls-for-killing-crucifixion-of-ISIS-terrorists-.html
  13. The Statement of the International Union of Muslim Scholars: https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/20140705-prominent-scholars-declare-isis-caliphate-null-and-void/
  14. The Statement from the Arab League: http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/636033/arab-league-confront-isis-now
  15. The Fatwa of Mufti Mehmet Gormez: http://www.reuters.com/article/us-iraq-security-turkey-religion-idUSKBN0FR16120140722
  16. The Statement of CAIR: https://www.cair.com/press-center/press-releases/12551-cair-condemns-isis-violence-and-rejects-calls-to-join-extremists-fighting-abroad.html
  17. The Statement of the Muslim Council of Great Britain: http://www.mcb.org.uk/not-in-our-name-british-muslims-condemn-the-barbarity-of-isis/
  18. The Fatwa of the Fiqh Council of North America: http://fiqhcouncil.org/node/69
  19. The Joint Sunni-Shiite Fatwa by 100 UK Imams: http://wilayah.info/en/sunni-and-shia-british-imams-denounce-isis-together-in-new-video/ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Bd0Y6qWmlA
  20. Association of Muslim Scholars in Iraq: http://www.heyetnet.org/en/index.php/aciklamalar/item/974-statement-no-1007-on-the-expulsion-of-iraqi-christians-from-the-city-of-mosul-by-islamic-state
  21. The Declaration Against Extremism by the Muslim Public Affairs Council: https://www.mpac.org/issues/national-security/mpac-rejects-isis-repugnant-crimes-against-humanity.php
  22. Saudi Arabia’s Council of Senior Scholars: http://af.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idAFKBN0HC0XL20140917?sp=true
  23. The Statements from Nahdlatul Ulama from Indonesia:
    1. http://www.worldreligionnews.com/issues/indonesias-largest-islamic-organization-denounces-isis
    2. http://www.cnn.com/2016/05/10/asia/indonesia-extremism/
    3. htps://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/27/world/asia/indonesia-islam-nahdlatul-ulama.html?_r=0
    4. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/indonesian-muslims-counter-isis_us_565c737ae4b072e9d1c26bda
  24. Shaykh Yaqubi’s Refuting ISIS: http://www.refutingisis.com/
  25. Historic Islamic Edict Fatwa on Joining ISIS/ISIL by the Islamic Supreme Council: http://www.islamicsupremecouncil.com/historic-islamic-edict-fatwa-on-joining-isis-isil/
  26. The Muslim Youth Group’s Jihad Against Extremism: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/young-british-muslims-declare-own-jihad-against-isis-and-other-terrorists-who-hijack-islam-10146534.html
  27. The Statement by Dr. John Andrew Morrow: http://www.jewishpost.com/news/American-Imam-Issues-Fatwa-Against-ISIS.html
  28. The Mass Fatwa by 100,000 Muslim Clerics from India, Bangladesh, and beyond:
    1. http://www.voanews.com/a/fatwa-endorsed-by-bangladeshi-islamic-scholars-aims-to-curb-terrorism/3384976.html
    2. http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/more-than-1-lakh-bangladeshi-clerics-sign-anti-terror-fatwa/1/695764.html
  29. The Marrakesh Declaration: http://www.marrakeshdeclaration.org/marrakesh-declaration.html
  30. The Grozny Declaration: http://chechnyaconference.org/material/chechnya-conference-statement-english.pdf

Dr. John Andrew Morrow is an indigenous inhabitant of Turtle Island and a member of the Michif-Otipemisiwak. He professed Islam at the age of 16. He is both a Western academic with a PhD from the University of Toronto and a recognized Muslim scholar. He has authored over thirty scholarly books, the most impactful of which is The Covenants of the Prophet Muhammad with the Christians of the World. His websites include www.covenantsoftheprophet.com and www.johnandrewmorrow.com. His videos and lectures can be found on The Covenants of the Prophet Channel on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCqM3-puvWuKuCEJsDQDZFrA. His Facebook accounts include @johnandrewmorrow and @covenantsoftheprophet. He can be followed on Twitter @drjamorrow.

 

Introduction

Muhammad ibn ‘Abd Allah was a Prophet. He was a Messenger of God. He was the Seal of the Prophets. This is something agreed upon by all Muslims: La ilaha illa Allah / Muhammadan Rasul Allah: there is no god but Allah and Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah.

Prophethood

Muhammad ibn ‘Abd Allah was a nabi or a prophet, namely, a person sent to preach the Word of God; a person who was following in the footsteps of his prophetic predecessors. He did not preach a new religion; he preached the primordial religion, Islam, submission and surrender to the One and Only God, the Creator and Sustainer of the Universe.

Muhammad ibn ‘Abd Allah was also a rasul or a messenger, namely, a person who was sent with a scripture, a book from God, a revelation, and a code of law. He came forth, not only with ‘aqidah or beliefs but with shari‘ah or law, a comprehensive social, political, and economic system. Islam is a complete way of life.

Unlike the prophets and messengers who preceded him and unlike the founders of other faith traditions, which focus on governing themselves, Muhammad, the Messenger of Allah, also focused on how Muslims should interact with others.

If one reads the Old Testament, and one study the Halakha, one sees that that Jewish Law was concerning primarily with regulating the lives of Jewish people.

If one reads the New Testament, and studies Canon Law, one sees that Christian law was concerned primarily with regulating the lives of Christian people. There is little in the Judeo-Christian tradition regarding the rights of non-Jews and non-Christians. There is little with regards to the manner we should treat different faith communities.

For many religions, both Eastern and Western, it was pretty much: “Follow my way or I will send you on the highway to Hell.” Although the belief system and code of conduct of believers was clearly delineated, the rights of unbelievers were often reduced to the right to die. In many cases, it boiled down to “Convert the unbelievers or kill them all.”

Pluralism

Islam, however, came to the scene with an entirely novel and unique approach: pluralism. Unlike many other religions that insisted that salvation was for them and them alone, Islam insisted that salvation was within the reach of all righteous monotheists. So long as one believed in God, and one did good deeds and avoided evil deeds, one had hope in the mercy of Almighty God. As Almighty Allah, says in the Holy Qur’an:

Surely those who believe, and those who are Jews, and the Christians, and the Sabians, whoever believes in Allah and the Last day and does good, they shall have their reward from their Lord, and there is no fear for them, nor shall they grieve. (2:63)

As Mustafa Akyol, the author of The Islamic Jesus, has observed:

The fact that the Qur’an promised salvation to [the Sabians], along with Jews and Christians, reflects a theological liberality in early Islam that most contemporary Muslims would have a hard time to even consider. (68)

I have studied Islam for over three decades. I too was taught that only Muslims were believers and that only Muslims went to Heaven. I was taught that Christians were mushrikin or polytheists. I was taught that the People of the Book were kuffar or infidels who were destined to eternal damnation in Hell. I studied all the so-called Muslim authorities who misrepresented and misinterpreted the Qur’an to suit their intolerant purposes.

I read all the so-called “authentic” traditions that extremists use to justify denying non-Muslims basic civil and human rights. I read all the so-called authoritative commentaries of the Qur’an that present an intolerant image of Islam. I can assert, openly, and unabashedly, that the extremist, fundamentalist, exclusivist, absolutist, fascist and supremacist interpretation of Islam is false. It represents a re-invention of Islam. It is not the Islam of the Rightly-Guided Caliphs. It is not the Islam of the Prophet Muhammad. And it most certainly is not the Islam of the Qur’an and the Islam of Almighty Allah.

Political Responsibility

When the Messenger of Allah established himself in Madinah, he consulted with Jews, Muslims, and polytheists, and created a constitution, the first of its kind in the political history of humanity. Known as the Covenant of Madinah, it placed all citizens on equal footing with equal rights and obligations. The citizens of the city-state of Madinah consisted of Jews and Arab non-Muslims. They numbered in the tens of thousands. Muslims, however were a minority during the early days of Muhammad’s rule: they numbered in the hundreds. Nonetheless, the Prophet proclaimed that they were a ummah wahidah, a single community, a constitutional confederation.

The term mu’minin or believers is used almost a thousand times in the Qur’an. As Mustafa Akyol recognizes, the term “was a broad umbrella that could incorporate all monotheists” (68). In the Constitution of Madinah and in the Covenants of the Prophet, the Messenger of Allah described the People of the Book as mu’minin or believers. And this makes perfect logical sense: anyone who believes in God is a believer. When the Messenger of Allah referred to his followers, those who embraced Islam, he used the term muslimin or Muslims. The Prophet spearheaded a movement of believers and created a Confederation of Believers. The rightly-guided Caliphs used the title Amir al-Mu’minin, Leader of the Believers, not Amir al-Muslimin, Leader of the Muslims. They were the leaders of all the citizens of the Ummah.

As Mustafa Akyol explains, “The existence of different religious traditions on earth is not an aberration but, quite the contrary the very will of God” (102). As we read in the Holy Qur’an,

And we have sent down the Book to you [Muhammad] with truth, confirming and conserving the previous Books. So judge between them by what God has sent down and do not follow their whims and desires deviating from the Truth that has come to you.

We have appointed a law and a practice for every one of you. Had God willed, He would have made you a single community, but He wanted to test you regarding what has come to you. So compete with each other in doing good. And every one of you will return to God and He will inform you regarding the things about which you differed. (5:48)

This is pluralism plain and simple, a condition or system in which various groups, principles, sources of authority or religious traditions co-exist in respect and tolerance. It is pluralism as defined by Diana L. Eck: energetic engagement with diversity; active seeking of understanding across lines of difference; encounter of commitments; and the language of dialogue.

One day, when the Prophet Muhammad was in Madinah, a delegation of Christians visited him from Najran. They debated and discussed religious matters. They agreed on some issues. They disagreed on other issues. When it came time for the Christians to perform their prayers, they excused themselves to leave the mosque. The Prophet Muhammad insisted that they pray in his mosque as it was a place of prayer and a house of God. And so the Christians prayed and celebrated mass in the mosque of the Prophet. This event is meticulously documented in Muslim sources. Not only is it authentic, it is exemplary. It is the very embodiment of Islamic ethics. Compare that to the actions of ISIS.

There are two visions of Islam that confront us today: an Islam of peace, mercy, tolerance, love, equality, and justice; and an Islam of war, cruelty, intolerance, hatred, inequality, and injustice; an Islam of terrorism, bloodshed, violence, misogyny, and bigotry. Forgive me if I have enough sense of decency and humanity to side with the former, True Islam, and repudiate all those who side with the latter which is nothing less than Anti-Islam. Muslims, true Muslims, must agree to disagree, not only with non-Muslims, but with each other. Had Allah willed, He would have made us all the same. He did not decree uniformity by means of barbarity, like ISIS wants to impose, but diversity and plurality under the wings of mercy. As Almighty Allah says in the Holy Qur’an:

O humankind, indeed We have created you from male and female and made you peoples and tribes that you may know one another. Indeed, the most noble of you in the sight of Allah is the most righteous of you. Indeed, Allah is Knowing and Acquainted. (49:13)

The Qur’an abolishes sexism. The Qur’an abolishes racism. The Qur’an abolishes absolutism. It calls upon different religious traditions to “compete with each other in righteousness” (5:48). It calls upon different religious traditions to defer their differences to the ultimate judgment of God. It is what is known as irja or “postponement;” namely, deferring religious differences to the afterlife.

The Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, never converted people by force. As Almighty Allah says in the Holy Qur’an, “There is no compulsion in religion” (2:256). Consequently, the Messenger of Allah invited people to Islam. If they accepted Islam, alhamdulillah, praise be to Allah. If they preferred to keep their religion, masha’ Allah, it was the will of Allah. Perhaps they would come into Islam in the future, insha’ Allah, if it is the will of Allah. The Prophet was perfectly clear on the subject. As he wrote in the Treaty with the Kings of Himyar, cited in the Sirah of Ibn Ishaq:

If a Jew or a Christian becomes a Muslim, he is a believer with his rights and obligations. He who holds fast to his religion, Jew or Christian, is not to be turned from it. (643)

As Abu al-Fath al-Samiri, wrote in the Continuation of his chronicle,

The Prophet of Islam did not cause anyone distress throughout his life. He would present his belief before the people, accepting anyone who came to him, [yet] not compelling one who did not.

According to this 14th century Samaritan scholar, “Muhammad never mistreated any of the followers of the Law.” He also related a tradition transmitted by Samaritan elders that stated that: “Muhammad was a good and mighty person because he made a treaty of friendship with the Hebrew People.”

If the People of the Book did not wish to embrace Islam, Almighty Allah called upon them to follow their scripture firmly. As we read in the Holy Qur’an: “So let the followers of the Gospel judge according to what God has sent down in it” (5:47). This is exactly what the Messenger of Allah did. He judged Jews on basis of the Torah; Christians on the basis of the Gospel; and Muslims on the basis of the Qur’an. And that is precisely what the Rightly-Guided Caliphs did. As Imam ‘Ali, may Allah be pleased with him, said when he assumed the Caliphate:

Question me before you lose me. Question me, for I have the knowledge of those who came earlier and those who will come later. If the cushion (on which a judge sits) was folded for me (to sit on), I could give judgements to the people of the Torah by their Torah, to the people of the Gospels by their Gospels, to the people of Psalms by their Psalms and to the people of the Furqan (i.e. Qur’an) by their Furqan, so that each one of these books will be fulfilled and will declare, “O Lord, indeed ‘Ali has given judgement according to Your decree.

Conclusions

This is Islam, true Islam, the Islam of Allah, the Islam of the Prophet, and the Islam of all true Muslims. It is a religion that soothes the soul. It is a religion that satisfies the intellect with certainty. It is a religion based on ethics and morality. It is a religion of piety and righteousness. It is a religion that provides people with rights as opposed to depriving people of rights. It is a religion of personal growth and development; a religion of social justice.

Dr. John Andrew Morrow is an Amerindian Muslim leader and a proud member of the Métis Nation. After embracing Islam at the age of 16, he became both a Western academic and a traditional Muslim scholar. He is the author of a large body of scholarly works, the most influential of which is The Covenants of the Prophet Muhammad with the Christians of the World. His websites include covenantsoftheprophet.com and johnandrewmorrow.com. His videos and lectures can be found on The Covenants of the Prophet Channel on YouTube. His Facebook accounts include @johnandrewmorrow and @covenantsoftheprophet. He can be followed on Twitter @drjamorrow.

The Muslim Post <style type=”text/css”>.wpb_animate_when_almost_visible{opacity:1;}</style>

By Charles Upton

In early May of 2017, the Library of Congress in Washington DC released digital copies of the Covenants of the Prophet. The precious documents were among the 1,687 manuscripts that were microfilmed at the Eastern Orthodox Monastery of St. Catherine’s on Mount Sinai in 1949. Part of the LOC’s collection for over nearly seventy years, the Covenants of the Prophet were only previously available to researchers who requested to view them in person.

When Dr. John Andrew Morrow visited the Library of Congress in November of 2014 to study and make digital copies of the Covenants of the Prophet, Margaret Kieckhefer, the Senior Information and Reference Specialist, was stunned: “You are the only scholar who has consulted the Covenants of the Prophet. All the other scholars who come here are only interested in the Christian manuscripts.”

For years, the Covenants of the Prophet were the personal treasure trove of Professor Morrow. As far as other scholars were concerned, the Muhammadan Covenants could only be found at St. Catherine’s Monastery in Egypt. “Considering that many Covenants of the Prophet were destroyed by fanatics and extremists in the past, and that the terrorists of our times are determined to destroy them, I was relieved to know that copies of them were safely stored in the Library of Congress,” explained Morrow.

Reaction to the release of the Covenants of the Prophet has been mixed. As Dr. Morrow expressed, “I am both sad and glad that these invaluable documents have been placed online under public domain. In the past, I had a monopoly over the manuscripts. This allowed me control over content. Anyone who wished to work in the field had to work with me directly or indirectly. Now, the field is wide open to both friends and foes alike. I am glad, however, that other academics will have access to these primary sources and I hope that they will stimulate scholarship for centuries to come.”

Rachida Bejja, a supporter of the Covenants Initiative, viewed the public dissemination of the Covenants of the Prophet as positive: “Prior to the publication of The Covenants of the Prophet Muhammad with the Christians of the World, there was virtually no knowledge of these documents and even less interest. I am convinced that the Library of Congress published the Covenants of the Prophet online in response to the popularity of Professor Morrow’s ground-breaking book.”

Héctor Horacio Manzolillo, a political commentator and analyst, was far more cynical regarding the public release of the Covenants of the Prophet. “Dr. Morrow is a pioneer in this field. He published The Covenants of the Prophet Muhammad with the Christians of the World in 2013. In 2017, he was set to publish Six Covenants of the Prophet Muhammad with the Christian Communities of His Time in over a dozen languages along with the 2-volume Islam and the People of the BookCritical Studies on the Covenants of the Prophet. As was well-publicized, he was planning to publish the collection of Muhammadan Covenants he had gathered from Mount Sinai and other archives. That project has been scuttled by the Library of Congress. Their timing is certainly suspicious. It is as if they stabbed Dr. Morrow in the back. If they had the Covenants of the Prophet since 1950, why are they just making them available to the public at this very moment?”

In the mind of Manzolillo, the reason behind the release is clear: “The Covenants of the Prophet are an inconvenient truth. They were hidden for centuries. It was thanks to the work of Dr. Morrow that they were resurrected and made relevant. Since the enemies of truth cannot silence Morrow’s voice, they want to drown it out by opening the floodgates; namely, by financing scholars-for-dollars to refute his findings and marginalize his scholarship. The Covenants of the Prophet present a previously ignored societal model that poses a threat to existing power structures. By championing the Muhammadan Covenants, Morrow has made enemies, not only of non-Muslims but of Muslims as well. Whether they are Sunnis or Shiites, the states they have created are inconsistent with the teachings of the Prophet. They tried to ignore Morrow’s findings but they failed. They tried to co-opt Morrow’s findings but he stood firm. Now they seek dilute his findings and re-direct research to castrate the Covenants of the Prophet, make them apolitical, and transform them into ‘historical curiosities’ without practical applications.”

Whether one is positive or negative when it comes to the decision of the Library of Congress to publicly release the Covenants of the Prophet from the Monastery of Saint Catherine at Mount Sinai, the scholarly foundations established by Dr. John Andrew Morrow will remain firmly entrenched. His academic accomplishments have inspired scores of scholars, including the likes of Abdurrahman Abou al-Majd, Eduardo Wassim Abou Ltaif, Zafar Bangash, Kevin Barrett, Bouchra Belgaid, Craig Considine, Mohamed Elkouche, Rosinda Etchegoyen, Naglaa Hassan, Evangelos Katafylis, Qasim Rashid, Reza Shah-Kazemi, Muhammad Sultan-Shah, Walaa Nasrallah, and Ahmed El-Wakil, among many others who are following in his scholarly footsteps.

As Héctor Manzolillo explained, “Considering the socio-political implications of the Covenants of the Prophet, this scholarly interest is precisely what the powers-that-be wanted to prevent. They have used every means possible to convince people in Higher Education and in high-ranking political positions that the Muhammadan Covenants were forged by monks to protect their lives and to obtain other benefits from Muslim rulers. When the Covenants of the Prophet Muhammad with the Christians of the World was published in 2013, articles and ‘scholarly’ studies surfaced alleging that the treaties in question were false and, indirectly, that Morrow was a liar because he based his findings upon them. Nonetheless, the sun continues to spread its light: the importance and veracity of the Covenants of the Prophet continues to spread in all directions: north, south, east and west. Since the truth of the treaties continues to spread, it seems that a new tactic has been developed to negate their importance and impact, particularly in the field of international politics, since the Covenants demonstrate, once and for all, that all the terrorism that is attributed to Muslims and which is devastating entire regions of the planet is un-Islamic. It has nothing to do with Islam. In fact, it is the invention of the enemies of Islam.”

When asked to help guide students and scholars through the massive collection of manuscripts, Dr. Morrow was as gregarious as ever: “Researchers should be pointed to the main page of the collection: (https://www.loc.gov/collections/manuscripts-in-st-catherines-monastery-mount-sinai/about-this-collection). The reel titled Arabic Firmans 1-48. Covenants of the Prophet and Decrees(https://www.loc.gov/item/00279389013-ms) contains five copies of the Covenant of the Prophet in Arabic. The first three date from 1737-1738, 1778, and 1800-1801, while the final two are undated. Scroll 77: Arabic Firmans 961, Addendum, contains a copy of the Covenant of the Prophet in Arabic (https://www.loc.gov/item/00279389153-ms). Microfilm Turkish Scrolls, Reel 1681, however, contains a much larger collection. It features 43 copies of the Covenant of the Prophet in Ottoman Turkish. The documents in the reel date from the 16th century to the 20th century. They can be accessed via the following link:https://www.loc.gov/resource/amedmonastery.00279388975-ms/?sp=1&st=gallery. The reel titled Arabic Manuscripts 695 contains two copies of the Covenant of the Prophet in Arabic, copied in 1683-84. Finally, Arabic Manuscripts 696 contains a Covenant of the Prophet, in Arabic and Turkish, that was copied in 1561 (https://www.loc.gov/item/00279388963-ms).”

As Dr. Morrow observed, the Covenants of the Prophet from St. Catherine’s Monastery are not the only treasures in its library’s ancient collection. “There are thousands of decrees and edicts from Fatimid Caliphs and Ottoman Sultans, along with Muslim jurists from the major schools of jurisprudence, that require meticulous study. Many of them explicitly confirm the rights and freedoms that the Prophet Muhammad granted to the monks of Mount Sinai.” Asked if he had any closing words for this article, Professor Morrow shook his head and said: “The Library of Congress, for good or bad, has released some of its riches. I pray they will prove profitable to investors in the hereafter instead of being squandered by pirates in search of worldly pleasure.”

Charles Upton was born in 1948. His books include Day and Night on the Sufi PathVirtues of the ProphetReflections of TasawwufThe System of Antichrist, and, with Dr. John Andrew Morrow, The Words of Allah to the Prophet Muhammad: Forty Sacred Sayings. He is also the conceiver of the Covenants Initiative, an international movement of Muslims to protect persecuted Christians, based on Dr. Morrow’s book The Covenants of the Prophet Muhammad with the Christians of the World. In 1988, he embraced Islam. Since that time, under two shaykhs, he has followed the Sufi path.