Surah Al-Baqarah, the second “chapter”, as the Qur’an has been arranged, has many commands or permissions to commit lethal violence, to kill those who reject the claim of Muhammad to be the “Prophet of Allah”. In addition to these, there are over two dozen indications in this surah of the hatred that Muhammad has for them, which, of course, he projects onto his externalization of his imagined god.
This essay typically quotes from Quran.com, but I am also looking at various translations using QuranX.com.
The context of hatred begins with a tautology early in the surah, in ayah (verse) 6, “Indeed, those who disbelieve – it is all the same for them whether you warn them or do not warn them – they will not believe.” Some readers of this might have a difficulty seeing this as a tautology, so, I edit, “Indeed, those who disbelieve…they will not believe.”
I find it difficult to believe a god would express itself in such poor construction. But, worse than this is the reference to a threat that Muhammad must have already made to those doubting him. Taking this as not merely as a conversation between “Allah” and Muhammad, even though that is the form, but meant as a communication to others, as something to influence them to believe, we see this to be a fallacious argument, of the variety Appeal to Consequences. I find it outright impossible to believe a god would employ fallacies in reasoning, such as this.
The following ayah, 7, “Allah has set a seal upon their hearts and upon their hearing, and over their vision is a veil. And for them is a great punishment.” begins the exposure of the hatred of Muhammad, and his lack of compassion, expressed in condemning and threatening them. He continues, by specifying those who believe in “Allah”, but do not, apparently, accept his prophethood, in the next three ayat, 8-10: “And of the people are some who say, “We believe in Allah and the Last Day,” but they are not believers. They [think to] deceive Allah and those who believe, but they deceive not except themselves and perceive [it] not. In their hearts is disease, so Allah has increased their disease; and for them is a painful punishment because they [habitually] used to lie.
There are related verses following, but the next to clearly reveal the hatred in the mind of Muhammad is ayah 24, “In their hearts is disease, so Allah has increased their disease; and for them is a painful punishment because they [habitually] used to lie.” Muhammad again curses them, by claiming that “Allah” has cursed them, and again, in ayah 26, “…and He misleads not except the defiantly disobedient…”. It takes several ayat, containing fallacious reasoning, some implicit, and unsupportable claims, until the next, 39, “And those who disbelieve and deny Our signs – those will be companions of the Fire; they will abide therein eternally.”
It’s quite a bit later, after silly fables featuring the mythical Moses, and unsupported claims and more fallacious reasoning, that we find the next, ayat 81,82, “Yes, whoever earns evil and his sin has encompassed him – those are the companions of the Fire; they will abide therein eternally. But they who believe and do righteous deeds – those are the companions of Paradise; they will abide therein eternally.”. It may be more difficult to see that this is an expression of the hatred Muhammad sees for “disbelievers”, but the “evil and his sin” is in opposition to “who believe and do righteous deeds”.
In ayah 84, Muhammad begins to reveal his motivations of revenge, “And [recall] when We took your covenant, [saying], “Do not shed each other’s blood or evict one another from your homes.” Then you acknowledged [this] while you were witnessing.”, but the beginning of the next ayah, 85, seems to address the hated ones, “Then, you are those [same ones who are] killing one another and evicting a party of your people from their homes, cooperating against them in sin and aggression. And if they come to you as captives, you ransom them, although their eviction was forbidden to you.”. And, back to addressing his real audience, in ayah 86, he curses the hated, “Those are the ones who have bought the life of this world [in exchange] for the Hereafter, so the punishment will not be lightened for them, nor will they be aided.”
At the end of ayah 90, Muhammad again threatens those who reject him, “And for the disbelievers is a humiliating punishment.”, not long followed by ayah 99, which unwarrantedly changes the characterization of those who rejected Muhammad, “And We have certainly revealed to you verses [which are] clear proofs, and no one would deny them except the defiantly disobedient.” After an inexplicably digression -Muhammad seems to have much difficulty sticking to one topic, let alone exercise cogent reasoning, but that is a subject for another article- in ayah 104, after some direction that includes apparently untranslatable words -so much for being a “clear word”- Muhammad again pronounces his doom upon those who reject him, “And for the disbelievers is a painful punishment.”
Following this last hate speech -I can’t help but comment on this, though it is off-topic- he criticizes those who reject him with an unsupportable accusation, but, were it true, it seems as though it should be too obvious to say, “Neither those who disbelieve from the People of the Scripture nor the polytheists wish that any good should be sent down to you from your Lord.”
The first indication of feelings of revenge on the part of Muhammad comes in ayah 114, “And who are more unjust than those who prevent the name of Allah from being mentioned in His mosques and strive toward their destruction. It is not for them to enter them except in fear. For them in this world is disgrace, and they will have in the Hereafter a great punishment.” Instead of peacefully accepting these exclusions, and finding or building his own space, or using homes to spread his delusions, he curses them out of revenge.
In ayah 126, after fables about the mythical Abraham, the vengeance of “Allah” against those rejecting of Muhammad, but set in the past, is again expressed, ” [ Allah ] said. ‘And whoever disbelieves – I will grant him enjoyment for a little; then I will force him to the punishment of the Fire, and wretched is the destination.’ ”
Soon, Muhammad adds to the fallacies he commits by an implicit Ad Hominem attack, in ayah 130, “And who would be averse to the religion of Abraham except one who makes a fool of himself.” I’ll analyze the fallacious logic of this in another post.
Another motivation for revenge comes in ayah 154, “And do not say about those who are killed in the way of Allah,…”, as we’ll see, soon enough. In ayat 161, 162, “Indeed, those who disbelieve and die while they are disbelievers – upon them will be the curse of Allah and of the angels and the people, all together, abiding eternally therein. The punishment will not be lightened for them, nor will they be reprieved.” the phrase “…and die while…” seems either to be unnecessary, redundant, or an implication that such disbelievers could repent before death. This latter option seems to contradict that they disbelieve because of the curse of “Allah”. Neither option seems consistent with an ideal, all-knowing deity.
Not long later, in ayah 165, doom is again pronounced on “unbelievers”, “And [yet], among the people are those who take other than Allah as equals [to Him]. They love them as they [should] love Allah . But those who believe are stronger in love for Allah . And if only they who have wronged would consider [that] when they see the punishment,…” The next two ayat, 166 and 167, have what seems to be tortured associations, but seems to indicate yet another pronouncement of vengeant doom, “[And they should consider that] when those who have been followed disassociate themselves from those who followed [them], and they [all] see the punishment, and cut off from them are the ties [of relationship], Those who followed will say, “If only we had another turn [at worldly life] so we could disassociate ourselves from them as they have disassociated themselves from us.” Thus will Allah show them their deeds as regrets upon them. And they are never to emerge from the Fire.”.
In his hatred, Muhammad dehumanizes his opponents in a way that a compassionate, all-knowing god surely would not, in ayah 171, “The example of those who disbelieve is like that of one who shouts at what hears nothing but calls and cries cattle or sheep – deaf, dumb and blind, so they do not understand.”
After another non-sequitur digression about dietary matters, Muhammad casts more hatred on his detractors, though with different terms, more bizarrely than usual, in ayat 174-176, “Indeed, they who conceal what Allah has sent down of the Book and exchange it for a small price – those consume not into their bellies except the Fire. And Allah will not speak to them on the Day of Resurrection, nor will He purify them. And they will have a painful punishment. Those are the ones who have exchanged guidance for error and forgiveness for punishment. How patient they are in pursuit of the Fire! That is [deserved by them] because Allah has sent down the Book in truth. And indeed, those who differ over the Book are in extreme dissension.”
In ayah 178 comes the first clear propagation of revenge, “O you who have believed, prescribed for you is legal retribution for those murdered – the free for the free, the slave for the slave, and the female for the female….”, however, it is followed by contradictory ambivalence, “…But whoever overlooks from his brother anything, then there should be a suitable follow-up and payment to him with good conduct.” If “Allah” wants peaceful compensation, then why ordain revenge? And, how is it that the lives of people can traded, effectively, for payment? Despite claims to the contrary supported by ill-applied passages, Muhammad, evidently, has little regard for human life.
After a rambling series of free associations with topics related to piety, Muhammad returns to venting his hatred, in ayah 190, perhaps, the most famous directive for violence, too often only partially quoted, but putting the lie to the claim of Islam being “the religion of Peace”, nonetheless, “Fight in the way of Allah those who fight you but do not transgress. Indeed. Allah does not like transgressors.” If there were a god who wanted its followers to be truly peaceful, it could make them successful in using non-violent means. Moreover, the ostensible implication of limits are vague, can be interpreted any way any one wishes. Defenses of this for the reason of self-defense misses the real point raised.
The claim that lethal violence is limited to self-defense is shown to be facile sophistry in the following ayah, though it still tries to cover with the excuse of self-defense, but also showing revenge as a motive, “And kill them wherever you overtake them and expel them from wherever they have expelled you, and fitnah is worse than killing. And do not fight them at al-Masjid al- Haram until they fight you there. But if they fight you, then kill them. Such is the recompense of the disbelievers.”
The phrase “wherever you overtake them” indicates that they are not attacking, but suggests them to be entrenched, retreating, even fleeing or hiding. This is not self-defense; it is revenge, plain and simple. The second phrase is reminiscent of the complaint in ayah 84. The directed self-defense with lethal violence in the house of the Kaaba seems suspect to me. I submit that the followers of Muhammad acted arrogantly, disruptingly, and threateningly, upsetting the people of Makkah, provoking attack or the threat of it. In his arrogance, Muhammad considered the conflict to be their fault.
After an insinuation of the possibility of rapprochement, in ayah 192, in 193, the implication is that violence is the expected state of Dar Al-Islam, “Fight them until there is no [more] fitnah and [until] worship is [acknowledged to be] for Allah . But if they cease, then there is to be no aggression except against the oppressors.” When should there ever be an end to “fitnah”? It has been a millennium and a half since this directive, and the spread of Muhammad’s version of monotheism has stalled, pretty much, since the 18th century, having conquered less than a quarter of the world, recent migration to Europe by many Muslims from Islamic countries not withstanding. We shall see more support for eternal war implied, later.
More direction for revenge, as opposed to non-violent peace-making, is enjoined in the next ayah, 194, “[Fighting in] the sacred month is for [aggression committed in] the sacred month, and for [all] violations is legal retribution. So whoever has assaulted you, then assault him in the same way that he has assaulted you….”.
After another digression to command pious behaviors, Muhammad again displays his hatred, in ayat 200, 201, “And among the people is he who says, “Our Lord, give us in this world,” and he will have in the Hereafter no share. But among them is he who says, “Our Lord, give us in this world [that which is] good and in the Hereafter [that which is] good and protect us from the punishment of the Fire.”
Despite claims elsewhere that the communication of Allah through Muhammad is a “clear word”, after another digression into vague requirements of piety, the following ayat 204-206 has very vague language, but still the antipathy of Muhammad is plain, “And of the people is he whose speech pleases you in worldly life, and he calls Allah to witness as to what is in his heart, yet he is the fiercest of opponents. And when he goes away, he strives throughout the land to cause corruption therein and destroy crops and animals. And Allah does not like corruption. And when it is said to him, ‘Fear Allah,’ pride in the sin takes hold of him. Sufficient for him is Hellfire, and how wretched is the resting place.”
Not long after, Muhammad picks up again his scare tactics, “And whoever exchanges the favor of Allah [for disbelief] after it has come to him – then indeed, Allah is severe in penalty.”, ayah 211. The following ayah, 212, shows his resentment, but blaming those whom he couldn’t convince, “Beautified for those who disbelieve is the life of this world, and they ridicule those who believe.”
In ayah 216, Muhammad again commands the use of violence, and without apologetically excusable context, “Fighting has been enjoined upon you while it is hateful to you. But perhaps you hate a thing and it is good for you; and perhaps you love a thing and it is bad for you.”, but now, Muhammad gas-lights his followers, trying to reduce their natural aversion to hurting others.
Next, Muhammad redundantly commands, ayah 217, “They ask you about the sacred month – about fighting therein. Say, “Fighting therein is great [sin], but averting [people] from the way of Allah and disbelief in Him and [preventing access to] al-Masjid al-Haram and the expulsion of its people therefrom are greater [evil] in the sight of Allah . And fitnah is greater than killing.” And they will continue to fight you until they turn you back from your religion if they are able. And whoever of you reverts from his religion [to disbelief] and dies while he is a disbeliever – for those, their deeds have become worthless in this world and the Hereafter, and those are the companions of the Fire, they will abide therein eternally.” I gather that he must have followed the Hitlerian maxim of persuasion, lie big and repeat it often.
From the next, 218, we can see again the intention for Dar Al-Islam to engage in perpetual war, though by inference, because it is implicit, subtle, “Indeed, those who have believed and those who have emigrated and fought in the cause of Allah – those expect the mercy of Allah” Reward was promised to those believers who emigrate -some translators interpret this as to Makkah from Medina, but that is not in the text- and who fight. Why should they be fighting? Why did Muhammad not promise blessing on those who emigrate and spread peace? Is it not because of the expectation of having to spread Islam by the sword? Though it is fallacious Appeal to Consequences, having a sword at one’s throat can be very persuasive to adopt Islam.
If ayah 190 were not enough, after some, again, unexplained digression into other matters, such as sex, marriage, menstruation, and divorce, Muhammad again commands violence in ayah 244, but without any context which can be used to defend it, “And fight in the cause of Allah…”, unconnected to what came before and after. Doesn’t his supposed dictator know how to give transitions, and keep to a subject?
In ayah 253, Muhammad reveals that his projection of his ideals has no intention for peace, because he claims that it can bring about peace, but does not, “…And if Allah had willed, they would not have fought each other, but Allah does what He intends.”
With all these condemnations, dehumanizations, threats of the worst torture imaginable, and commanding, endorsing, and rewarding violent spread of Islam, we can see that the claim, “There shall be no compulsion in [acceptance of] the religion.”, ayah 256, is a lie.
After self-contradicting condemnation of the Torah (Taghut), Muhammad claims a generalization that an all-knowing god would not have revealed, ayah 257, “And those who disbelieve – their allies are Taghut. They take them out of the light into darknesses. Those are the companions of the Fire; they will abide eternally therein.” That Muhammad lied is obvious to anyone paying sufficient attention, except those who minds have been shackled by dogmatic indoctrination, typically in childhood, before the ability to exercise critical thinking, the asking “what may be wrong with this?” usually develops.
Without any explanation, other than fiat, Muhammad condemns lending for interest (usury) in ayah 275, “Those who consume interest cannot stand [on the Day of Resurrection] except as one stands who is being beaten by Satan into insanity. That is because they say, “Trade is [just] like interest.” But Allah has permitted trade and has forbidden interest. So whoever has received an admonition from his Lord and desists may have what is past, and his affair rests with Allah . But whoever returns to [dealing in interest or usury] – those are the companions of the Fire; they will abide eternally therein.”, again demeaning those who present a counter-argument as being made insane by “Satan”, and condemning those who disagree to torture.
Muhammad ends the surah with a prayer, ostensibly to be repeated, ayah 286, “You are our protector, so give us victory over the disbelieving people.”, ending this scramble of a surah containing a some good instructions, many ridiculous ones, interspersed with contemptible commands to violence, dehumanizing his opponents, and fallacies of reason not befitting a god. The Qur’an is not from a god, but from men, recited, transcribed, written, compiled and edited according to their motivations, and, perhaps, mental illnesses. While any particular version (sect) of Islam may be peaceful, or, rather, the people in it, Islam as a whole does not deserve the reputation of being “the religion of peace”.
Views: 259
