10 Questions about Islam, Islam EN, art

• 10 Questions about Islam

8 October 2010
By guest author Rainer Grell
Translation:

You surely can`t judge a religion - or at least not solely - by what its adherents do. Religion can be misunderstood or misused. Besides, in every religion there are different branches contradivting or fighting each other. “The Islam” doesn't exist, that's the answer one repeatedly gets.

Let us just leave this as it is and also not bother further about the fact that „the Muslims“ understand themselves as a worldwide faith community (Ummah) with the ones united in Germany associations (ZMB, DITB, VIKZ, Islam council) at every given opportunity claim that “all Muslims” (are insulted, discriminated against etc.). Instead, let's look at the indisputable fact that Koran and sunna (example) of the prophet Mohammed constitute the foundation of Islam. Then arises the following questions for Islam in Germany and Europe:

Question one: Democracy?

According to article 8 of the Islamic Charta of the Central Council of Muslims in Germany (February 20th 2002, ) Islam is equally faith, ethic, social order and directions for life. The separation of religion and state (din wa daula) is alien to Islam. Religion is in no way a “private matter”, but permeates all areas of life. “In the West religion is only a part of life. With Islam life is only a part of religion”, as formulated by Ayatollah Khomeini – and by no means only with regard to Shia Islam.

I am telling you, Muslims, in full openness, that secular democracy contradicts your religion and your faith in all respects (…) The Islam that you believe in and whereby you call yourselves Muslims is completely different from this ugly system (…) Not even in trivial matters can there be any agreement between Islam and democracy, because they are diametrical opposites.”

Article 1 section 4 of the agenda of the co-ordinating committee of the Muslims in Germany (March 28th 2007) states: “The co-ordinating committee is committed to the liberal-democratic constitution of the German Federal Republic”, as it says , but then the next section reads: “the Koran and sunna of the prophet Mohammed are the basis of the co-ordinating committee.”

In the „social system“ of Islam, the law of God stand above any human law. How can this system be compatible with the democratic order of the German Federal Republic, as well as other European countries, an order which is created by humans for humans?

The former head of the Central Council of Muslims in Germany Ayyub Axel Köhler gives the answer himself: ”In the classical Islamic constitutions, there are no traces of democracy, as it exists in modern Western states. The classical Islamic political philosophies reject the principle of popular sovereignty. Thus the aversion against the liberal-democratic system is deeply rooted within Islam. The Islamic ruler is best chosen by vote, an insight already held by the experts of constitutional law in the golden Islamic Middle Ages. But this in no way turns the Islamic social system into a democracy. This form of government is alien to Islam.”

So is Hamed Abdel-Samad thus right when he states: ”The worldly aspect of Islam and democracy get along like spinach and tiramisu”? Is democracy merely a tram you get on, then and abandon once the destination is reached?

And here, poor fool, I stand once more, no wiser than before. Or?

Question two: Human rights?

Article 3 of the Islamic Charta of the Central Council of Muslims in Germany states: “There is no contradiction between the Islamic teaching and the essence of human rights.” .

Assuming that human rights, as formulated in the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights (December 10th 1948), are also accepted (at least in 'essence') by Islam, then why did the Islam Council of Europe pass the “Universal Declaration of Human Rights in Islam” (“deduced from the noble Koran and the pure sunna of the prophet”) on September 19th1981?

Why did the states of the Organisation of the Islamic Conference pass the “Cairo Declaration of Human Rights () in Islam” on August 5th 1990? The latter states in article24: ”All the rights and freedoms stipulated in this Declaration are subject to the Islamic Shari'ah.” Section 25 continues: ”The Islamic Shari'ah is the only source of reference for the explanation or clarification of any of the articles of this Declaration.”

Nobody can serve two masters, wrote Prof. em. Dr. Karl Doehring, , in an extensive Op-Ed in Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung ().

How does Islam in Germany and in Europe manage this split?

Question three: Rule of Law?

Rule of Law is a state of affairs in which all state power is based upon and limited by laws, and the law applies to everyone. Or, as formulated in section 20 subparagraph 3 of the German Constitution: “The legislative is bound to the constitutional order, the executive and the judicial authorities are bound by law and justice.”

A model political order according to Islamic ideals is published in the Islamic model constitution published by the scholars of the Al-Azhar University in Egypt (see also: Towards an Islamic Reformation, ).

§28 Justice and equality constitute the foundation of the rule.

§43 All laws apply in the context of the higher objectives of the shariah.

§44 The state has one Imam who, also in the case of dissent, is to be obeyed …

§47 He has to be Muslim, male, come of aged, in full command of his mental and physical faculties and to demonstrate his knowledge of the shariah.

§61 The judges are to pronounce verdicts in line with the shariah.
Laws in a constitutional state according to western understanding are made by humans, passed by the elected representatives of the people in the parliaments. Islamic law, the shariah, is deduced from the Koran and the sunna, and therefore is considered to be of divine origin.

How can these two attitudes be united?

Question four: Equal rights?

Article 6 of the Cairo Declaration of Human Rights in Islam opens: “Woman is equal to man in human dignity ” There is no mention of equality before the law as in section 7 of the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights (). Also Article 1 (a) merely states: “All men are equal in terms of basic human dignity and basic obligations and responsibilities, without any discrimination on the basis of race, colour, language, belief, sex, religion, political affiliation, social status or other considerations. ” There is no mention of rights in the article.

In the Islamic Charter of the Central Council of Muslims in Germany, the word “woman” occurs only once, namely in context of active and passive electoral rights of women (no.11). Looking for the phrase “Men and women are equal” (German Constitution §3.2.1), and in fact on earth not just in heaven, will be a vain attempt.

Also he unlimited sexual availability of the woman for the man is incompatible with equality in terms of the Constitution: ”Your wives are a tilth for you, so go to your tilth, when or how you will” (sura 2:223)”. And what happens when the women do not put up with this treatment and protest against it? “As to those women on whose part you see ill­conduct, admonish them (first), (next), refuse to share their beds, (and last) beat them (lightly, if it is useful) ...” (sura 4:34). So the woman must absolutely obey the man, who further may surround himself with four women, if he can afford it (sura 4:3).

What does all this have to do with equal rights?

The Preussian Civil Code (ALR in German, from 1794) also gave the husband the “right of the moderate castigation” of his wife. It was, however, abolished already in 1812.

In Bavaria, this development lasted a little longer. According to the Bavarian Codex Maximilianeus Bavaricus Civilis (1758), the man in marriage also had the right to castigate “if necessary with moderateness” in order to assert his position and rights. The latter has not been applied by the courts since the enactment of the German Civil Code (BGB) in 1896, but was officially abolished only in 1947.

Talking of beating. The parental right of castigation was suspended in 2000 through a change of the BGB. Its § 1631 section 2 since now reads as follows:”Children have the right to non-violent education. Physical punishment, emotional violation and similar degrading treatment is prohibited.” That is why strokes are chargeable as bodily injury under §223 of criminal law.

Nonetheless in the book „As-Salah. The prayer in Islam” (on page 21), it is stated:” The five daily prayers is a duty for every grown-up Muslim, be it man or woman, in full command of his mental faculties. Children from the age of seven are to be coerced to the prayer. If needed and no other means exist, through beating.”

How is all this compatible with the statement in no.10 of the Islamic Charter of the Central Council of Muslims in Germany, that Muslims in the diaspora are“basically”bound by the Islamic law to adhere to the local legal system?Perhaps the answer is behind the word “basically”?

Question five: Freedom of religion (within Islam and for Islam)?

“The Koran forbids any exertion of violence and any pressure in religious matters.” as stated in article 11 of the Islamic Charter of the ZMD. Therefore the Muslims represented in the Central Council accept “the right to change the religion, to have a different or no religion at all”. Sura 2:256 appears to confirm this: There is no compulsion in religion.” (la ikraha fi`d-din). But not mentioned is the fact that for this sentence has at least half a dozen interpretations: Why then did Mohammed say: ” The blood of a Muslim who confesses that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah and that I am His Apostle, cannot be shed except in three cases: In Qisas for murder, a married person who commits illegal sexual intercourse and the one who reverts from Islam (apostate) and leaves the Muslims.”? (Sahih Bukhari, Volume 9, Book 83, Number 17)

In addition, the following statement is attributed to the messenger of Allah: “I was instructed to combat humankind until they confess that there is no God except Allah and Mohammed is the messenger of Allah, until they say the prayer and pay the statutory deductions. If they perform these obligations, their lives and belongings are secure from me. They then are subject only to the law of Islam and Allah will judge them” (Sahih Bukhari, Reclam-edition 1991, II/9).

How does this statement fit together with the asserted religious freedom within Islam?

Question six: freedom of opinion?

“Everybody is free to think, believe and express whatever he thinks or believes without someone else intervening or hampering him, as long as he remains within the general limits regulated by the shariah.” Article 12 (a), Universal Declaration of Human Rights in Islam, Islam Council for Europe, 1981.

Consequently criticism of Islam is forbidden. It even seriously threatens global peace, according to Ali Bardakoglu, President of the Ministry of Religious Affairs (Diyanet) in Turkey.

What does this have to do with freedom of expression in terms of section 19 of the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights? It is not in any way the point to denigrate Islam or insult Muslims: “The religiosity of many Muslims deserves respect. However, the oft-demonised criticism of Islam is, when scientifically based and in proper context - not solely based on selective shortcomings, never disrespectful.

If Islam is a part of Germany, as acknowledged by Thomas Schäuble in his capacity of Interior Minister and chairman for the German Islam Conference, why then do Muslims not unconditionally confess to the freedom of opinion?

“Immigrants must adapt themselves to the local system not the other way around. Who can't put up with that should leave, sooner rather than later.” This phrase is not something from a rightist agitator, rather from the Dutch Muslim Ahmed Aboutaleb, who has a Moroccan background.

Question seven: anti-Semitism?

Mohammed said:”You will combat the Jews until one of them will seek refuge behind a stone. And this stone will shout:´Come over here! This Jew hides behind me! Kill him!´” (Sahih Bukhari, Reclam-edition 1991, XXVIII/18). This phrase is also written in section 7 subparagraph 3 of the Charter of Hamas (August 18th 1988). Isn`t this order obligatory for every Muslim when the Koran also states: ”Indeed in the Messenger of Allâh you have a good example to follow for him who hopes in Allâh and the Last Day and remembers Allâh much.” (Sura 33,21)?

Along the same line, item 11 of the secret document of the Muslim Brotherhood “For a worldwide strategy in Islamic politics” (December 1st 1982 – described in FrontPage Magazine: ) appeals to “nurse a feeling of hatred against the Jews and to refuse any coexistence”.

Is Islam misused here, or are Hamas and Muslim Brotherhood just following the example of the prophet?

Question eight: Violence?

„Islam is the religion of Peace“, .. “Islam means 'Peace' as well as 'Devotion'”, the Central Council of the Muslims in Germany tells us immediately in article1 of its Islamic Charter.

The wondering non-Muslim, however, might ask himself how the numerous suras of the Koran, in which the Muslims are encouraged to use violence against the “unbelievers”, are to be understood.

„The recompense of those who wage war against Allâh and His Messenger and do mischief in the land is only that they shall be killed or crucified or their hands and their feet be cut off on the opposite sides, or be exiled from the land. That is their disgrace in this world, and a great torment is theirs in the Hereafter. ”(Sura 5,33)

This verse was written on the note that the killer of Theo van Gogh, Mohammed Bouyeri, stabbed into the chest of his victim.
„I will cast terror into the hearts of those who have disbelieved,“, sura 8,12 says and: ”so strike them over the necks, and smite over all their fingers and toes. ” This sounds just as 'peaceful' as the slogan of Muslim demonstrators in London: ”Behead those who insult islam!”

Nor does the fatwa of Ayatollah Khomeini against Salman Rushdie show any 'peaceful' nature of Islam: ”I would like to inform all the intrepid Muslims in the world that the author of the book entitled 'Satanic Verses'. . . as well as those publishers who were aware of its contents, are hereby sentenced to death. I call on all zealous Moslems to execute them quickly, wherever they find them ” () That was no hollow threat: 22 people have been murdered due to this request.

Professor Sheik Omar Abdel Rahman (Sunni, ) of the famous Al-Azhar University in Cairo said to Mark A. Gabriel (pseudonym), an Imam of Gizah later converted to Christianity: “My brother, there is a whole Sura about the war booty (Sura 8, “Spoils of War”). A sura about freedom doesn`t exist. The Jihad and the killing are the head of Islam. Whoever removes them cuts off the head of Islam.”

Ayatollah Sadeq Khalkhali (Shiite, ): “Opponents of the killing have no space in Islam. Our prophet (Mohammed) killed with his own blessed hands. Our Imam Ali (Mohammeds son-in-law) killed over seven hundred persons on a single day. If bloodshed is necessary for the continuance of our faith we are here to fulfil our duty.”

Perhaps the peace nature of Islam only goes into effect when the whole world is living in dar al-Islam (house of Islam), that is, has become Islamic? And if so: which Islam? For neither among themselves do the Muslims treat each other squeamishly: Of the four rightly guided successors of the prophet Mohammed only, Abdallah Abu Bakr, the first caliph, died a natural death. Many Muslim suicide bombers take co-religionists (male and female) with them in death (Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan etc.), and among the 2752 victims of the Sept 11th attack on the World Trade Center, there were also Muslims (figures up to 300 have been given).

Question nine: Integration?

“O you who believe! Take not the Jews and the Christians as Auliyâ' (friends), they are but Auliyâ' (friends) to one another. ” (sura 5:51). “O you who believe! Take not for Auliyâ' (protectors or helpers or friends) disbelievers instead of believers. (sura 4:144) “Verily, The worst of moving (living) creatures before Allâh are those who disbelieve, - so they shall not believe. ”(sura 8, 55). In a different translation:”Behold! Worse than cattle to Allah are the unbelievers.” And based on that the recommendation of Yusuf Al-Qaradawi to the Muslim immigrants to get together in ghettos along the lines of the Jews: ”Try to form your own small community amidst the broad society, otherwise you will dissolve like salt in water”.

Aren`t these appeals to refuse integration what a not insignificant amount of Muslims in Germany – consciously or unconsciously – are complying with?

Question ten: Enlightened Islam/Euro-Islam?

Don`t forsake us – Allow us a Voltaire” Ayaan Hirsi Ali shouts at her European readership. And Salman Rushdie follows up with his demand: ”We need an Islamic reformation”. At the end of which, supposedly, stands an enlightened Islam or, as the German-Syrian political scientist (and Muslim) Bassam Tibi suggested, an “Euro-Islam”. The political scientist (and Muslim) Hamed Abdel-Samad explained: ”For me only an `Islam Light` has prospects in Europe: Islam without shariah, without Jihad, without gender discrimination, without missionary work (dawa) and without the demanding mentality.

In politics, too, one comes upon the insight that without a change of Islam we won`t get to a harmonious coexistence with Muslims in Germany and Europe: “We (sic!) have to manage that the people can develop in a modern secular state without constantly feeling to be breaking supposed or actual taboos.” And Volker Bouffier, the new Hessian prime minister knows right away how this is going to work: ”For me the only solution is an enlightened Islam”. Is he aware of the consequences of his statement?

It means nothing less than: “The doctrine whereupon the Koran is dictated by Allah and thus the belief is not modifiable, and has to be replaced. Muslims have to become convinced that humans wrote the scripture” as Ayaan Hirsi Ali clearly understood. Will the worldwide umma, or at least the community of the Muslims in Germany and Europe, be ready for it and able to do it?

Embassy counsellor and chairman of the Turkish-Islamic Union of the institution for religion (DITIB) already rejected this notion. In an interview with the Turkish newspaper HÜRRIYET, he refused the idea of an 'Euro-Islam'.”The sources of the Islam are the Koran and the Sunna of the prophet”, Arslan said. Or as prime minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan put it:” There is no moderate or non-moderate Islam. Islam is Islam and that's that.”

Will the Muslims in Germany and Europe be able to critically review their religious sources and their history, no longer conceive the Koran as the “uncreated”and “eternally valid” Word of Allah, but rather man-made? Will they accomplish the separation between religion and state, abandon their claim to secular power by understanding Islam as “private matter”, and reduce their faith to its spiritual aspect?

Rainer Grell, *1941, lawyer; has been active for 35 years in the interior ministry of Baden-Wuerttemberg Germany, lately as head of division for nationality law among others; author of ”Muslim-Tests”. Retired since June 2006