FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   173   174   175   176   177   178   179   180   181   182   183   184   185   186   187   188   189   190   191   192   193   194   195   196   197  
198   199   200   201   202   203   204   205   206   207   208   209   210   211   212   213   214   215   216   217   218   219   220   221   222   >>   >|  
te: 113. European writers' mistake.] That it is a mistake on the part of the European writers to assert that the Koran allows wars of aggression, or in other words, to wage war against the unbelievers without any provocation, is shown by the testimony of Mr. Urquhart and Mr. Edward William Lane. The latter writes: "Misled by the decision of those doctors, and an opinion prevalent in Europe, I represented the laws of 'holy war' as more severe than I found them to be according to the letter and spirit of the Kur-an, when carefully examined, and according to the Hanafee code. I am indebted to Mr. Urquhart for suggesting to me the necessity of revising my former statement on the subject; and must express my conviction that no precept is to be found in the Kur-an, which, taken with the context, can justify unprovoked war."[306] [Sidenote: 114. Sir William Muir quoted.] I will quote several remarks of European writers, including clergymen and Indian missionaries, to show how astray they go in attributing to the Koran and Mohammad the wars of aggressions and compulsory proselytizing. Sir William Muir represents the principles of Islam as requiring constant prosecutions of war, and writes-- "It was essential to the permanence of Islam that its aggressive course should be continuously pursued, and that its claim to an universal acceptance, or at the least to an universal supremacy, should be enforced at the point of the sword. Within the limits of Arabia the work appeared now to be accomplished. It remained to gain over the Christian and idolatrous tribes of the Syrian desert, and then in the name of the Lord to throw down the gauntlet of war before the empires of Rome and Persia, which, having treated with contempt the summons of the Prophet addressed to them in solemn warning four years ago, were now rife for chastisement."[307] The occasion to which Sir W. Muir refers here was to wipe out the memory of the reverse at Muta. The expedition to Muta was occasioned by the murder of a messenger or envoy dispatched by Mohammad to the Ghassanide prince at Bostra. A party was sent to punish the offending chief, Sharahbil. This could, by no means, be maintained as a warlike spirit or an aggressive course for the prosecution of war, or for enforcing the claim of universal supremacy at the point of the sword. [Sidenote: 115. Islam not aggressive.] That Islam as preached by Mohammad was never aggressive has been fully shown
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   173   174   175   176   177   178   179   180   181   182   183   184   185   186   187   188   189   190   191   192   193   194   195   196   197  
198   199   200   201   202   203   204   205   206   207   208   209   210   211   212   213   214   215   216   217   218   219   220   221   222   >>   >|  



Top keywords:
aggressive
 

William

 

writers

 

Mohammad

 

European

 

universal

 

writes

 

spirit

 

Sidenote

 
mistake

supremacy

 

Urquhart

 

treated

 

Persia

 

contempt

 

empires

 

gauntlet

 
summons
 
appeared
 
accomplished

Arabia

 

limits

 

enforced

 

Within

 

remained

 

Syrian

 

desert

 

tribes

 
idolatrous
 

Christian


offending
 
Sharahbil
 

punish

 
prince
 
Bostra
 
maintained
 

preached

 

warlike

 
prosecution
 
enforcing

Ghassanide
 

dispatched

 

chastisement

 
occasion
 
addressed
 

solemn

 

warning

 

refers

 

occasioned

 

murder