Maldives Mullahs - Dhivehi Observer

Opinion
"Have the mullahs turned Christian?" – What's the Point?

28 April 2005

It appears the article titled "Have the mullahs turned Christian?" appearing on the so-called Maldives Royal Family website is aimed at tarnishing the image of Islam as a tolerant religion. Reading other articles in the site also confirms this. The author goes on quoting Quranic verses out of context without considering other verses relating to the same issue or the historical context of the verses. This is a typical strategy used by people who want to portray Islam as an intolerant religion, among other things. For the benefit of readers, here’s some explanation which will clarify the doubts the article may have created about Islam.

First, the author tries to mislead readers by quoting (5:51) out of context. He wants to say that Islam prohibits us from taking non-Muslims, especially Jews and Christians as our friends, saying "The Koran labels those who enter into friendship with Christians as Christians". However, little research into this subject would clear the confusion.

According to IslamOnline, in the verse quoted (5:51), the word "Awliya" is used. It is a plural and its singular is "wali". The correct translation of the word "wali" is not "friend" but it is someone who is very close and intimate. It is also used to mean "guardian, protector, patron, lord and master" Also read the historical context of this verse on IslamOnline

Allah also says in the Quran:

"Allah does not forbid you to deal justly and kindly with those who fought not against you on account of religion and did not drive you out of your homes. Verily, Allah loves those who deal with equity. It is only as regards those who fought against you on account of religion, and have driven you out of your homes, and helped to drive you out, that Allah forbids you to befriend them. And whosoever will befriend them, then such are the Zâlimûn (wrong-doers those who disobey Allah)." (60:8-9)

Second, the author tries to show that Islam is an intolerant religion and it goes as far as saying we are ordered to: "killing the idolaters wherever we find them, and taking them captives and besieging them and lying in wait for them in every ambush". Again the author has deceitfully and intentionally quoted the verse out of context without considering other related verses and the timing of the event. A simple reading of the first few verses of surah al-Taubah will put the verse in context. This issue relates to a specific event at the time of Prophet Muhammad, and it is not a general command. It was about the pagans of Mecca who betrayed the Prophet and breached the treaties made between them and the Muslims. Some details are given below:

After numerous betrayals and breach of treaties by the polytheists, on the day of Hajj (the greater pilgrimage), war was declared in a just and civilized manner. A notice period of four months was granted. The enemies were given respite to finish their pilgrimage and prepare for war. At the end of this period battle would be done as the polytheists had proven themselves unworthy of being treated as a noble enemy with whom a peace treaty could be established. Instead it had become necessary to subjugate them under a just Islamic Government, so that the country could be free from their mischief and trouble making. The freedom of these people had led to nothing but chaos and lack of security over the entire country. They did not respect their agreements and no one’s life and honor was safe. So, it had become necessary that they be brought under the rule of law so that the nation could be made free from their poisonous undertakings. For this reason, a clear exemption was made for those who did not break their agreements:

"Except those of the idolaters with whom you made an agreement, then they have not failed you in anything and have not backed up any one against you; so fulfil their agreement to the end of their term. Surely Allah loves those who keep their duty." (9:4).

The declaration of war was with those people about whom it is stated:

"How (can it be)? And if they prevail against you, they respect neither ties of relationship nor covenant in your case. They would please you with their mouths while their hearts refuse; and most of them are transgressors." (9:8).

In short, the idolaters of Arabia were declared unworthy to be trusted due to their traitorous behavior, and for repeatedly helping and joining together with external enemies, with the purpose of destroying the Muslims. The only remedy of their constant mischief and trouble making, was the establishment of a stable Government, so that treachery and mischief would be terminated and peace would prevail. This could only be done by no longer leaving these people free, but by subjugating them under a Muslim Government. So, with perfect justice, a notice period of four months was given on the day of Hajj. The enemy were told that they could prepare for war. As the Muslims would no longer make any agreements with them, but instead by vanquishing them, subjugate them under the laws of their government, so that in the future they would not be able to create any trouble or turmoil. The order was thus proclaimed:

"So when the sacred months have passed, slay the idolaters, wherever you find them, and take them captive and besiege them and lie in wait for them in every ambush. But if they repent and keep up prayer and pay the poor-rate, leave their way fee. Surely Allah is Forgiving, Merciful. (9:5).

The author also ignores the next verse which says:

And if anyone of the idolaters seek your protection, protect him till he hears the word of Allah, then convey him to his place of safety. This is because they are a people who know not." (9:6).

The intention of the author of the article has certain objectives which he want to achieve: portray Islam as a religion intolerant of non-Muslims and create doubts within the Muslims’ mind about their religion. However, if anyone does his/her own research into such issues raised, he/she will find that such allegations are baseless and not of Islam. Quran and the life of the Prophet surely shows that Islam is a religion of peace.

It is no doubt that if modern-day "civilized" countries were faced with similar situation, we would see F-16s with cluster and napalm bombs killing people irrespective of age and sex and destroying property. And the surprising thing is we would not find such actions barbaric.

The author also tries to portray the present regime as extremist Muslims labeling them as "mullahs" and portraying Arabs as our colonialists. The author seems quite desperate to get this message across. The author needs to understand that majority of the Maldivians do not believe we have an Islamic government headed by Muslim scholars. Their true identity has been revealed by online papers like DO.