One shouldn't assume that all Muslims have taken seriously the entire text of the Quran.
In practice, few places in the Muslim world could afford to eliminate Christians and Jews from the economy.
Shortly after Muhammad and then his armies had overrun Christian and Jewish Palestine and Syria, the victors found themselves a tiny minority in a vast pre-existing empire, the Byzantine Empire. The Arab conquerors fell back on precedents, and Caliph Omar issued a pact (about 637 and then enhanced through the 800s). Christians and Jews -- people of the Book -- paid the protection tax (jizya) but were exempt from military service. They were supposed to behave submissively (what that meant was fluid in its interpretation). One interpretation was designed so that poor Muslims would not feel embarrassed by more prosperous Christians and Jews. There are four schools of Muslim jurisprudence (Hanbali, Hanafi, and two others that I don't remember). The emphasis is on the syllable 'prudence'. Interpretations of the Pact of Omar by these schools differ on fine points. (These schools of legal thought should not be confused with the Sunni-Shia conflict over who is Muhammad's successor.) One professor of canon law in Cairo (1772) dispelled a misinterpretation of the Pact of Omar that Christians and Jews should be expelled from "Muslim" lands -- infidels were only expelled from Arabia itself. (sources for all the above upon request)
When we see the lack of mercy in the Quran, I suggest watching how cruelty begins at home. Muslim on Muslim violence has been the rule at least since World War I. Muslim tyranny against fellow Muslims has been the rule for even longer. Memory of the Christian Crusades serve to distract from the very real "crusades" of Muslim against Muslim. Jewish ascendancy in the Holy Land has been a superbly calculated distraction from Muslim upon Muslim tyranny.
1 comment:
One shouldn't assume that all Muslims have taken seriously the entire text of the Quran.
In practice, few places in the Muslim world could afford to eliminate Christians and Jews from the economy.
Shortly after Muhammad and then his armies had overrun Christian and Jewish Palestine and Syria, the victors found themselves a tiny minority in a vast pre-existing empire, the Byzantine Empire. The Arab conquerors fell back on precedents, and Caliph Omar issued a pact (about 637 and then enhanced through the 800s).
Christians and Jews -- people of the Book -- paid the protection tax (jizya) but were exempt from military service. They were supposed to behave submissively (what that meant was fluid in its interpretation). One interpretation was designed so that poor Muslims would not feel embarrassed by more prosperous Christians and Jews.
There are four schools of Muslim jurisprudence (Hanbali, Hanafi, and two others that I don't remember). The emphasis is on the syllable 'prudence'. Interpretations of the Pact of Omar by these schools differ on fine points.
(These schools of legal thought should not be confused with the Sunni-Shia conflict over who is Muhammad's successor.)
One professor of canon law in Cairo (1772) dispelled a misinterpretation of the Pact of Omar that Christians and Jews should be expelled from "Muslim" lands -- infidels were only expelled from Arabia itself.
(sources for all the above upon request)
When we see the lack of mercy in the Quran, I suggest watching how cruelty begins at home. Muslim on Muslim violence has been the rule at least since World War I. Muslim tyranny against fellow Muslims has been the rule for even longer.
Memory of the Christian Crusades serve to distract from the very real "crusades" of Muslim against Muslim.
Jewish ascendancy in the Holy
Land has been a superbly calculated distraction from Muslim upon Muslim tyranny.
Post a Comment