The National Post and the Toronto Star don’t agree on much, but the apparently pressing need to convince the public that Islam could not possibly have anything to do with terrorist attacks either planned or committed by highly religious Muslims has brought them together like circling celestial bodies that come into conjunction every few generations or so. Better yet, the unimaginative apologists recruited by the two newspapers trot out, among other things, exactly the same tired and remarkably dishonest little talking point in favour of the essentially humane and compassionate nature of Islam.
It came up tails, so I’ll let the Star’s Faisal Kutty go first:
The vast majority of Muslims condemn terrorism because even classical Islamic law explicitly classifies hirabah (terrorism) as a serious sin. In fact, indiscriminate killing and attacks are prohibited. Indeed, the Qur’an proclaims: “Anyone who kills a person it is as if he has killed the whole of humanity.”
The Post’s Zijad Delic relies on the same Koranic passage, though he paraphrases rather than quotes:
At the heart of Islamic logic and ethics — a logic and ethics inseparable from true faith — is the sanctity and dignity of human life. God Almighty says in the Qur’an that to kill one human being (a nafs, or soul) is tantamount in sin to killing all of one’s human brothers and sisters. (Qur’an 5:35) [sic – it's actually 5:32, or thereabouts] God upholds the sanctity of life as a universal principle, as He says in the Qur’an: “Do not kill one another, for God is indeed merciful unto you” (4:29).
Could the Divine voice be any clearer than that? Any opinion that contradicts this core Qur’anic logic has no value to Islam whatsoever.
Maybe it couldn’t be any clearer, but that’s a moot point because the “Divine voice” didn’t say that at all. My Koran (translated by Tarif Khalidi for Penguin Classics) uses somewhat different wording: “he who kills a soul, it is as if he killed the whole of mankind”. Except – and stop me if you’ve heard this one, because that widely used but heavily redacted quotation has been debunked in many corners of cyberspace – I seem to have left out a few words, just like Faisal Kutty did. Here’s the whole passage, in context:
It is for this reason [some nonsense about Cain not having successfully concealed Abel's corpse – I kid you not] that We decreed to the Children of Israel that he who kills a soul neither in revenge for another, nor to prevent corruption on earth, it is as if he killed the whole of mankind; whereas he who saves a soul, it is as if he has saved the whole of mankind. Our messengers came to them bearing clear proofs, but many of them thereafter were disobedient on earth.
In truth, the punishment of those who make war against God and His Messenger, and roam the earth corrupting it, is that they be killed, or crucified, or have their hands and feet amputated, alternately [verily, Allah is a micromanager], or be exiled from the land. This would be their shame in the present life, and in the next a terrible torment awaits them – except those who repent before you gain mastery over them. Therefore, you must understand that God is All-Forgiving [!], Compassionate [!!!] to each [except perhaps the poor bugger whose appendages got lopped off].
Doesn’t sound quite so warm and inspiring and no-man-is-an-islandish now, does it?
I haven’t read that much of the Koran, but most of the parts I have read have been sort of like this – replete with hostility to unbelievers, full of non-sequiturs and half-connected thoughts, spouting risible threats of hellfire and damnation. If you think I’m exaggerating, take a look for yourself. It might not be a problem, of course, if Muslims didn’t take the damn thing so seriously. Koran recitation contests are a big deal in the Muslim world, or at least significant parts thereof, and a person who has memorized the whole Koran is known as a hafiz or hafiza.
I don’t think that Islam is uniformly awful – in fact, there are some rather praiseworthy things about it, such as the emphasis on charity – or doubt that the vast majority of the world’s Muslims are peaceable and productive members of the societies they inhabit. A good case, though not one I happen to agree with, can be made that Islam is no more likely to beget violence than other religions. However, Kutty and Delic aren’t even attempting to make such a case in an intellectually honest way. Instead, they’re dodging and obfuscating, chopping out inconvenient bits of Koranic verses and evidently hoping no one will notice. An undergraduate who tried that kind of thing on a term paper would probably get a zero. In the unlikely event that the gods exist, and give a damn about honesty, “a terrible torment awaits them” in the next life.
P.S. Wondering about that 4:29? Here it is, in context:
O believers, consume not the wealth you trade among yourselves dishonestly, unless it be a commercial deal resulting from mutual agreement [dishonesty is acceptable provided you can get the poor sap on the other side of the negotiating table to mumble "yes"?]. Do not kill each other [note that this only applies to "believers"], for God is always Compassionate [heard that one before!] to every one of you. Whoever does so, aggressively and unjustly [ there always seems to be a certain amount of hedging when the matter of unlawful killing comes up, doesn't there?], him We shall scorch at a raging flame [yawn], a thing easy for God [sure, if the bastard existed]. If you shun the major sins you have been forbidden to commit, We shall expiate your misdeeds [thanks!] and lead you through an honourable portal [sounds exciting].