Here we go again! Another lie created against Islam in an attempt to demonize and spread mistrust of Muslims. Be aware this is the same tactic used against Jews in Nazi Germany. Propaganda was created stating Jews had a teaching that they too could lie to gentiles when ever they pleased and we all know what that lead to. And so here now in the 21st century the bigots are using the same claims and tactics but the target is now Muslims. I read the article of Raymond Ibrahim posted on Frontpagemag.com and I just had to respond.
Have any of you checked the sources cited in his article?Most of the anti- islamic bigots would answer no. Heres what the very sources he cited said about Tawriya which they said means deliberate ambiguity rather than creative lying.
Shaykh Ibn ‘Uthaymeen said this should not be used unjustly. If you use the pun of injustice it’s not permissible. The author of the article seems to be aware that this refuted his claim so he add in parenthesis ((“injustice” as defined by Sharia, of course, not Western standards).Says who? None of the sources he cited said as only defined by sharia. A commonly known wrong is a commonly known wrong just the same in Islam( stealing, cheating, murder etc is wrong and accepted as such in Islam).
Sheikh Al-Munajjid another source cited by the article’s author said Excessive use of puns leads to lying. So the claim that this can be used when ever and where ever is a lie in it self . Al Munajjid said this is used for embarrassing circumstances. Yet the author would have us believe Muslims can use this to lie in business transactions, and to take peoples property and other commonly accepted wrong activities.
Another source cited by the article’s author which he ignores is :
Al-Nawawi who said The Deliberate ambiguity is permissible if the need arises or a legitimate interest, and should not be a great deal so to be a habit, nor to use it to gain the right to void or escape payment. If it is a means of taking something wrongfully or depriving someone of their rights, then it is haraam( NOT ALLOWED) in that case. This is the guideline in this matter. Emphasis on** should not be a great deal so to be a habit, nor to use it to gain the right to void or escape payment .Nor used to take something wrongfully or deprive someone of their rights.**
Mr. Ibraham told us Muhammad is recorded saying “Allah has commanded me to equivocate among the people inasmuch as he has commanded me to establish [religious] obligations”; and “I have been sent with obfuscation”; and “whoever lives his life in dissimulation dies a martyr” (Sami Mukaram, Al Taqiyya Fi Al Islam, London: Mu’assisat al-Turath al-Druzi, 2004, p. 30).
However the source he cites clearly is Al Taqiyya Fi Al Islam, London: Mu’assisat al-Turath al-Druzi, 2004, p. 30). Did you catch it? The source is about AL TAQIYYA not about TAWRIYA. And taqiyah deals with a situation only when a Muslims life is in immediate danger and they utter words of disbelief because they are threatened with being killed or tortured. Thus this citation does not support any proof for “creative lying”.
Another hadith was cited which Ibrahim says ,in a canonical hadith, Muhammad said: “If any of you ever pass gas or soil yourselves during prayers [breaking wudu], hold your nose and leave” (Sunan Abu Dawud): ” Holding one’s nose and leaving implies smelling something offensive—which is true—though people will think it was someone else who committed the offense.”
Those familiar with this hadith can quickly see that Ibrahim has added his own conclusion about this hadith not endorsed by the islamic position. No where is it taught that this hadith teaches for one to pass gas and leave thereby allowing some one else to take the blame for passing gas and the offensive smell . This is a clear example of how these haters just make up blatant lies to taint Islamic teachings and draw false conclusions based on their over zealous bias against Islam.
Lastly its important to note that Some scholars were of the view that it is haraam to resort to deliberate ambiguity if there is no reason or need to do so. This was the view favoured by Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (may Allaah have mercy on him). See al-Ikhtiyaaraat, p. 563.
So as we see Raymond totally failed to mention those parts that clearly inform us that “this should not be used unjustly. If you use the pun of injustice it’s not permissible” . Or ” should not be a great deal so to be a habit, nor to use it to gain the right to void or escape payment”.”Nor used to take something wrongfully or deprive someone of their rights” or that” Excessive use of puns leads to lying” . Thus it’s not something that Islam pushes the believers to enact as the haters would have you believe.
Categories: Responses to anti-Islamic Polemics