The Considered Opinion of Sunni Islam

Lord Hylton

It should be more widely known that 126 Muslim leaders and scholars, on September 9th,  sent an Open Letter to Dr Ibrahim Awwad Al-Badri, known as Abu Bakr Al-Baghdadi, the declared Caliph of the so-called Islamic State (ISIS/ISIL).  The authors came from every country in the Middle East and North Africa, as well as Nigeria and West Africa, and also from Malaysia, Indonesia, Pakistan and from most of Europe, together with Canada and USA.

They pointed out that it is forbidden in Islam to kill the innocent, or emissaries, which includes journalists and aid workers; also to harm or mistreat Christians or any people “of the Scripture” (this includes Yezidis).  It is further forbidden to force people to convert, to deny their rights to women and children, and to declare a caliphate without the consensus of all Muslims. Torture is also banned.  Jihad in Islam is defensive war and is not permissible without just cause, just purposes and right rules of conduct.  Punishments may not be inflicted without correct procedures, ensuring both justice and mercy.

In a strong and closely argued way, they show that most of the above norms have been violated on a large scale by ISIS/ISIL.  The letter runs to 15 pages, and on page 8 the authors accuse ISIS/ISIL of “heinous war crimes”.



4 comments for “The Considered Opinion of Sunni Islam

  1. MilesJSD
    01/10/2014 at 11:10 am

    This is very good news,
    at least ‘inspiring’ us to once again work at establishing such fairness as the “Friendly Win-Win-Win Method III of Cooperative Problem Solving”, perhaps.

    Nonetheless, this United Kingdom has a quite similar “hijacking of God” impediment, in the forms of
    (a) False-Witnessing of many differently demeaning, defamatory, demonising, and negatively-discriminatory sorts;

    and its much worse ‘evil’ whereby
    (b) Official “adversarism” as the first and only response to a public need wreaks permanent inhibition upon many people’s real-life Needs, but is so easily and evidently legally slippery-sloped down into the “kangaroo-court” tactic of one-sided “guilty-as-charged” verdicts and punishments.
    So one must further wonder whether any of even the “good and honest” other-cultures around the World are using the Friendly Method III of Cooperative Problem Solving or its fair equivalent:
    because very evidently “the First World West” is not, is it ?

  2. Daedalus
    06/10/2014 at 4:05 pm

    Muslim scholars or not what is being done in Allah’s name is causing a great deal of anxiety amongst Muslims with many who have suffered asking “What sort of Muslims are these?” The answer is they are Muslims just like any other, it’s how they able to incentivise Islam so that it can be used to deliver an outcome.

    What is needed is an independent benchmark to test not only Islam but Christianity and Judaism to see how they all measure up. The benchmark I suggest is how ancient Egypt practised its religion.

    People millions of years in the making walked through Egypt on a journey to the four corners of the earth. They took with them it’s notions of religion and changed them. Over a million years in the Stone Age and tens of thousands of years in the Metal Ages and to what conclusion?

    Egypt had thousands of years to work it out.

    If a man was to enter the afterlife he needed to demonstrate that in life he had a good heart and pursued goodness or Maat; a man’s heart that contained badness, Isfet, would be denied entry to the afterlife. At first the priority was to prevent a leader with god like absolute power from becoming a bad person and it did this by setting the moral bar very high. What’s crucial here is that an individual is to be tested.

  3. Daedalus
    06/10/2014 at 4:06 pm

    Later, the very same moral stricture would be placed on any Egyptian that had the means to offer up a defence for the trial of Maat.

    The temporal paradigm of religion has only ever existed in two forms. Uniquely the Egyptians believed like today’s atheists that badness or Isfet was a characteristic of the living world. That good and bad existed side by side in a constant struggle one to win over the other and that the reward for being good would be a place of safety in an afterlife. Wickedness would remain in the living world.

    The other form accepted the first form but took it a step further by providing a place of safety in an afterlife for good people but sending bad people to another afterlife the two operating as a duality. The second form would evolve into the spiritual paradigm.

    The test of Maat was very tough because on an individual basis the person had to measure up to the purity of Osiris by offering testimony (prayer 125) that the person was free of a number (142) of crimes. The ‘Papyrus of Ani’ lists the hymns and judgements of the Ka but its earlier form was much simpler. Moses would cherry pick this list to deliver his ten commandments to the Hebrews.

    The list would start with an all encompassing “I have not done wrong”.

    Other strictures would include: violent robbery, theft, homicide, lies, profanity, fornication, causing others to weep, trespass, eavesdropped, adultery, ejaculation, caused terror, deafness to truth, outspoken, caused violence, disturbed the peace, spoke treason, been a hothead, blogging, spoken loudly, profaned the God or extolled the weak.

  4. Daedalus
    06/10/2014 at 4:07 pm

    The list is long because Egyptian society never practised civil or criminal law as we know it. Such laws would have been confirmation that society was in the grip of chaos. This is the benchmark by which all religions should be measured.

    Islam comes out rather well if it is to be observed in the strictest sense. Its Sharia law is based upon the moral fabric endured by those saintly old Egyptians and one that frees them from fully observing Maat. This is essentially what ISiS is about.

    Where Islam fails is how it defines Jannah or Jahannam. Both are afterlife’s that belong to the temporal paradigm of religion because Jannah offers physical carnal promises. Jahannam is a second form temporal quality a continuing corruption within the spiritual paradigm but one regarded as necessary as a deterrent.

    Another failure of Islam is that no test is required in order to enter Jannah. The same can be said of Judaism. Only Christianity accepts that a person must be measured before entry to heaven.

    Muslims can argue that Allah judges them and as a result they enter Jannah or Jahannam however the Koran says that Muslims will be judged at the end of time so this argument doesn’t hold.

    Jannah is associated with idolatry and Ka. Evidence for this is that any attempts to picture Mohammed is forbidden because such a picture would be his Ka. His Ka would not know hunger or thirst, his bread would never rot nor his milk turn sour.

    Allah must be a God of Isfet with Muslims constantly trying to promote Maat through prayer and deeds. Isfet has many bad qualities including injustice and lies. To kill a man with a good heart and one proven by his personal sacrifice is to embrace Isfet but is not necessarily a violation within Islam. From a Christian perspective such a deed is pure evil.

    How should a Muslim be tested for entry to Jannah?

Comments are closed.