The Lahore Ahmadiyya Movement Blog

Miracles, Myths, Mistakes and MattersSee Title Page and List of Contents

See: Project Rebuttal: What the West needs to know about Islam

Refuting the gross distortion and misrepresentation of the Quran, the Prophet Muhammad and Islam, made by the critics of Islam

Read: Background to the Project

List of all Issues | Summary 1 | Summary 2 | Summary 3

March 20th, 2013

Summary 1



Issue 1. Islam is non-peaceful right from its inception. It was spread by sword.

Islam is peaceful and it “spread in spite of enemy’s sword” – Muhammad The Prophet, by Maulana Muhammad Ali. Islam only allows self-defense and Prophet’s life proves it.

After the start of his ministry, the Prophet and his followers were incessantly persecuted and tortured for 13 years. Thrice Muslims were forced into exile empty handed, twice to Ethiopia and once permanently to Medina. Peace still evaded Muslims and Medina was then attacked thrice by Makkans and repulsed. Thrice the Jewish tribes were evicted from within Medina for sedition along with their properties. A peace treaty was signed with Makkans on terms that were unfavorable to Muslims, which was then later violated by Makkans themselves. City of Khaibar was overpowered by Muslims to prevent further scheming by Jews that had resulted in siege of Medina by armies from all over Arabia only the year before. Despite being conquered, the Jews of Khaibar were allowed to keep their city and businesses. A peace treaty was signed with them by the conquering Muslims. Makkah was taken over after the Makkans violated the peace treaty, without bloodshed (except a minor skirmish), the aggressors, tormentors, killers and persecutors of 21 years were forgiven once and for all, and even were allowed to keep the property that they had usurped from the Muslims, whom that they had evicted earlier. While still in Makkah after its conquest, Muhmmad was forced to confront the en-massed forces of Hawazin tribe and their allies at Hunain, who when confronted fled leaving behind six thousand prisoners of war, to their fortification in the city of Taif, which was besieged but later let go. All the prisoners of war were released without any trial or compensations. On intelligence reports of possible Byzantine attack on Medina, the Prophet led a 30 thousand strong contingent to the border town of Tabuk. While there, Jordan was for him to take, but he turned back once the reports turned out to be incorrect.

The Prophet faced the military attacks from within Arabia. After his death, his successors had to fight the entire Arabia (except Makkah and Medina) when it revolted against the government and refused to pay the taxes. Soon thereafter, they were pulled into wars by Persian and Roman empires. These empires were the ones to instigate the aggression and their generals had taken oath to eliminate the winds of change emanating from the desert, once and for all. The Muslims fought back in self-defense and took the wars to their natural conclusion. Ironically, it was the Byzantines and Persians who were eliminated as empires. Twice Jerusalem was captured by Muslims, once during Umar’s reign and second time by Saladin, without shedding blood. This peaceful take over stands in stark contrast to the Crusader mayhem and knee deep blood and bodies at the temple of Solomon, mostly of their fellow Jews and Christian residents of the city.

Not once in history a Muslim military expedition has been tied to proselytizing.

Issue 2. Islamic doctrine (Quran, Hadith, Shariah) mandates violence against unbelievers.

Islam stands for peace – “Islam, Peace and Tolerance” by Dr. Zahid Aziz, with evidence, arguments and conclusions based upon Quran, Hadith, Shariah.

Issue 3. It is a religious duty of Muslims to impose Islam globally.

Success of Islam is in its merits not in an alleged coercion. There is no compulsion in religion — the right way is indeed clearly distinct from error.”— 2:256.

Issue 4. Muslim terrorists apply the true Islam practiced by Muhammad.

Terrorism is bane of humanity which started from before Joshua’s siege of Jericho, confronted and eliminated by Muhammad and Muslim history, though it is still continued by state and non-state actors, big and small, Western and Eastern, rich and poor, modern and medieval. Quran and Sunnah are the single most effective bulwarks against terrorism.

“I become more than ever convinced that it was not the sword that won a place for Islam in those days in the scheme for life. It was the rigid simplicity, the utter self-effacement of the Prophet, the scrupulous regard for his pledges, his intense devotion to his friends and followers, his intrepidity, his fearlessness, his absolute trust in God and his own mission. These and not the sword carried everything before them and surmounted every trouble. The sayings of Muhammad are a treasure of wisdom not only for Muslims but for all mankind.” — Mahatma Gandhi.

9 Responses to “Summary 1”

  1. March 26th, 2013 at 2:55 pm
    From Mohammed Iqbal:

    Ikram Sahib, you say in Islam war can be waged only in self defence. You may be correct. But is it the mainstream opinion? I am afraid. Works of Maudoodi and Qutub, two venerable Syeds of the Sunni mainstream maintain that Jihad is not just a self defensive war. Don't you think we need to give a comprehensive rebuttal to their views?

  2. March 26th, 2013 at 4:32 pm
    From Zahid Aziz:

    The Lahore Ahmadiyya Movement has, over the years, refuted Maudoodi's ideas in articles and booklets. Perhaps the earliest example is an article by Dr Basharat Ahmad, in which he gives the reasons why he wrote volume 3 of Mujaddid-i Azam. At that time, Maudoodi's writings were starting to reach the public eye, while Dr Basharat Ahmad was close to the end of his life. Finding this article both useful and inspiring, I translated it into English a few years ago. Please see pages 4 and 5 of this issue of The Light (UK) edition.

  3. Dear Iqbal:

    Dr. Aziz quite succinctly answered your concerns, especially in context of late Maudoodi sahib and his rebuttal by late Dr. Basharat sahib.

    Factually, you have drawn attention to certain non-Quranic doctrines that some sections of Muslims follow, which in turn provide fodder for the hate of this documentary. “Islam, Peace and Tolerance” by Dr. Zahid Aziz is a simple and comprehensive read that clears the false doctrines once and for all. Interestingly, this documentary does mention Syed Qutub in the same context as well (Issue 29).

    There was a similar discussion about ‘cart before the horse’ i.e. Khalafat first and Righteousness later as preached by Maudoodi, which was discussed in Issue 80 (your comment) and Issue 67 before.

    You might be interested to read Dr. Basharat further – The Quranic Commandments Regarding War/Jihad (link)

    Also, there is a collection of articles/pamphlets on about JIHAD IN ISLAM (link)

  4. March 27th, 2013 at 5:03 pm
    From Mohammed Iqbal:

    Ikram Sahib, I am thankful to you for having painstakingly written this rebuttal series. But the fact is that LAM view points have limited takers. How many others do you think have taken benefit out of it? Not that it is a criterion for reward in the sight of Allah. But Maudoodi, Syed Qutub and their views are mainstream.


  5. March 27th, 2013 at 9:52 pm
    From Rashid Jahangiri:

    @ iqbal sahib,

    There is reason for hope that muslims of the world will catch up with LAM. The other day on facebook I received HQ last chapter and its translation. A non-LAM member copied the interpertation of Maulana Muhammad Ali sahib. This HQ translation is in Urdu.

  6. March 28th, 2013 at 6:34 am
    From Zahid Aziz:

    When I was writing Islam, Peace and Tolerance I used to show its chapters to my Member of Parliamant here in UK. One observation he made was that some people would say that most Muslims don't hold the point of view expressed in this book, and it is only small group who believe in these interpretations. So, to cater for that objection, I added a final chapter which I have now extracted for your convenience and placed it here.

  7. Dear Iqbal: Thank you for your appreciation. However, unflinchingly I can assure you that this work was built upon published works of the elders of LAM. They dedicated their whole lives to separate husk from the kernel of Islam and left behind treasure trove of knowledge directly sourced from and influenced by Quran, Sunnah/Hadith and teachings of the Mujaddid.

    The LAM can only highlight errors where Muslims create doctrines that conflict with Quran. Should we then be anxious of such manmade doctrines? Probably not:

    26:3-6. Perhaps you will kill yourself with grief because they do not believe. If We please, We could send down on them a sign from heaven, so that their necks would bend before it. And no new Reminder from the Beneficent comes to them but they turn away from it. They indeed reject, so the news will soon come to them of that at which they mock. [Muhammad Ali, Ed. Zahid Aziz]

    When the big hitters like Maudoodi develop a doctrine in conflict with Quran, LAM is the first to raise its pen, e.g. Dr. Basharat sahib above. Should we be surprised when such non-sense doctrines become ‘mainstream’? Probably not:

    25:30. Then the Messenger will say: "O my Lord! Truly my people took this Qur'an for just foolish nonsense. [Yusuf Ali]

    When there are no immediate takers of the message of LAM based upon Quran, Hadith/Sunnah and Mujaddid, should we get frustrated? Probably not:

    10:41. And if they reject thee, say: My work is for me and your work for you. You are clear of what I do and I am clear of what you do. [Nooruddin]

    Fact of the matter is that ‘mainstream’ Islam is converging towards the message of LAM. While doing so they do not give credit to it. About 20-25 years ago I saw ‘Religion of Islam’ by Maulana Muhammad Ali published from somewhere in Middle East, probably Lebanon, without the name of the author or LAM mentioned on it. It would have been nice if the publishers were honest, but should LAM lament it? Probably not:

    11: 51. `My people! I ask of you no reward for this (teaching). My reward is not due but from Him Who created me. Will you not then understand? [Nooruddin]

  8. @Mohammad Iqbal. You may want to read this brief document titled "What is the Truth About American Muslims" on the website of Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) – you cannot get any more mainstream that that Muslim umbrella organization – and endorsed by the following Muslim organizations (take from the title page):

    The following organizations endorse the religious freedom principles articulated in this document and support the effort to provide accurate information about American Muslims and Islam that reflects the widely-shared views of these topics among American Muslims:  

    African American Ministers Leadership Council
    Islamic Networks Group
    Islamic Society of North America
    Muslim Public Affairs Council

    If what the above document describes is the state of mainstream Muslim view in the West, then how far away from the Lahori Ahmadi view is it?

  9. March 28th, 2013 at 8:25 pm
    From Zahid Aziz:

    In December 2007, when my Member of Parliament was kind enough to visit me at home to be presented with copies of Islam, Peace and Tolerance, I replied to a question he had earlier asked me, and published an account of this in the next issue of The Light (U.K. Edition) as below:

    "A question had been raised prior to our meeting, that as our organisation is not considered as being among mainstream Muslims, how could our views and teachings on tolerance in Islam possibly influence other Muslims? In response I presented the following four points:

    Firstly, the literature of our Jama‘at has already been influencing Muslims for the past ninety years. As we were the first Muslim organi­sation to produce literature on Islam in English, our books influenced the English literature subsequently produ­ced by other Muslims, many of our ideas penetra­ting into it.

    Secondly, in the U.K. we have been in the position of leadership of Muslims because the Woking Muslim Mission was recogni­sed as the main centre of Islam in this country, supported by Muslims of various sects.

    The above two points relate to the past. The other two points relate to the present and future.

    My third point was that those Muslims today who are seeking to find a peaceful, rational, non-fanatical picture of Islam need exactly the kind of material that we have produced, as in this book. They are unable to accept extremist interpre­tations and are searching for a picture of Islam that is both sensible and can be derived and justified from the original sources of their religion. The arguments and evi­dences that they need are none other than those which we have produced.

    Fourthly and lastly, our literature helps to improve the image of Islam in the eyes of non-Muslims. If non-Muslims have before them only the image of Islam presented by the advocates of intolerance and violence, naturally they will feel revulsion against Islam. If our perspective is also made known to them, they will at the least realise that the opposite kind of interpretations also exist."