The very courageous and forthright Dr. Tawfik Hamid has written a must read analysis in the Jerusalem Post, entitled “The development of a jihadist’s mind.” Although Dr. Hamid—a former member of the jihadist organization, al-Gama’a al-Islamiyya (Jamaah Islamiyah)— faces overwhelming obstacles—not the least of which will be the flimsy basis for his own albeit much needed re-interpretations of core Islamic theology/jurisprudence vis a vis the jihad, and its corollary institution, dhimmitude—he is possessed of unusual candor, and insight.
Dr. Hamid even voices concerns with the much ballyhooed “Qur’anist” movement, including the lionized Mahmoud Mohamed Taha, executed in the
These extracts from “The Second Message of Islam” reveal that Packer’s ecumenical “anti-Qutb” (i.e., Sayyid Qutb, the prolific 20th century Egyptian
Qur’anic commentator, and jihad theorist)—Mahmoud Taha—was in fact simply more disingenuous than his presumptive polar opposite, Qutb. Taha proclaims these bowdlerized pieties on Islam’s violent Medinan emergence as a polity:
Islam used persuasion for thirteen years in propagating its clearly valid message…When the addressees failed to discharge properly the[ir] duties…the Prophet was appointed as their guardian…once they embraced the new religion [i.e., by coercion]…the sword was suspended…and [they] were penalized according to new laws. Hence the development of Islamic Shari’a law…
And Taha further had the temerity to compare the jihad-genocide waging historical “sword of Islam” to a surgeon’s scalpel—an unconscionable immoral equivalence to this physician:
In justifying the use of the sword, we may describe it as a surgeon’s lancet, and not a butcher’s knife…We [the Muslims] have enacted fighting with the sword in order to curtail the freedom of those who abuse it, so the sword brings them to their senses, thereby allowing them to earn their freedom and benefit from their life [note: “freedom as perfect slavery to Allah”, the Sufi notion of Ibn Arabi, perhaps?]
But Taha’s true sentiments towards non-Muslim infidels are in the end, not concealed from anyone who cares to look. He in fact justifies—consistent with mainstream Islamic jurisprudence—their historical subjugation by violent jihad:
Suffering death by the sword in this life is really an aspect of suffering hell in the next life, since both are punishments for disbelief…for the disbelievers the law of war, and hardship of iron.
Dr. Hamid has examined contemporary jihadist ideology by “immersion” in order to better comprehend the nexus between such teachings, and acts of violence. The conclusions of this former jihadist, turned introspective analyst, provide a remarkable validation of Major Coughlin’s own extensive independent findings (summarized earlier, here, and here). Hamid states plainly that,
These doctrines [of jihad] are not taken out of context, as many apologists for Islamism argue: They are central to the [Islamic] faith and ethics of millions of Muslims, and are currently being taught as part of the standard curriculum in many Islamic educational systems in the Middle East as well as in the West.
Political scientist, lawyer, and jihad terrorism expert, Dr. Walid Phares recently expressed his puzzlement, at one level over the Coughlin affair: “I don’t understand why is there so much intellectual commotion about this matter in the West and in the
Phares argues that although politicians might attempt to separate Islam from Jihad for their own purposes, “the study of the theological roots of Jihad is something else, and that is an academic not a political issue.”
“Jihad is Jihad”