The Islamic State, also known as ISIS and ISIL, is neither Islamic and nor a state.
Allow me to explain:
The Islamic State (IS) group emerged from war-torn Iraq and Syria, the former after it was torn apart by the US invasion in 2003, and the latter due to its current internal fighting between Assad’s government troops and various factions seeking to rid of the president.
The IS group has taken over vast areas of central and north-western Iraq, as well as huge areas of Syria. Claiming to represent mainstream Sunni Muslims, it has led itself to the destruction of graves and tombs of Muslim saints and sages, including a shrine dedicated to St. George, as well the tombs of Prophets Jonah (known as Yunas – peace be upon him, in the Qur’an) and Seth (peace be upon him) , revered by Muslims, Jews and Christians alike. IS have destroyed and ransacked mosques, churches and other places of worship. Their destructive actions based on their nihilistic mentality are almost a reminder of the 18th and 19th century Wahhabi rebellions and devastations that were witnessed in the central and eastern regions of the Arabian Peninsula.
Mosques and other places of worship were destroyed and desecrated by the US forces in the 2003 invasion of Iraq. Likewise, the IDF have destroyed many mosques built on Palestinian land. However, this does not render it any lawful for Muslims to harm a building used by non-Muslims for worship or otherwise.
Let us begin with the adjective; Islamic.
To be Islamic, one ought to believe in all the fundamentals of the Islamic faith and practise upon its teachings. With regards to the destruction of places of worship, Islam prohibits it; the Qur’an says:
“There is no compulsion in religion.” (Qur’an, 2:256)
Islam respects other religions and prohibits any violation of the places of worship belonging to other religions. The Qur’an again says:
“Had it not been for Allah’s repelling some men by means of others, cloisters (of monks) and churches (of Christians) and oratories (of Jews) and mosques (of Muslims) – wherein the name of Allah is oft-mentioned, would definitely have been demolished.” (Qur’an, 22:40)
In this verse, it is clear that Islam holds the preservation of non-Muslim places of worship in a much higher regard than that of mosques, as protecting them has been mentioned before it was mentioned protecting mosques.
Then again, mosques are places of worship, and not necessarily assigned to Muslims, for when the Christian delegation went to see the Prophet Muhammad (Allah bless him and grant him peace) in Madinah and found no place to stay, the Prophet Muhammad (Allah bless him and grant him peace) offered them his own mosque and he allowed them to pray therein facing whichever direction of prayer suited them. However, it would only be appropriate to retain the appropriate designation of specific places of worship to the relative devotees of the respective religion in order to avoid confusion, disorganisation and conflict.
Furthermore, a letter ascribed to Prophet Muhammad (Allah bless him and grant him peace) from the year 628 CE, endorsing the St. Catherine Monastery of Mount Sinai, includes several clauses of human rights, especially those of religious freedom. It includes the following text:
“I have caused this document to be written for Christians of the East and the West, for those who live near, and for those of distant lands, for the Christians living at present and for those who will come after, for those Christians who are known to us and for those as well whom we do not know… .
Any Muslim violating and abusing what is therein ordered would be regarded as violator of Allah’s testament and would be the breaker of His promise and would make himself deserving of Allah’s curse, be he a king or a subject.
No bishop will be expelled from his bishopric, no monk from his monastery, and no priest from his place of worship, and no pilgrim will be detained from his pilgrimage.
None of their churches and other places of worship will be desolated destroyed or demolished. No material of their churches will be used for building mosques or houses for the Muslims. Any Muslim so doing will be regarded recalcitrant to Allah and His Prophet.
In religious controversies and disputes, they may be and should be protected from all troubles and injuries. He, who break Allah’s covenant and adopt a defiant attitude, will be regarded as His (Allah) enemy and violator of His testament.
No one shall bear arms against them, but, on the contrary, the Muslims shall wage war for them.
Every help shall be given to them in the repair of their churches. They shall be absolved from wearing arms. They will protected by the Muslims. Let this document be not destroyed till the Day of Judgement.”
When Umar ibn al-Khattab (Allah be pleased with him) , the second Caliph of the Muslims after Prophet Muhammad (Allah bless him and grant him peace), entered Jerusalem as victor, he refused to pray inside the Church of the Holy Sepulchre when invited by Patriarch Sophronius, insisting that his praying therein would only give later Muslims undue legitimacy to convert it into a mosque – thereby depriving Christendom of one of its holiest sites. Instead, Umar prayed outside the Church, where a mosque was later built, known as the Masjid Umar – the Mosque of Umar.
Umar entered into a treaty with Patriarch Sophronius – a part of its text is as follows:
In the name of Allah, the Merciful, the Compassionate. This is the assurance of safety which the servant of Allah, Umar, the Commander of the Faithful, has given to the people of Jerusalem. He has given them an assurance of safety for themselves, for their property, their churches, their crosses, the sick and healthy of the city and for all the rituals which belong to their religion. Their churches will not be inhabited by Muslims and will not be destroyed. Neither they, nor the land on which they stand, nor their crosses/crucifixes, nor their property will be damaged. They will not be forcibly converted.
(Muhammad ibn Jarir at-Tabari, History of Messengers and Kings)
The abovementioned references from the Qur’an, from the treaties of Prophet Muhammad (Allah bless him and grant him peace) and of his successors with non-Muslims clearly declare Islamic principles, tenets and teachings. It is they that form the foundations of Islam with regards to interfaith relations and social cohesion. A clear example of encouraging social cohesion between Muslims and non-Muslims is the Charter of Madinah – the world’s first written constitution, where all were pronounced equal in the city state of Madinah. What further proof can there be of social cohesion and respect for all faiths other than the Prophet Muhammad (Allah bless him and grant him peace) standing up, after he was sitting, when the funeral passed by of a Jew, out of respect for it. (al-Bukhari)
Anyone claiming to be Islamic, or declaring certain acts to be of Islam, must be obviously deluded and certainly far from the truth, if those claims and acts are in contradiction to the above.
IS (ISIS/ISIL), in this regard, is not Islamic.
As far as the word ‘state’ (as a noun) is concerned, if they take it to be synonymous with ‘condition’, IS is clearly not it – we would only have to understand the aforementioned to comprehend the non-Islamic ‘condition’ that IS are in.
However, if we take ‘state’ in reference to the political definition, we may understand it to be a “geographical area within defined territorial boundaries and with a distinct set of political institutions, ruled by a government through laws conformance to which is imposed by force (if necessary) in the common interest. (http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/state.html#ixzz3D1ACjyF0)
Let us analyse this relative to IS and its current circumstances:
Geographical area within defined territorial boundaries: The geographical area is there but it is not defined at all as it continues to change due to the ongoing military victories and defeats – the lack of this aspect alone does not allow IS to qualify as a ‘state’.
With a distinct set of political institutions: Other than Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi who has appointed himself the ‘caliph’ (and his dominion as the ‘caliphate’), there are no real political institutions. To begin with, IS lacks a judiciary, the executive (for which the military might serve the purpose), and the legislative (the existence of which is questionable).
Ruled by a government through laws conformance to which is imposed by force (if necessary) in the common interest: This, as we have witnessed, is definitely a distinct trait of IS. Though the use of force with authority is an essential component of any state, it is not a defining aspect of it, because if it were, it would render every mob, crowd and assembly a ‘state’ that might influence the weak and the victim into humbly accepting its will.
When analysed, we find that IS is certainly not a state. Thus, IS is neither Islamic and nor a state.
President Obama has rightfully spoken and admitted IS being alien to Islam, but it might be just a little too late; a lot of damage has already been done.
