Editor: This is a guest post in response to our on-going question about why refugees are resettled in certain cities and perhaps also helps to explain the secondary migration of Muslim refugees in the US. Back in early August we reported that a powerful Washington, DC Imam, Imam Hendi, told a Saudi audience that by the year 2015 there would be 30 Muslim mayors in America.
With reference to post (21Nov07) discussing “gateway cities….” I would suggest that the more gateway cities we develop within the US, the more chance we will also begin to find enclaves where Islamic Jurisprudence (sharia) is practiced, not local, state, or national law. I would suggest this will not bode well for the nation, IF ALLOWED.
The enclaves will develop, less for socio-economic reasons or politcal reasons, than for religious reasons. The influence of the religion (i.e. teachings of “faith”) is something our multi-culturalists have ignored, considering them as being not of consequence.
I would humbly suggest that a brief outline as to how enclaves are formed may be extrapolated from one important writing of AYMAN AL-ZAWAHIRI. In 2002, he penned, “Loyalty and Enmity: An Inherited Doctrine and a Lost Reality” [THE ALQAEDA READER, Raymond Ibrahim, ed. and trans. (Doubleday, c2007 by Raymond Ibrahim, pp. 66 – 115)] Zawahiri comments on this doctrine as he refers to the Koran, the hadiths and “exegeses by the ulema regarding the legitimacy of this doctrine….” The article is actually a criticism of the Saudi elite who, by various actions, seemed to have left orthodoxy; at the same time it is a call to duty and orthodoxy for the less privileged worldwide. It would apply to refugees being settled within the continental US where many Saudis, it would seem to the common Muslim, are aspiring to more than purity of religion.
[According to Ibrahim: “The comprehensive nature of this doctrine is such that once it is upheld, everything else that radicals such as al-Qaeda yearn to see falls into place. The entire world becomes black and white, good and evil. In such a setting other doctrines that al-Qaeda endorse become more obligatory and urgent. Upholding sharia (Islamic) law becomes more pressing, since that is the primary way for Muslims to differentiate themselves and be clean of the ways of the infidels. Waging Offensive Jihad against the infidels becomes even more logical and palatable, since Muslims can never love or befriend infidels anyway until the latter submit to Islam. All Muslims would be obliged to help, fund, and shelter the mujahidin, since they must at all times be loyal to fellow Muslims. And so forth. In short: the Muslim must ‘know that he is obligated to befriend a believer – even if he is oppresive and violent toward you, while he must be hostile to the infidel – even if he is liberal and kind to you.’ ”
“This treatise is further revealing in that it acknowledges another little-known doctrine – that of taqiyya. According to this doctrine, Muslims may under certain circumstances openly deceive infidels by feigning friendship or goodwill – even apostacy – provided that their heart remains true to Islam….” (p. 64)]
I propose that at least three influences from the religion will serve to seed enclaves. The first influence is that of Muhammad’s position as the Messenger of God; the second is the fear of placing one’s soul in jeopardy; the third is the need for protecting your soul. THE FORCE OF THESE INFLUENCES UPON AN INDIVIDUAL MUSLIM MAY NOT BE YET OBSERVED BY FOLKS WORKING WITH AND ON BEHALF OF THE VARIOUS VOLAGS IN THE US.
As regards not being friends and/or allies with infidels, Zawahiri cites several Koranic verses, ahadith, and statements by the exegites. After referring to (5: 51 – 58), which Zawahiri introduces with these words:
“Allah Most High said,” and continues: “O you who have believed! do not take the Jews and the Christians for friends; they are but friends of each other; and whoever among you takes them for a friend, then surely he is one of them. Verily Allah does not guide the unjust people ….” (p.70) [ALLAH COMMANDS THAT MUSLIMS HAVE NO JEWS OR CHRISTIANS FOR FRIENDS. This makes the relocation effort difficult work and minimizes anticipated success at encouraging ASSIMILATION.]
He then refers to al-Tabari:
“When the Most High said, ‘[A]nd whoever among you takes them for a friend, then surely he is one of them,’ He means that whoever turns to the Jews and Christians in friendship, in place of the believer, becomes one of them.” He adds: “For whoever allies with them and enables them against the believers, that same one is a member of their faith and community. One seeks not the friendship of another unless he is of the same faith and confession.”” (p.71) [WHAT KIND OF WORKING RELATIONSHIP CAN ONE HAVE WITH A REFUGEE WHO CANNOT ACCEPT FRIENDSHIP? A ONE-SIDED MISSION OF MERCY.]
Zawahiri then brings forth:
“Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani said in explanation of the hadith relayed by Ibn Omar: “If Allah brings down torment upon a tribe, the torment afflicts those of the group. Then they go back to tending their affairs.” … “One learns from this that fleeing the infidels and the oppressors is legitimate: to reside with them jeopardizes one’s soul. This is so even if one does not aid them or approve of their deeds. …” (pp71, 72) [IT’S THE WORD < RESIDE > THAT DISTURBS]
Zawahiri brings forth 5: 80-81 and then 9: 23-24, in the same context.
One could jeopardize one’s soul if any thing, any relationship, other than what Allah commands “… are dearer to you than Allah and His Messenger, and jihad in His way, then wait till Allah fulfills His decree: Allah does not guide a sinful people.” (p. 72) According to a “[hadith of Bukhari] that he [Muhammad] said: ‘By him who holds my soul in his hand, none of you believes unless I am dearer to him than his father, his son, and all of mankind.’ ” ” [the brackets are in the text/p. 72] [HERE MUHAMMAD ASSERTS A RATHER PRIMARY INFLUENCE/TO NOT FOLLOW HIM PUTS ONE’S SOUL IN JEOPARDY.]
“The sharia differentiates between befriending infidels, which is forbidden, and fearing their evil …” begins Zawahiri, as he describes the difference between befriending and dissembling, which is taqiyya employed for self-preservation. Perhaps more fit for the battlefield [is the US a battlefield?] is this comment of al-Tabari: “… [U]nless you but guard yourselves against them, taking precaution” [3:28]. “Only when you are in their power, fearing for your selves, are you to demonstrate friendship for them with your tongues, whilst harboring hostility toward them. But do not join them in the particulars of their infidelity and do not aid them through any action against a Muslim.” (p. 74)
But, alas, there is fear.
“Allah Most High said: “O you who have believed! If you obey [any] faction from among those who were given the Book, they [Jews and Christians] will revert you, after you had believed, into infidels” [3:100]. Allah Most High said: “O you who have believed! If you obey the infidels, they will drive you back on your heels, and you will turn back [from faith] to your own detriment” [3:149]. Ibn Jarir al-Tabari said: “He means by this, O you who have believed Allah and his Messenger, Allah’s promise and His threat, His commandment and prohibition: ‘If you obey the infidels’ – that is, those who rejected the prophesy of your Prophet Muhammad, the Jews and Christians. [Should you obey] what they command and forbid you to do, you accept their views and accept their counsel. They claim that they can give you sound counsel on this, but ‘they will drive you back on your heels.’ Thus He says they will lead you to apostasy after you had believed, and rejection of Allah, His Revelation, and His Prophet after your submission to Islam. ‘You will turn back [from faith]’ – that is , you will turn away from your faith and the religion to which Allah had led you, ‘ to your own detriment’ – that is, you will perish. For you have lost yourselves and strayed from your religion; and all things in this life and the next are lost to you. And for this reason are the people who believe in Allah forbidden to obey the infidels, adopt their views, or accept their counsel regarding their religions.” ” [emphases and underlining (boldface here) in the text/p.80]
Considering the importance of Muhammad and the fear of jeopardizing the soul with the concommitant duty to protect the soul, finding the “right” imam may be most important to an individual Muslim.
If one were able, wouldn’t one move to the right mosque?
Conjecture, and admittedly a stretch … There’s been expressed, on this blog (20Nov07), a seeming perplexity at the randomness by which refugees are relocated. Perhaps this relocation process is anything but random; perhaps the present process functions to create a network of gateway cities – with the “right” mosques. The bulk of Zawahiri’s article discusses this, says Ibrahim: “… The entire doctrine is dedicated to showing that true Muslims must always strive to be in a state of wala’ [essentially means friendship, benevolence, fealty, and devotion] by being devoted to Allah and loyal to one another, while maintaining a state of bara’ [disavowal, repudiation – essentially being “clean” of something] by hating or at least being clean from everything – and everyone – outside of Islam. In fact, if every Muslim followed this doctrine, a clash between the Muslim world and the non-Muslim world would inevitably occur – which is precisely what al-Qaeda seeks.” (p. 63)
Bokai previously wrote this guest post, again questioning whether the volags know what Islam is aiming for in America.