Rules of engagement in war of ideas against Jihadists

  Part Two: To define its missions:

Chapter 3 : Mission 3: Reform Muslims

It means reforming Muslim communities in the West and the US, and reform Muslim World, and Muslims in the Middle East in particular. Here we have two key words: Islam and the silent Muslim majority.

As there is a contradiction between Islam and the Salafi Wahhabi dogmas, it become a must to have Islam in our side against the radicals. This needs sincere Muslim scholars who have good expertise in the different Islamic and different Muslim fields and who have also religious commitments to hand this mission as their own peaceful Jihad to reform peacefully their own Muslim peoples.

Actually, the fanatic trends and movements are minorities in the entire Muslim World. Those fanatic leaders and followers – are just few millions. It is nothing in Muslim population which is about one billion and half billion people. The problem is those minorities are very active and highly equipped by tools , money and influence. The most dangerous weapons they have is their claim to have Islam exclusively in their side. Because of their propaganda they are called (Islamists) while they are the real enemy to the religion of Islam. Proving the contradiction between them and Islam will dismantle them and help in undeceive the silent Muslim majority.

Let’s look at some samples.

Sample 1:

Reform the Wahaby culture from inside Islam to confirm and to conform to the Human  Rights Culture and the Islamic Values   

http://www.ahl-alquran.com/English/show_article.php?main_id=7475

 For more than two decades, the writer has struggled to discuss the untouchable side of Muslim tradition in order to reform it to conform to the real Islamic values of peace, justice, tolerance and freedom of speech andbelief. This angers the hardest hard-line Sunni Muslims, known as Wahabis. The writer’s efforts so enraged the fanatics that he had to escape to the U.S. in order to disseminate his message.
 Coming to the U.S he finds the Islamic Sunni schools – as he expected – are influenced by the Wahabi fanatical culture. The writer saw similar influences at the religious courses in Egypt.  When he tried to reform these courses, a project sponsored by the Ibn Khaldoun Center in Cairo, Wahabists forced the cancellation of the project. It is worrisome to the writer to see the same fanaticism at work in the Islamic schools here in the midst of the world’s most open society.
The main purpose of this proposal is to offer alternative Islamic teachings which confirm and conform to the Human Rights culture to the Saudi State to reform its Wahabi Salafi culture which is tarnishing the name of Islam and victimizing the Saudi State and all the Muslims around the world, and to encourage Muslim scholars to discuss this issue and to undertake reform themselves. AS this reform has become the real responsibility of all the intellectuals in Muslim and Arab World, they are invited to discuss this proposal and other insights to pave the way of reform.
Ahmed Subhy Mansour
June 16, 2004
 The Saudi State and its Wahabi faith at a quick Historical glance
1-The first Saudi State and its Wahabi faith
The first Saudi state was established by the agreement in 1745 between Ibn Abdel Wahab, the zealot Sunni scholar who revolted against the Sufi and Shiite Muslims in the 18^th century, and Ibn Saud, the prince of Al Dare’iah in Najd, north of the Arabian Peninsula. Under this accord, the Saudi Prince received from Ibn Abdel Wahab the religious justification to conquer his neighbors and occupy their lands under the banner of Jihad. Creating Wahabi dogma from the most extreme of  Sunni tradition, the first Saudi State used the name of Islam and Jihad to occupy most of the Arabian Peninsula and to invade and massacre Shiites and Sufi Muslims in Iraq and Syria. In response, the helpless Ottoman Empire asked the Egyptian strongman Mohammed Ali to defeat the Saudi menace. After seven years of fierce battle, Mohammed Ali destroyed the first Saudi State and its capital in 1818.
2- The military defeat strengthens the Wahabi cult
The defeat of 1818 destroyed the first Saudi State, but also strengthened the zeal of the Wahabists.  In the Arab world, military action against an ideology only adds to public support.  The Wahabists set about helping the house of Saud to establish a second state in Najd for a short time in the last decades of the 19^thcentury.  Even though the second Saudi state collapsed quickly under internal conflicts, Wahabism grew.  Wahabi scholars insulted other Muslim Sects, accusing them of being idolaters; the other sects were unprepared to defend themselves rhetorically from the Wahabists.  Seeing that the others lacked a strong counter-argument, hundreds of thousands of Muslims switched their support to Wahabism.
3-Al Ikhwan built the third Saudi State for Abdel Aziz, then revolted against him
Abdel Aziz, son of Abdel Rahman [Ibn Saud], founded the third Saudi State – which exists to this day -- with the help of fanatic guerrilla soldiers known as Al Ikhwan, or “The Brothers”.  For more than 20 years the Ikhwan fought for Abdel Aziz to reestablishing the Saudi State, [1905 – 1925].  It was ultimately named the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia in 1932.  The Ikhwan, who were lawless, tough Bedouins, were steeped in Wahabi dogma, believing it to be the real forgotten Islam, to be enforced with swords and Jihad.
After adding the Hejaz and the Muslim Sacred Mosques to their conquered territory, the Ikhwan wanted to continue their jihad by invading Iraq and Syria where they had committed many massacres.  This was a threat to the mighty British Empire and its allies. Abdel Aziz saw this and made a strategic decision to distance himself from the Ikhwan, thereby keeping his kingdom secure by avoiding conflict with the British.
This was the first time the Saudi political authority and its religious authority were at odds. Al Ikhwan, who believed in a continuous Jihad, condemned Abdel Aziz.  They accused him of being an accomplice of idolaters [the Egyptians] and the infidels [the British].  Abdel Aziz tried to eliminate this dissension but the Ikhwan used their Wahabi teachings to bolster their condemnation of Abdel Aziz, calling on statements made by Wahabism’s founder and the oldest imams, Ibn Taymeya and Ibn Hanbal.
4- Abdel Aziz’s policy: Protect the state rather than reform Wahabi faith;and the result of his policy
It was clear even in the early 1900s that Wahabi doctrine needed reforming, but the helpless Saudi scholars were incompetent at doing so. There was a peaceful attempt to reunite Abdel Aziz and his Ikhwan in Riyadh conferences in 1927 and 1928; but it failed to head off a brewing conflict. Abdel Aziz realized he had to fight his own brothers [Ikhwan], and defeated them in 1929. But he could not defeat their dogma, nor could he reform it. So the problem was left unsolved for decades, until the present day.  This is how it has become a danger to the Saudi State, the Muslim World and the Western World as well.
Abdel Aziz lefted reformation for another day, and chose instead to protect his new state from its internal and external enemies.  Shiite Muslims stood at the borders in Iran, Iraq, and Syria and in Yemen; they also were inside the Kingdom, in the Eastern region and in Al Hejaz. The King’s plan was to focus on non-Shiites:  He wanted to persuade all Sufis to convert to Wahabism, especially in Egypt and India, home to the biggest oppressed Sunni and Sufi populations.  He would then use Wahabi doctrine as a religious motive to revolt against their Christian oppressor, the British Empire. Once Abdel Aziz took control of Al Hejaz and the Sacred Mosques 1925, he had the perfect opportunity to recruit his converts and spread the Wahabi faith.
By 1928 the Muslim Brotherhood [Al Ikhwam Al Muslemeen] was created in Egypt by Hassan El Banna and his spiritual master Rasheed Reda, Abdel Aziz’s agent in Egypt. From 1928-1948, Hassan El Banna established fifty thousand branches of the Muslim Brotherhood throughout Egypt, while creating an international organization and a secret military organization. The Muslim Brotherhood partnered in fomenting the Egyptian Revolution, which changed the history of Middle East.  After the Revolution they came into conflict with Gamal Abdel Nasser, the leader of the Revolution.  Most escaped to Saudi Arabia, and waited till Anwar Al Sadat was in power to return to Egypt.  Sadat gave them the authority to control Egypt’s education and culture, which they used to create public and secret organizations.   Their plan was to take over Egypt, which involved a member of one of their secret organizations assassinating Sadat.  The Muslim Brotherhood produced two infamous leaders, Sheikh Omer Abdel Rahman, the blind cleric currently in a U.S. prison, and Ayman Al Zawahiri, the right hand man of Usama Bin Laden.  Another Brother was Mohammed Atta, ringleader of the September 11 attacks.
Returning to the early 20^thcentury, Abdel Aziz found it easy to recruit Indian Muslims to his plan.  They hated the British and the majority of their fellow Indians; and they found in the Wahabism the justification to revolt and divide India into two countries.  Thus Pakistan was created as one of the greatest mistakes of the 20^thcentury.  Pakistan, with the help of the Saudi State and its [Madaris] or Islamic schools created the Taliban, which later took over Afghanistan.
 Instead of modernizing Wahabism after his clash with his Saudi [Ikhwan], Abdel Aziz preferred to export Wahabi teachings in their original medieval form to the rest of the Muslim world; this created bloody religious turmoil from Algeria to Indonesia and from Sudan to Russia, and finally to the West and the U.S.
5- The Saudi State keeps its founder’s policy
Following Abdel Aziz, his sons, King Saud, Faisal, Khaled and Fahd have maintained Wahabism in their kingdom; spurred by new oil wealth, they aspired to make their owned family-state the leader of the intire Muslim World.  Because of political and economic interests, the West -- especially the U.S. – accommodated this Saudi policy. Moreover, facilities were given to the Saudis to create Islamic Centers in the West to spread Wahabi dogma as the real religion of Islam.  This gave Wahabis the opportunity to influence Muslim communities in the West.
Many new Islamic schools and centers were opened with Saudi money and were controlled by Wahabists.  They controlled ancient Muslim centers, schools and mosques with Saudi funding; they introduced Wahabi books and cultural resources as the “pure” Islamic teachings, publishing them in both Arabic and English.
This campaign began as early as 1970. After ten years I became an active reformist inside Sunni groups in Egypt; I was persuaded by the Saudi propaganda that America would completely convert to Islam by the 21^stcentury.  One might argue that, upon failing to reach this grandiose goal, their response was September 11.
Oil wealth gave the Saudis the ability to modernize the material life of their people while their religious, social and cultural life remained controlled by backward Wahabi dogma. This created a huge contradiction, exacerbated by a strategic decision by the house of Saudi to ally itself with the infidel Western countries instead of waging Holy War on them.

6- The Saudi State becomes victim of its policy
Failing to modernize Wahabi teachings has resulted in the Saudi State becoming a victim to its religious ideology. On the first day of the 15^thcentury of the Muslim calendar [November 22, 1979], some fanatical groups led by Johayman Al Otayby occupied the Sacred Mosque of Mecca, declaring the Saudi State to be the enemy of Islam and the ally of the infidel west.  In his preaching Johayman used the teachings of Ibn Abdel Wahab and the oldest scholars of fanatical Muslims to bolster his claim that the Saudi State was anti-Islam. As was its custom, the Saudi monarchy used military power to remove and eliminate Johayman and his group, while the official government Wahabi scholars were - and still are - unable to rebut Johayman’s arguments.  The only way the Saudi State could respond was by banning and confiscating Johayman’s books and messages.
Johayman was just a simple religious Wahabi scholar; the current Wahabi opposition, born after the Gulf War of 1990, is very different.  It includes many different intellectuals of varied backgrounds.  Most of them have graduated from Western universities and some still live in the West, but they are ardent enemies of the West and its culture. From the membership of this opposition came the Saudi men who volunteered for Usama Bin Laden’s terror attacks.
This irony requires some explanation.  The fanatics who comprise the current Wahabi cult did not become extremists because of their Western educations.  sRather, most of them belong to ancient tribes shamefully defeated by Abdel Aziz.  While studying in the West, they came to realize the extent to which the Saudi royal family suppresses their human, social and political rights. Upon returning to their homeland, they were reminded of their humiliating lower status. They wanted to oppose the regime, but could not do so with help from the West.  So their only hope the Wahabi faith, which offered them the platform for challenge:  That is, to destroy the Saudi state by declaring it to have no religious legitimacy.
The first Saudi state was destroyed after 73 years by a foreign military action; the second Saudi state was destroyed after decades by internal Saudi conflicts.  Now it is clear that the third Saudi State will be destroyed by the Wahabi faith fostered by its own royal family, unless the house of Saudi chooses to reform the faith from inside Islam to make it conform to the values of a human rights culture.  This is the real Islam as it is stated in the Holy Quran and the real history of the prophet Mohammed.
7- The Wahabi faith spreads the culture of dictatorship in the Arab Muslim World
The Wahabi faith gives the Muslim ruler unlimited political authority, which is why the Saudi royal family maintains it as the official religion:  it keeps those demanding democracy at bay.  But there is also a contradiction:  while Wahabism supports absolute authority by the Muslim ruler [or Caliph], Wahabis condemn the current Saudi government as the enemy of Islam.

Other Wahabists elsewhere in the Muslim World -- or so-called Islamists -- have the same schizophrenic feeling toward despotic military regimes. They too condemn them as allies of the infidel west, seeking to overthrow them. So while the political activists in other parts of the globe oppose tyranny by demanding democracy, human rights and freedom of speech and belief, the Wahabists oppose the Infidel  West and its democratic culture.  The despotic regimes in the Muslim world support the Wahabi opposition to some degree, to scare the non-fanatical intellectual opponents of tyranny, along with the masses.  In doing so they send the message:  Which is worse, us or them?
In the Muslim world, the only mighty power that can truly oppose tyranny is the Wahabists who use Islam to overthrow these regimes. There is a bloody history of this in Algeria, Egypt, Sudan, and even inside Saudi Arabia itself.   Confronted with violent examples in history, intellectuals are forced with a distasteful choice: the corrupted despotic military regimes or the terrorist religious regime. The despotic regimes are terrible, but the fanatic terrorist regime is even worse.  These fanatics are victimizing innocent people along with some courageous peaceful writers and intellectuals. In many cases the military regime is using the fanatics to intimidate and even silence peaceful reformers.
As a result, the wave of democracy is bypassing the Muslim world while sweeping through other regions that lack similar levels of sophistication and culture.

8- Why the “Muslim Street” is hostile to the U.S and the West

These two oppressive forces [the Arab regimes and the Wahabi opposition] have hatched endless corruption and chaos in the Muslim World. To distract the masses, the regimes and the Wahabi oppositions convince them that the Infidel west, as the ardent enemy of Islam, is to keep Muslims lagging behind all other peoples. This conspiracy paranoia is the driving obsession of the Wahabis.  It divides the entire world into two warring camps, the believers and the infidel.  It is their rationalization for holding on to their medieval Wahabi culture (and their Jihad as the only way to deal with the West.) 

Under the banner of battling the West, the fanatical Wahabis throughout the Muslim world are rallying the masses. Their central aim is to create one united Islamic Nation [Ommah] to be governed by one ruler, the Khalifa, who will confront the West by Holy War or Jihad. To achieve this aim, they are working to take over Egypt, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan; these three states, once overtaken, would be the foundation on which to build the One Islamic United Nation to defeat the Christians and Jews. 

9- Should we let the Saudi State collapse or help it survive?

In the Wahabist political literature (banned by the Saudi government), the Wahabis envision that, after they destroy the Saudi state and topple the royal family, they will  establish their Islamic Ommah with its capital in the Arabian Peninsula, Al Hejaz, and Islam’s holiest shrine. They call this “the Base”, or “Al Qa’eda”.  Usama Bin Laden has borrowed this term for his terror network.  Knowing that this is the plan of the Wahabis, one can see the need to defend the Saudi State and help it survive.

Furthermore, there is longstanding enmity between peoples of the Najd and Al Hijaz regions.  These are Saudi Arabia’s two biggest provinces, rife with various restive, angry religious sects and tribes. If the Saudi monarchy were to collapse, the Arabian Peninsula – the religious heart of Muslim World and the resource of the world’s oil industry - would become a fireball of war and chaos. It’s the interest of the civilized world to keep the Saudi monarchy stable and to save it by pushing for it to reform its religious problem. It’s also imperative for the United States to push for this reform, because it will lead to the reform of Islamic schools in the U.S. 

 10- September 11 is the product of uncontrolled Wahabism and a harbinger of a potential third world war.

I would argue that September 11^thwas the beginning of the Third World War. Unlike the prior two world wars, military action alone will not win the day.  Perversely, it will strengthen the fanatics and increase the number of innocent victims. This should instead be a peaceful intellectual war against terrorism – waged by Muslims.  To save the Saudi State, the Muslim world, the West and millions of innocent people, the Saudi State has to reform Wahabism from inside Islam.  

How to reform  

1-The new kind of the Wahabi War

According to the Wahabist religious vedicts [Fatwas], Al Jihad means to hate and to fight the enemy of Islam. The “enemy” includes all Christians, Jews, non-Muslims and Muslims who are not Wahabis. It’s permissible in their wars to kill not only soldiers, but children, women and even pets.  The killer [Al Mujahed], should he die in the process, is said to go straight to paradise, where he will see God and have a special rank before Him on the Day of Judgment. This rank allows him to intercede for his family and friends. It’s easy to prove this from their history and tradition, but the current suicide bombers are the manifest proves of their kind of Jihad.   Mohammed Ben Abdel Wahab, the sacred Imam of the Wahabis, wrote in several of his books advocating this kind of Jihad. He distorted interpretations of the Quran and used false quotes from the Hadeeth, or Sayings of the prophet Mohammed.  He directed Sunni scholars to establish this as official Wahabi dogma.  A careful reading of the true Quran and Hadeeth shows that Abdel Wahab writings are in conflict with true Islam. 

2-Some facts on how to reform

To save the world from the danger of Wahabist extremism and reform Islam from the inside, it is useful to consider the following:

2-1-Wahabist doctrine springs from the minds of Muslim scholars based on their circumstances and culture of their lives during the middle Ages.  It was an era of Crusade and Holy Wars and religious persecution.  The Wahabist reaction to these circumstances was wrong and contradicts the core of any pure religion. But the times were what they were:  People used religion to serve their political aims. The great values of peace, tolerance, freedom and justice, which form the core of all religions, were ignored.  People chose war and oppression, and abused the name of the religion in order to commit heinous crimes.

2-2- The Wahabis, to preserve the preeminence of their ideology, always ban the freedom of speech and belief and confiscate the books of any other faith.  Any   Muslim intellectual who tries to discuss their teachings is doomed as an apostate; it is declared that he should be killed under the banner of Islamic Jurisprudence.  These are the laws of a medieval culture -- a hangover from a dark period of the world.

2-3- Wahabism does not represent all Muslims.  There are three main sects: Sunnis, Shiites and Sufis.  Among the Sunnis are four sub-sects. Hanabelah are the hardest line of the Sunni; Ibn Taymeyah and his people are the hardest line among the Hanabelah; then Wahabis are the hardest line among the followers of Ibn Taymeyah.

The number of Wahabists is relatively small. Minute sect becomes by the Saudi State, the representative of the religion of Islam. Today there are more than a billion

Muslims in the world, most of them Sunni and Sunni Sufi, followed by Shiites. Generally, most Muslims are peaceful people who believe in superstitions and the miracles of the Imams and the sacred tombs. The Wahabi cult is definitely a minority in terms of followers; but it’s the biggest cult in terms of organizations, leaders, strength and activists. Wahabis are ardent activists in spreading their faith and plotting the takeover of secular regimes in the Muslim World.  There are roughly a few million followers of Wahabism, meaning about 3% of Muslims.  But this 3% is hijacking Islam for their own selfish designs. At times they were supported by the U.S. government, though no longer; however, their culture is still supported by the Saudi state and most regimes in the Muslim world. The real problem, then, is not the number of followers: it’s the Wahabist culture and its influence.

2-4- One could easily argue the fallacies of Wahabi dogma, and Wahabi leaders know this. That’s why they use their power to ban and confiscate any writings that contradict them, and persecute anyone who dares to discuss their doctrine.

The writer of this proposal has more than two decades’ experience discussing this fanatic culture and the untouchable side of Muslim tradition. He has the knowledge and commitment to continue, but the fanatics forced him to flee to the U.S to save his life and be able to exercise his freedom of speech and belief.  Now he is offering up his knowledge to help reform the Wahabi faith from inside Islam.

The key question, though, is this: Is the Saudi State willing to save itself -- or not? 

3-The Role of the Saudi State

U.S.government support for reform is not enough.  The commitment and knowledge of this writer and other Muslim thinkers and reformers is not enough -- unless the Saudis themselves willingly support this proposal and activate it in practical steps. The Saudis have spent billions of dollars to spread Wahabi dogma; as a result, the entire worlds – and the institution of Islam – are in peril.  Now it’s the Saudis’ religious duty and their obligation to the international community to neutralize this danger in a peaceful manner.

The Saudis spent billions of dollars to spread Wahabi dogma using tens of TV channels and newspapers, along with hundreds of institutes, schools and centers. Now they need to spend a few million dollars and devote a few TV channels, newspapers and centers to eliminating the poisonous tree they have planted.  They certainly have the rhetorical weapon they need: Islamic facts are very clear in the Quran, and Wahabi dogma is so weak that it would wither under the glaring light of discussion.  It’s in the interest of the Saudi government to undertake this, if only for their own survival.  These days they now face a stark choice: Wahabi dogma or their state and lives. Should they embark on reform, they can use the explanation that Wahabism is no longer suitable for this day and age. The intellectual efforts and writings in the cause of reform are already available, but it must be remembered that the Saudi State used its influence inside Egypt and other Muslim countries to confiscate and to ban all this and persecute the free thinkers.  This persecution scared the peaceful intellectuals who want merely to live in safety. There are many such intellectuals in numbers in Egypt and other Muslim and Arab countries. From 1995 to 2000, many came to the writer’s weekly forum at the Ibn Khaldoun center in Cairo. The writer received a wealth of commentary from Quranic scholars outside Egypt as well.  But then the media outlets of the fanatics threatened them, accusing the Ibn Khaldoun center of being a den of enemies of Sunna and the prophet Mohammed. This campaign led to a wave of arrests in Egypt. Many of the writer’s staffers were arrested and the writer himself eventually fled All of those free thinkers who once were actively involved with the Ibn Khaldoun center are now so scared that they are trying to deny their faith. The Saudis also have bribed other intellectuals to get them to defend Wahabism and attack their former colleagues. The Saudi crown family, therefore, must undertake a dramatic change in the way it does business. It must: 1- Uphold the first Islamic value, the freedom of speech and freedom of belief, giving unlimited freedom of thought and belief to all people in the kingdom. This will allow Shiites and Sufis to practice their beliefs and discuss Wahabi dogma. 2- Give equal opportunities to all Muslims in mass media and other public platforms in religious, cultural and social life. 3- Continue a genuine but gradual reform in the political, economic and social spheres. 4- Encourage free thinkers throughout the Muslim World to participate in this reform.

This is not a call to ban Wahabi doctrine, but to establish equality among all Muslim cults, and to give freedom of belief and speech for all of them, and to make all doctrines open to public examination.  This kind of climate will create a competition of sorts, in which the people will choose for themselves which Islamic faith is best for them.

4- The Practical Steps of this proposal

As mentioned earlier, the writings of reform are available, as is the commitment of silenced intellectuals throughout the Muslim World; they are eager to support this project but they are scared. The real problem is to the financial support for establishing an international organization to implement the project, and protect the safety of the intellectuals involved. It needs a formal arrangement with the U.S., Saudi, Egyptian and allied governments.  The writer knows personally from experience at the Ibn Khaldoun center that any reform needs official support, directly or indirectly. There are many official American efforts to reform the Muslim culture in the realm of education and religion. We –of course - welcome these efforts, but we need to reform our religious problems by ourselves.  What we need is American support. American support will reform the American image in the Muslim World.

American policy is usually distorted by the Muslim media and misunderstood by the Muslim masses. The dictators of this region direct the anger of the masses toward America and explain their own failures as a product of the “Western Conspiracy against Islam and Muslims”. But with this project, the fanatics will be forced to spend their time not fighting the U.S. but defending themselves and their dogma.  The dictators will be forced to enact some reforms as a compromise to stay in power. The Muslim masses will finally get a chance to hear more than one opinion and several points of views.  They will finally discover that their real enemy is the fanatics and the dictators, not the U.S. and the West.  It will not be easy to achieve this; it will be a painful struggle.  But it is worth it to save Islam and save millions of lives in wars and terrorist actions. This is the true peaceful intellectual Jihad as The Almighty God mentioned in the Holy Quran:[25:52]                             

 Finally
To pursue this mission, the writer of this proposal hopes to find an American entity that can help establish a company specializing in media to publish books and produce, stage and television programs in English, Arabic, and other Islamic languages.  These would be disseminated throughout the Muslim World and the Muslim communities in the U.S. and the European Union. The writer and his colleagues know how to attract and impress the Muslim masses. The writer had to struggle alone for more than ten years against the Egyptian regime and Muslim fanatics; through this struggle he has established a new trend, the Quranic trend: the intellectuals who believe in Islam as the religion of peace, tolerance, justice, human rights, and freedom of expression. This is a trend of people who believe that their real enemy is not the West or the U.S. but the fanatics and the dictators of Muslim World.  If the Quranic people throughout the Muslim world find a home in this U.S.-sponsored entity, it will be lead to greater security for the U.S. and the rest of the civilized world.

The American Constitution protects the freedom of speech, so the only way to reform the Islamic schools in the U.S. is to give American Muslims an alternative ideology and let them choose which they prefer. With the books and broadcasts of this sponsored entity, Muslims will have the materials to discuss Wahabi teachings and see the contradictions between Wahabism and the true interpretations of the Quran.  They will have access to other Islamic teachings which confirm and conform to American values and the Human Rights culture. Members of the American Muslim community and students at Islamic schools in the U.S. will be able to compare ideologies, then think and choose for themselves.

This is an essential way to prevent the formation of an American Taliban.     

Sample 2

THE ROOTS OF DEMOCRACY IN ISLAM

Presentation by

Dr. Ahmed Subhy Mansour
On Monday, December 16, 2002

National Endowment for Democracy

My thanks go to the National Endowment for Democracy for giving me this opportunity to practice my freedom of speech here without feeling fear, as I used to feel in Egypt. In Egypt, I was prejudiced by two main trends: the fanatics and the secularists. The fanatics accused me of being the enemy of the prophet Mohammed and the rejecter of his teachings, which they call Sunna. The secularists refused any discourse emanating from inside Islam, even if this discourse was against the fanatics, calling for justice, peace, human rights, religious tolerance, freedom and democracy. Now, thanks to the support of the National Endowment for Democracy, I can talk about democracy in Islam, without fear or shame. I will outline my presentation, the roots of democracy in Islam, in some pages to have enough time for discussion.

http://www.ahl-alquran.com/English/show_article.php?main_id=4145

 Between Islam and Muslims

In any language, any time, and any place, Islam means submission to the One God, the creator and peacefulness in dealing with people. To submit yourself to your God, this is your freedom of choice, and you will be responsible for this before God alone on the Day of Judgment. No one in this life has the authority to judge your faith.
To be peaceful in dealing with people—that is the meaning of Islam. If you are peaceful, you are Muslim, whatever your faith. To be an aggressor, a terrorist or a criminal is not to be a true Muslim. This is the core of Islam, which was revealed to all the prophets in all the divine holy messages, and finally revealed in Arabic language in the Quran, confirming previous holy revelations.
In his life, both as a prophet and as ruler of the Islamic state, Prophet Mohammed embodied and applied the Quranic values of peace, justice, freedom of belief and expression, and democracy. After his death, however, his powerful Arab tribe, the Quraysh, used the name of Islam to establish a mighty empire in Asia, Africa, and Europe that lasted more than six centuries.
In the Middle Ages, the Islamic concept of al-Shura, or consultation, which relates to modern conceptions of democracy, was abandoned, and Muslims adopted their own traditions. The strictest interpretation of Islam was revived in our time by the Al Wahabi doctrine, which established the fanatic trend in the Muslim world and gave Islam a notorious name. The Wahabis are against democracy, accusing it to be the rule of Satan. However, when we read the Quran, its code and idioms, we find out that democracy is very much a part of the Islamic faith, commandments, values, culture, and society.


The Islamic Society of Democracy

Islamic values refer to the high values of peace, human rights, freedom of speech and belief, justice and equality, and democracy. Any society that upholds and practices these values is an Islamic society. Because democracy is only one aspect of this society, we have to mention briefly the other aspects:

1. Equality between races and cultures:

God said in the Quran, “O people, we created all of you from the same male and female, and we made you into nations and tribes to recognize each other. The best among you is the most righteous. God is omniscient cognizant” [49:13]. So we are brothers and sisters from the same parents. God made us into different races and cultures to recognize each other, not to fight each other, to benefit from this plurality in this life. In this life God ordered us not to exalt ourselves, not to use the religion as a means of living and power. [53:32] [16:90 to 95].
2. Equality between men and women:
The Quran confirms this equality in creation and in responsibility in this life and in the hereafter [3:195] [4:124] [16:97] [40:40]. In the realm of marriage, the Quran states justice beside equality.

3. Equality between the different religions:
This is confirmed by two other Islamic values;: freedom of speech and belief, and peace. Accordingly, everyone has the right to believe or to disbelieve, to advocate his belief in a peaceful way without insulting anyone else’s belief or personality.

4. Human rights, and the balance between the society and the individual

The Quran mentions five rights, and makes a unique balance between the society and the individual in this regard.

a) Justice:
Everyone has an absolute right to justice. Justice is the mission of the holy divine messages from God [57:25] and the mission of the Islamic state [4:58], [42 :15], [2:282], [65: 2], [16:90]. Any society or state that upholds and practices justice in any time, place, or language is doing so in the true spirit of Islam.

b) Freedom of belief and speech:
Everyone has an absolute right to believe or not to believe [17:107], [18:29], [41: 40] and to advocate what he believes without insulting the others [6:108], [23:3], [28:55], [29: 46]. On the Day of Judgment, everyone will be questioned before God alone, according to his or her freedom of belief. The Islamic state has nothing to do in guiding people to the right path; it is a personal choice and responsibility [28:56], [10:108], [17:15], [27:92], [39:41], [3:20], [6:104].

c) Wealth:
Individuals are entitled to wealth so long as they are not minors or fools who may squander their wealth. In such cases, society must appoint a guardian to manage the wealth on behalf of those incapable of doing so themselves. Society must also look after such persons, give them a good life from his income, and supervise theguardians charged with looking after the wealth [4:5-6].
Society is expected to look after its poor. The poor are entitled to charity and to alms, collected by the state or given directly to the needy [9:60], [2:215], [17:26], [30: 38], [6:141], [51:19], [70:24].
At the same time, the Quran forbids the concentration of a society’s wealth in the hands of a few people [59:7] because it makes them control the power and the state. Such a concentration of wealth and power results in a class division pitting the hungry majority against the affluent few. The Quran considers this a sign of a society’s eventual self-destruction [17:16], [23:33], [21:13], [11 :116], [34:34], [34:23], [56:45], [23:64], [2:195].
d) Security:
Individuals have an absolute right to security. Society has to defend itself from external enemies and to protect its people. An Islamic state is a strong, peaceful state; it prepares its army to prevent enemies from attacking its borders; and it has to be strong in maintaining peace. At the same time, it has to punish any criminal who violates the peace.

e) The right of power:
Shura, or democracy, means assuming power. According to Islam, it is the society as a whole—not one person, like the Egyptian pharaoh in the time of Moses—that owns and exercises power. [43:51 to 54], [40:37], [28:38], [79: 24].
The fanatics, according to their concept of ‘Al Hakemiyah,’ or the governance, believe that the ruler in Islam obtains his political authority from God and that he will be responsible before God alone on the Day of Judgment.
Did Prophet Mohammed have the same authority from God when he was the ruler of the Islamic state of Al Madina? If so, we may say: He was the final prophet revealed by God, and no one has the privilege the final prophet had. But the fact is that Prophet Mohammed, as a leader, got his power and the authority not from God but from the people or the society, as is the case today in any democratic society.
The people around him gave him shelter after years of persecution in Mecca, and established a state for him to help him against his mighty tribe of Quraysh.
That is why God said to him: “And because of the mercy of God, you treated them with compassion. Had you been harsh and hardhearted, they would have broken away from you. Therefore, you shall pardon them, ask forgiveness for them, and consult them in the matter. Once you reach a decision, then carry it out, putting your trust in God. God loves those who trust in Him” [3:159]. God made his Messenger deal with them gently in order to obtain their loyalty. If Prophet Mohammed had not acted with compassion, his people would have abandoned him and he would have become homeless and helpless in front of his enemies. Because they were his source of power and authority, God made him gentle in dealing with them, ordered him to forgive them if they insulted him and to consult them in affairs of state.
Al-Shura, or consultation, is the Quranic expression of democracy. A religious commandment, it refers to the discussions and deliberation that take place at meetings (or Majalis). In these meetings, Prophet Mohammed taught the early Muslims the culture of democracy in Islam.

The Roots of Democratic Culture in Islam: The Culture of Power and Justice
A strong society is the one that maintains its power and rules itself by itself, through rulers that are servants of the people, accountable before them. This is the essence of a democratic society. A weak, helpless society, on the other hand, tends to produce dictators, because the people are passive, lazy, and inactive. The difference between a strong society and a weak society lies in culture: the culture of strength and struggle versus the culture of weakness and passivity. It may be difficult to make the weak society strong and democratic, because the necessary changes in culture may take a long time and bloody struggle to occur, as happened in the West. But Islam offers a peaceful path to democratic change. This peaceful path has three aspects:
1. Belief in the Day of Judgment
2. Belief in the divine predestination

3. Freedom of choice

God created me and predestined for me four things: my birth (date, family, and shape), my death (date and place), his providential sustenance for me, and the crises that will take place in my life. In the hereafter, God will not question me concerning these four things.



In this life, no one can harm me or benefit me beyond these four inevitable predestinations. Beyond them, I have the freedom of choice to believe or not to believe, the freedom to be active in acts of good or evil, or the freedom to be inactive. It is up to me to be active or inactive. I will be responsible for my freedom of choice before God at the Day of Judgment, at which time I will placed either in hell or in heaven, according to my deeds in life. So I have to answer the eternal questions: Why am I here? What should I do to win the test of this life? According to Islam, the winner is one who believes in God and the Day of Judgment; who is active in good deeds; who upholds the high values of peace, justice, and freedom of choice; who fears God alone; and who submits to God alone, and not to any human being. This is the culture of strength, which is available to anyone and any society to uphold. This the culture that changed Muslims in the time of Prophet Mohammed and that created a strong democratic state among them.
Roots of Democracy in the Islamic Faith

Islam states that there is no god but One God, the creator of the universe. Democracy is an aspect of Islam, while dictatorship contradicts it. The tyrant acts like God, making the people submit to him and punishing them if they do not. The tyrant is never accountable to his people. The Muslim tyrant puts himself higher than the prophet Mohammed, who was democratic in his dealings with others. In this way, the Muslim tyrant indirectly claims the status of a god beside the One God. Moreover, dictatorship is also opposed to justice, which is the basic aim of all the divine messages of God. Justice is the basic foundation of Islamic laws. This means that democracy, taken as an aspect of justice, is a central part of the Islamic faith and should be considered one of Islam’s ritual commandments.

Democracy in Islamic Ritual: Commandments
In a sura, or chapter, named Al-Shura, or democracy, the Quran describes Muslim society as one in which individuals respond to their Lord, observe their prayers, whose affairs are by consultation among them, and from whose provisions they donate (42:38).
In this verse, the commandment of shura, or consultation, appears between the two famous commandments of prayer and charity (salat and zakat). Like every ritual commandment in Islam, shura is a personal duty, which no one can perform on behalf of another. Put another way, no one can represent anyone but himself. Shura represents the kind of direct democracy in which all the people participate in the meetings held to discuss community affairs. In addition, Muslims are urged to practice shura in their work and family lives, much like they are exhorted to pray five times a day.
The chapter on shura was revealed in Mecca, where Muslims were persecuted by the Quraysh tribe but continued to hold secret meetings in the home of Al Arkam in the spirit of shura. And they continued to practice it publicly in their new state of Al Madina.
Yet the tradition of attending open meetings with the prophet and discussing their affairs was a new one for the inhabitants of Al Madina. Some of them left the meetings with or without excuse. Because it is a ritual commandment in Islam, God strongly warned Muslims that He would punish them in this life and in the hereafter if they abandoned their meetings.[24:62-to 64]

The Difficulties of Applying Democracy in the Time of Prophet Mohammed

Some Muslims in the democratic meetings crossed the line by insulting the Prophet (33:69-70), outmatching him, raising their voices over his voice, speaking loudly in his face (49:1-2), entering his house without his permission, and making no difference between the mosque where the meetings were held and the house of the prophet (33:53). God blamed them and told them that they were in need of discipline because democracy did not mean that kind of disorder.

The hypocrites were the elders of Al Madina and its richest people before the coming of Islam. They had to accept Islam in order to protect their wealth and prestige and in order to conspire against the new state that gave them absolute freedom of belief and speech. The democratic meetings were their means to plot. The hypocrites controlled the meetings and directed them toward their own interests. Because the Muslim masses obeyed the Quran and attended the meetings, the hypocrites became the minority. Finally, the hypocrites lost their respect because they refused to defend Al Madina. They even tried to help the enemy, but the defenders of the faith had more influence than they did. Those defenders practiced democracy even in times of war.
Democracy in time of War
1. Battle of Badr

After persecution and continuous attacks from the Quraysh, Muslims were given permission to defend themselves and to retaliate. The Quraysh confiscated their assets and stocks of trade caravans. So the prophet and his small army marched to attack the trade caravan of Quraysh in order to regain some of the Muslim money. The caravan changed its route and a large number of Quraysh troops came to attack the Muslims. The prophet held a meeting in which a few men refused to face the larger Quraysh army. They argued with the prophet, but the majority decided to fight on. The minority accepted this decision. The Quran said, “And verily, a party among the believers dislike it. Disputing with you in the truth after it was made manifested, as if they were driven to death, while they were looking.” (8:5-6).
 Battle of Ohod
The next year, the Quraysh came to destroy Al Madina, and the Muslims held a meeting to discuss the situation. The majority decided to march out of the city to fight the enemy near the mountain of Ohod. The hypocrites, however, preferred to stay back and face the enemy from within the city. The Muslims were defeated in this battle. In their meeting, the hypocrites blamed the prophet, saying, “Did we have any part in the affair?” “ If we had had any say in the matter, none of us would have been killed.” And, “If only they had obeyed us, they would not have been killed” (3:154–68). The hypocrites had refused to fight, but they also had the right to participate in meetings and voice their opposition to the strategies of those who had fought and suffered defeat.
3. Battle of Allies
After that, the Quraysh gathered the biggest army of the time to destroy Al Medina. At their meeting, the Muslims decided to dig a trench around Al Madina to protect it. Everyone present vowed in the name of God never to flee. But at the time of the siege, the hypocrites fled the battle (33:9–25). In fact, they joined forces with the enemy (59:11–24) (4:141) and conspired to put an end to the democratic meetings (58:5–8) (33:9–25). Ultimately, however, they lost their influence and prestige. The hypocrites used democracy to destroy it, but in the end, democracy brought about their own ruin by exposing their acts and deeds.

The Process of Democracy in Islam

Islamic democracy is a ritual commandment. Direct democracy, in which every person represents himself or herself, involves decisions made by the majority and applied by all Muslims. So long as it is peaceful in its dealings, the opposition has total freedom of belief and expression. The accountability is another aspect. The prophet used to be insulted as a leader, and the Quran blamed those insulting him when they exceeded their limits.

Democracy also means accountability. A true Islamic society rules itself by itself through executives who are accountable to their society. The Quran calls these executives “Olo Al Amr,” meaning “those of the affairs.” They are mentioned twice in the Quran:

1) In 4:58-59, God orders Muslims to obey the executives in their capacity as God’s messengers. This means that the ultimate obedience is to God and to His message, which is one of peace, freedom, justice, and human rights. If a ruler abandons these values, no one should obey him or her.
2) In 4:83, the Quran clearly identifies “those of the affairs.” They were people who were experts in their fields. Some of them were experts in the field of security and were by the side of the prophet in times of war. This means that they were not presidents, but rather, experts who helped the prophet.

Prophet Mohammed was the leader of that Islamic state and wanted to teach the people how to govern themselves. That is why he did not appoint anyone to be the leader or ruler after him. But after his death, the Quraysh changed everything step by step. Eventually, the democratic Islamic state became an empire ruled by a dictator under the sons of the elder of Qurasyh, the previous enemy of Islam.

Sample 3

The contradiction between Islamic State and the religious State

http://www.ahl-alquran.com/English/show_article.php?main_id=2929

Introduction:
It is a common fact for Muslims that Islam had its own religious state, although seculars reject the Religious State under any circumstances and they call for the separation between religion and politics. And both Seculars and religious people are the biggest fighting trends in our Islamic world.
I stand in the middle between both of them, I believe that Islam is not only a religion, but it is a state. And here I agree with the religious trend, but I disagree with them in the nature of this state, I believe that the Islamic State is a Civilian State that contradicts with the common controlling ideas of the religious states. And I also disagree with seculars who disconnect religion of the State; ignoring the fact that Islam had already initiated its own Civilian Global State before.
In fact the prophet Mohammed has established a Civilian State, and the fundamentals of this state remains in the Holly Koran, while the Holy Koran narrates about the prophet's life and the establishing of the Islamic State in the Arabian peninsula. It is the state that changed the universal history.

But this Civilian State turned to a political despotism and a tribal rule after the great sedition and the establishment of the Ommawyan State. Then this tribal despotic rule turned into a religious political despotic rule in the Abbasyan caliphate. And this system remains in control till the collapse of the Othmanic State under the name of "Khelafa" (caliphate).

Historians agreed to name the Islamic State after the death of the prophet "right guidance caliphate", while they remove the Words "right guidance" from the titles of the following Islamic States. And this is a great significance of the great change of the Islamic system that Muslims paid its expanses till now. And the recording of the Islamic literature was happened during those "wrong guidance" caliphates, so the facts of real Islamic state during the prophet's era were ignored.
We will now discuss the contradiction between the Islamic State during the prophet and the right guidance caliphate's era and during the sequent religious states afterwards.
The base of Contradiction between the two States: Islamic and religious:
The great Muslims social scientist "Ibn-Khaldoun" wrote in his introduction "Al-Mokaddema" about what we know as "the secular State" under the address of (( the meaning of Khelafa (caliphate and Imamah (Immamat) saying " the royal rule is divided into two main kinds: the first one is "the natural rule" – h; the state that rules with inclinations and Desires- and he (Ibn Khaldoun) thought that it was immoral and unjust. And the second one is "the political rule"- the state that rules with logic to obtain benefits and to eliminate harms. – And he thinks it is dispraised because it judges without the God's light. And finally he thinks that the caliphate system is the best, because it includes forcing the people to judge their worldly and otherworldly matters with God's low. "It is a succession to God to protect his religion and to rule the world with it," he added.
Shortly Ibn –Khaldoun thinks that the base of the Religious State is to force people enter paradise and committing them to God's low. But the aim of the Non-Religious States – if it is reasonable- is to obtain benefits and to eliminate harms of its people. And considering the fact the Ibn-Khaldoun was a religious judge, so it is expected that he will be prejudiced for the country that he lives under its wing.
And I disagree with him along with others.
Because entering people the Paradise and making them believe in God, is not the basis of an Islamic State, because belief is a personal responsibility for every human. The holly Koran says (whomever he believes, it is for his own benefit, and whomever disbelieves, it is his own harm. No blame for anyone for other's mistake :Al-Esra 15) even making people believe is not the mission of the prophet when he was a ruler, the holly God ordered him ( it is not your mission to make them believe :Al-Bakara 272) and ( you don't make those you love believe, but God make them believe if they wanted to :Al-Kasas 56) and he ordered him ( there is no Force in religion : Al-Bakara 256) and ( you shouldn't force people to believe : Younis 99).

But the Base of establishing an Islamic State is the administration of justice among people, or with Jurists words " the consideration of people's rights, or Human rights with our words.

The enlightened jurists confirmed that the God's rights ( Belief and worship) is a personal responsibility dues to God's judgment, but the people's rights is the nation's responsibility in this world. The holly God says "I have sent prophets with lots of evidences along with the Book and the balance to make people administrate justice: Al-Hadid 25", so the main target from sending prophets and holly Books is to make people administrate justice among them.

The justice has two kinds, the first is "being just to God" by worshiping him and him alone, the holly God said (polytheism is a great sin : Lokman 13), and this subject can only judged by God at the day of Resurrection. The holly God said (say: the God is the Creator of Heavens and Earth, the fully known of the seen and unseen things, you judge between your people in their differences: Al-Zomor 46). And the second kind is "being just to people" which requires a ruling system, and the more successful this system to administrate justice the more Islamic it can be. And that is the meaning of the Verse "to make people administrate justice". So the punishments legislation in the holly Koran is aiming to reserve people rights including right of living, money and honor. And administrating justice only can achieve the missing system that can reserve the individuals and the society's rights and achieve the balance between justice and freedom.
But it is different in the Religious State.
Because every Religious state adopts its own religious ideology and forces the people to accept it and it uses it to strengthen its sultan. And then the ruler monopolizes power, wealth and religion, and appoints himself as an intermediary between people and God, if any one criticizes him he would be a disbeliever (of course he will have support from a certain jurists and army leaders). And while the regular political despotic ruler is contented with killing his opposed people, the religious political despotic ruler confiscates the worldly and otherworldly rights of his opposed people under the name of preserving religion. And this is a great injustice to God and his religion. And this is the abstract of the real history of religious States in the east and the west in all ages. 


The contradiction in Human rights between the two States:

1) the Islamic State:

Administrating justice among people in the Islamic State achieves the balance between the individuals and the society's rights, And the balance between freedom and justice. But in the religious States we won't need this overlap, were one man enjoys every rights for himself. We will offer some details:
In the Islamic State, The individual have the absolute right in two things: Justice and freedom of belief and thinking. And the society has the absolute right in three things: power, Wealth and Security. And the individuals have a quotient right in these three things.

(A) The absolute right of justice to individuals:
We won't stop with the great number of the Koranic verses that obligates Muslims to administrate justice with enemies or friends (the God commands you to be just and charitable : Al-Nahl 90) ( if you are going to judge among people, you should be just :Al-Nesaa 58) ( if you are going to judge, be just even if they were relative :Al-Ana'am 195) ( Oh you who believe be just and witness to God. Even if it will hurt you or your relatives, if they were poor or rich the God is worthier to them, and don't follow your desires: Al-Nesaa 135).
We will only here to affirm one Koranic fact, which is that the real meaning of the word "hakam" is the judge among people and administrating justice, not ruling. Then it means.

(B) The absolute right of thinking and belief freedom to individuals:
Mohammed al-Ghazaly the famous Islamic scholar said once he counted two hundred Koranic verse affirming the thinking and belief freedom. But I can claim that they are more than five hundred Koranic verse affirming the freedom of religion and thinking, and the freedom of express practice belief and disbelief, and the affirmation that the judgment of the belief matters -including the prophet himself- dues to God only at the day of resurrection.

We will be contented with the following verses (if you disbelief, the God can dispense without you and he denies disbelief for his people. But if you believe he will approve it to you and don't blame a person for other's mistakes, you will return to God , them he will tell you what have you been doing, he is the Omniscient of your chests : Al-Zomor 7). So it is an absolute freedom in belief and disbelief.
Even the holly God affirms the atheistic action in his Book, and he postpones the penalty of that to the day of resurrection, he said (those who atheists in our Book aren't invisible to me, are those who will be thrown to hill better than those who will come in peace at the resurrection day?. Do whatever you want, he is fully aware of what you do: Fossilat 40)
At the resurrection day the people will be classified according to their imagination to God into two main fighting trends, one of them goes to hill, and the other goes to paradise. The holly God said "those trends who are fighting about their God, the disbelivers of them shall have a great pain…. : Al-Hag 19) the catching thing here is that the holly Koran equalizes between the two trends in the litigation, and it didn't gave anyone of them the privilege to be a litigant and a judge in the same time, even if one litigant of them is the believers. Even the prophet himself is going to be a litigant against Abo-Gahl and Abi-Lahab and the rest of the famous disbeliveers. The holly God said to his prophet (you are dead, so they are, then you will come at the resurrection day as litigants: Al-Zomor 30-31).
So the individuals have the absolute right in justice and religion and belief religion in the Islamic State as long as it doesn't contradicts with the other's personal rights, or it will be under the legislation of defamation.

(C) The absolute right of political authority to the society:(the consultation)

The holly God is the only one who is unquestionable, but anyone else is questionable (Al-Anbeya 23), so the despotic person when he rises himself above the people's right to question him is actually reclaiming Godhood. And It is the immortal story of the Egyptian Pharaoh who reaches Godhood through despotism. And this is the place of the Consultation "Al-Shora" in the Islamic religion.
The prophet Mohamed himself was ordered to apply consultation in the verse ( consult them in any matter : Al-Omran 159), so it is logical that anyone who disdains to consult his people , rises himself above the prophet , so he will fall in the Godhood-Reclaiming swamp.
The holly verse "Consult them in any matter" founded the society's absolute right is authority, with our words "The Nation is the source of all authorities". The holly God said to his prophet (because of the mercy that god supplies you, you became soft with them, and if you were harsh and rough they would leave you alone. So forgive them and ask God's forgiveness for them and consult them" and the quotation here is "and if you was harsh and rough they would leave you alone". The holly God says that he supplies his prophet with mercy and he didn't make him harsh or rough, because if he was so , they would leave him alone. And if that happened he will lose his sultan and his state. So what gives him the sultan and the state is their gathering and union around him, and before when he was in Mecca he was persecuted, and if they leave him he would be persecuted again. Then their gathering and union around him is the source of his sultan, and not from a divine authorization. And the wholly God made him soft with them to make them gather and union around him. And he worn him of being rough or they would leave him. So he ordered him to forgive them and ask God's forgiveness for them and consult them, because they are his partners in ruling , and they are the source of his sultan and state. And the wholly God reminds his prophet this favor in other verse saying he is the reason of making him soft with them, and that is why they gathered and union around him, and that is something he couldn't buy with all the Earth's fortune. Al-Anfal 62-63.
And the Islamic State agrees with the secular state that "the nation is the source of all authorities" and they both disagree with the Religious State about this principle. Meantime the Islamic State disagrees with the secular state in the application of this principle. The secular State uses the social contract theory in the its application to this principle. This means that the nation gives some of its sovereignty to a ruler of a group of people to rule on behalf of the rest of the people, and by elections the nation can select a group of people to form an assembly council who can rule or make lows. And this is a point of disagreement between the Islamic State and the secular state.

The political and legislative speech in the holly Koran doesn't addressed for the Muslim ruler, but for the whole nation who rules itself according to the legislation of direct democracy (Consultation) were the ruler is a regular employee for his people for a certain period. And when his contract ends he becomes an ordinary man "eats and walks in the markets".

And to make the nation practice its absolute right in power, the holly Koran turned this right into an obligatory imposition and it joined it with other obligatory impositions like alms and prayers. And that was mentioned in the "shora" sura before the Muslims establish their Islamic state in Medina, the verse says (those who respond to their God and perform their prayers, consult with each other, and they pay the alms: Al-Shora 38). So the Consultation (the direct Democracy) came between prayers and alms, that means it is an obligatory imposition and it also means that the performance of consultation happens in Mosque like prayers and as the representative actions doesn't count in prayers so consolation must be personally performed. And this way only the Koranic speech to the nation can be affirmed. We can also notice that the Koranic speech in Moses's pharaoh was addressed for the despotic pharaoh as the ruler of the people and the state. But in the Islamic legislation for the Islamic State the speech always addressed for the whole society. Like (and you should prepare what you can from the power means: AL-Anfal 60) (O you who believe the retaliation was written on you: Al-Bakara 178) (if you afraid of disunity between them, you send a referee from his people and a referee from her people: Al-Nesa 35) ( don't give spendthrifts your money: Al-Nesa 5-6).
When Muslims moved to Medina and they establish their first Civilian State, the consultation's councils were held at the Mosque when someone calls "it is time to gather for prayers". And when some people of Al-Ansar were sluggish to attend some of these councils, even if some of them apologize for the prophet and others even sneak out of it. The God ordered all Muslims to attend these councils so as not to make some people who attend this councils monopolize the power into their hand. And they would waste the society's rights by turning themselves into a silent majority. Then the last three verses of Al-Nour Sura said revealed to confirm the necessity of attending these councils by all Muslim individuals. So the Muslims were committed to attend all the consultations councils afterwards (Al-Mogadalah :7-13).

Most of the Muslim great men were graduated in these councils, then they astonished the whole world and change the History. So the prdidn't appoint another ruler after him, because he left the nation with a full ability to rule itself. When Ali Abdel-Razek (the Muslim scholar) talked about this matter, he misunderstood this action as a separation between the Islamic religion and the State by leaning on the fact that the Koranic speech were addressed for the whole society, not for a ruler. And we agree with him that the Islam doesn't admit the presidential or the theocratic State. But it calls for a state that can be ruled by people using the direct democracy (consultation) like some European countries (Switzerland). It is a State were its strength counted with the strength of every individual by practicing direct democracy to obtain power.

(4) The absolute right of Wealth to the Society:
Basically God owns wealth, and he made it an absolute right to the society and a quotient right for individuals according to their work, Good utilization and investment. And it a right for the inheritors not just for being realtives but also includes good utilization, as if the inheritors kept squandering the wealth, the society has the right to restrain them, and meantime they should be well-treated (don't give squanderers your money which the God gave you to observe. And you should spend on them from the money and treat them well, as for orphans you should test them when they become adults and if you felt they are wise enough you should pay them their money: Al-Nesa 6).
Then the Money is an absolute right for the society, so the Islamic speech was addressed for the society to supervise on wealth "don't give squanderers your money" and the whole society is responsible of developing the wealth "which the God gave you to observe". And if the individual utilizes the money well enough, , so he is worthy of it"then pay them their money" and we can notice the difference between "their money" and "his money" in the Koranic verse.
And those who can't earn their living, they should have a certain right in the nation's wealth. The holly Koran confirms the right of mendicant, indigent, poor, and wayfarer people in the individual and official charities, like (those who count the mendicants and indigents right in their money: Al-Maareg 24-25) (give your relative, the poor, and the wayfarer their right :Al-Esraa 26).

(5) The absolute right of the Society in Security:
The main missions of the Islamic State towards its people is administrating justice and providing the inner and the outer Security. And the inner security for society means that the society should have a powerful army that can deter its enemies and prevent them from trespasses (you should prepare every mean of power to deter your enemies and your God's enemies: Al-Anfal 60). And this preparation makes the enemy reconsiders ever making an aggression. And that leads to the prevention of bloodshed.
And this legislation goes along with justice and the fighting legislation in the holly Koran, which commands to fight only in self-defense situations and making the reply for aggression equals to the aggression. (Fight in God's way those who fight with you, and don't trespass, the God don't like aggressor…. Those who trespass on you, you should equally trespass on them: Al-Bakara 190-194). Then the final aim of fighting should be "stopping persecution in religion" the holly Koran said "fight them to prevent persecution, and to make the whole religion for God: Al-Bakarah 193) (fight them to prevent persecution, and to make the whole religion for God: Al-Anfal 39). And the meaning of "make the whole religion for God" is preventing the priesthood, and making people free to choose whatever they wish, so they can't advance any pleas to God at the resurrection day.
So, justice and freedom are the basis of relationship to the outer enemies by establishing a powerful state by the strengths of its people and its army to provide the absolute right of Security for the society. And it is the right of individuals to live in security on the basis of equality in rights and duties, not by giving one man the biggest amounts of protections on the account of other people. The history tells us how was the second Islamic caliphate Omar sleeps under the tree, and how the prophet didn't have any guards to protect him to make a real proof of the equality in security rights for all Muslims.

{2} The Religious State:

All the previous principles were politically lost in the Ommoyan caliphate, and the Abbasyan caliphate legitimate this violation over God's legislation by:

1- Creating fake narrates of the prophet contradicts with the holly Koran.

2- Cancellation some Islamic legislation when it doesn't go with their allegations under the name of "abrogation"-Naskh-, even though the word "Nasakh" in the holly Koran means "wrote and firmed" not "abrogate or cancel"

3- The most important thing is that the Abbasyan State ignored the recording of the real Sunna of the Prophet in preparing his nation and education of its people although the holly Koran mentioned some of these deeds: purifying and educating his people. And these deeds were applied by two ways, the first one was during the Gommaa prayer every week (he made more than 500 unrecorded speech during these prayers), and the other way was during the consultation councils( Al-Nour and Al-Mugadalah sura showed us some aspects of these councils).
Actually the Amowyan caliphate wasn't established on a religious propaganda. It only used the low of Force. So it didn't have to religiously justify its crimes against the prophet's family and Medina and Meka. But the Abbasyan caliphate was established on a religious propaganda (getting contentment from Mohammed's family by appointing one of his grandsons as a caliphate for the Islamic State).

Once, AbdelMalik Ibn Marawan's made a speech at 75 a.h. In Medina, he said "then, I am not the weekend caliphate (means Othman) and I am not the flatterer caliphate (means Moawya) .. So if anyone told me to fear God, I will break his neck".
But the Abbasyan caliphate was established on a religious propaganda (getting contentment from Mohammed's family by appointing one of his grandsons as a caliphate for the Islamic State) but after they established their state they persecuted all others including Ali's son, the Grandchildren of the prophet, with a slight difference. The caliphate had to get a religious justification from his jurists. So it is a low nation. But the low always comes from the caliphate's jurists. Once, the caliphate Abo-Gafar almansor made a speech at Arafa day. He said "O, you people I am the God's sultan in his land. I rule you with his guidance and he made me the keeper of his money, I give or prevent according to his will" so this Abbasyan caliphate ruled with the logic of the Middle Ages where the principle of "the divine right of Kings" were a common fact. And it is the same logic of "Al-Raee wal Raeya" (the shepherd and his sheep) which means that the ruler is a shepherd who owns and leads his sheep, and he is only responsible to God about them. So it is vainly to ask about justice and freedom of belief in this religious States.
The contradiction between citizenship rights in the two states:

If the previous situation is being applied for Muslims in the religious state, so what is the situation of the Non-Muslims?

{1} In the Islamic State:

We will refer first to the concept of (belief) "Eman" in Arabic. The word (belief) in Arabic has two meanings if it came concerning the relation between humans it means "security and peace". So, those who live peacefully and secure are actually "believers" according to the Islamic religion, no matter was their religion as long as they don't rise weapons on each other. And then everybody will come to God at the day of resurrection to judge their differences. And till that day comes, everybody must live in justice, peace and equality, share the same duties and enjoy the same rights. The holly Koran talk in Al-Hag sura about fighting legislation, it mentioned the motives of giving the permission of approving fighting, then it concluded with the legitimate purpose of fighting, which is protecting the worshiphouses of all religions were the name of God is mentioned. (Al-Hag 40)
Then the holly Koran defined the citizenship's concept (Pharaoh has was arrogant in earth, and he divided its people into sects and he persecuted one of them: Al-Kasas 4) the persecuted sect were Israel's sons. And the holly Koran considered them Egyptians even with their different religion and race. So, the Koranic legitimate makes the homeland for all individuals, Meantime the religion is to God only. So the famous saying "Religion for God, and home for all" is an Koranic legislation.
But this Islamic legislation was profaned by the Omoyan state when it prejudged against Non-Arabs (Al-Mawaly) and Gypts , then the Abasyan state prejudged against No-Muslims (Jews and Christians) and prejudged against Non-Sunni Muslims (Shea' and Sofi),they considered the Non Muslins to be a second-class citizens under the name of "Ahl-Alzemma" and they justify this wrong situation.
Finally:
We can shorten this few facts:
1- the Islamic State is not a fancy utopia. It established as state out of nothing during the prophet's era, and its collapse happened after a long struggle and wars till it was able to defeat the Omoyan State in its youth. But the Abasian state came afterwards deceiving Muslims with the slogan of "obtaining satisfaction from Mohammed's people" and re-establishing the Islamic state. But it did not take long before they established their religious state based on distorted religious facts.
2- Although that this distorted fact ruled over most of the Islamic history, but the real Islamic fact still keeps the basis of the Islamic state, and contradicting with the known religious state in West and East.
3- The modern secular states are more close to the Islamic state, but the closest system to the Islamic system is the direct democracy systems in the Switzerland union.

4- The Punishment system in Islam needs a private research in the framework of the Koranic legislation and its differences with the legislation and heritage of the religious states.

Sample 4

The right of women in Islam to work and to be active in the society

http://www.ahl-alquran.com/English/show_article.php?main_id=7118

Qur’an is not the main source of Islamic law for most Muslims.

Muslims are divided into three main sects: Sunni, Shiites and Sufis. The Sunni man made Sharee’a is more prevalent because it is upheld by the two main sects ( Sunni and Sufis )

In the middle ages, Muslim Clerics did the following to manipulate the real Islamic Quranic law:

1. To add something that might contradict the Quran, they fabricated sayings, or (Hadith) and attributed them to Prophet Mohammed, more than two centuries after his death. Those books of Hadith were written in the Abbasside era,( 750- 1258 ) and still the main source of  Sunni Sharee’a until now. For example: ( Book of Malik : Al Mowatta’), ( Book of Al Shafe’ee : Al-UMM), ( Book of Al Bukhari ) and ( Book of Muslim )
2. To abrogate the pure Islamic Quranic laws in the Quranic verses, they claimed they were (Mensoukh) or abrogated.
3. To change the Quranic meanings and terms, they used (Tefseer) and (Ta’weel). As the Quran is preserved and kept pure by Allah, they could not change its written words. So, they changed their meanings and terminology.
4. Justice is the main value in Islam and all the Holy messages came from Allah, including the final message : The Quran: (We sent aforetime our messengers with Clear Signs and sent down with them the Book and the Balance (of Right and Wrong), that men may stand forth in justice; ) (57 : 25  ) . Allah says in the Quran: (Surely Allah enjoins doing justice and doing good (to others), the giving*of charity) to kindred, and He forbids indecency, evil and rebellion; He admonishes you that you may be mindful) (16: 90). Prophet Mohamed was ordered to say: ("I believe in the Book which Allah has sent down; and I am commanded to judge justly between you) (42: 15). So, in light of justice, it is a  must to understand all the details of the Quranic Sharee’a.
5. In different forms of man made Muslims’ Sharee’a, you will find many aspects of injustice , including the rights of woman.

Equality under the law of the Quran

1. Shiites and Sunnis have different versions of Sharee’a. Under Shiite Sharee’a, women get more rights than under the Sunni Sharee’a, like in divorce. The Shiites idolize Fatima, the daughter of Mohammed, and for this reason they give women more rights than Sunni clerks do.
2. The Sunni Sharee’a represents the mighty power of Muslim Empires (Umayyads, Abbasids, and Ottoman empires) and their medieval culture , even towards women’s rights.. Under the mighty Muslim rule of Caliphs, women at that time were treated as second class citizens.
3. As example, Sahih Al Bukhari – most sacred text of Hadith for Sunni and Sufi Muslims - attributes – falsely –to Prophet Mohammad the Hadith saying “Women lack mind and religious attitude.” 
4. Accordingly a woman should be( sponsored, supported, protected) by a man – father, husband, brother, even her son – for travels, and has to get his permission to work. Generally, she is prohibited in many ways to work.  Some women whose husbands allow them to work do not allow them to have control over money. Some give a working woman wages less than a man who is doing the same work. Some prejudge the woman her right to supervise men, if she is qualified for promotion. This contradicts Qur’an and its real Islamic laws and its values of equality and justice.
5. Qur’an is gender-neutral. According to the Qur’an, however, women and men are equally included in many terms in the Quranic terminology, like:
6.  “You who believe,” (O ye who believe! Fasting is prescribed to you as it was prescribed to those before you, that ye may (learn) to be God fearing) (2: 183) ( O ye who believe! When the call is proclaimed to prayer on Friday (the Day of Assembly), hasten earnestly to the Remembrance of Allah, and leave off business (and traffic): That is best for you if ye but knew) ( 62 : 9  )
7.   “People,”( O ye people! Adore your Guardian-Lord, who created you and those who came before you, that ye may have the chance to learn righteousness  ) (2 : 21 ) 
8. Parents”( but if he has no child and (only) his two parents inherit him, then his mother shall have the third;) ( 4 : 11) 
9. Children of Adam(O Children of Adam! wear your beautiful apparel at every time and place of prayer: eat and drink: But waste not by excess, for Allah loves not the wasters) (7 : 31 )
10.  Servants of Almighty Allah (And the servants of (Allah) Most Gracious are those who walk on the earth in humility, and when the ignorant address them, they say, "Peace) ( 25 : 63  ) .
11. Moreover, the Arabic word (Zawjah) means wife, while the Arabic (Zawj) means husband. But in the Quranic term, it is only one word for husband and wife: (Zawj). So, according to the holy Quran: Zawj is for wife in this verse :( And if ye wish to exchange one wife (Zawj) for another and ye have given unto one of them a sum of money (however great), take nothing from it. Would ye take it by the way of calumny and open wrong?) ( 4 : 20 )( In what your wives (Azwaj ) leave, your share is a half, if they leave no child) ( 4 : 12 ).
12. ( Zawj ) is used for husband as well in this verse :( So if a husband ( Zawj) divorces his wife (irrevocably), He cannot, after that, re-marry her until after she has married another husband and he(The second husband) has divorced her)  (2 : 230 ).
13. Sometimes, Zawj means female and male , husband and wife together : (And one of His signs is that He created mates ( Azwajen ) for you from yourselves that you may find rest in them, and He put between you love and compassion; most surely there are signs in this for a people who reflect) ( 30 : 21)
14.  There is no word (Zawjah) for wife, in the Quran at all.
15. There are many examples in the verses that include laws/jurisprudence. Total equality between man and woman.
16. Generally , about equality ,Allah says in the Quran : (O people! be careful of (your duty to) your Lord, Who created you from a single being and created its mate of the same (kind) and spread from these two, many men and women  ) (4 : 1 ).
17. About the orphan, male or female, He says (And test the orphans until they attain puberty; then if you find in them maturity of intellect, deliver to them their property, and do not consume it extravagantly and hastily, lest they attain full age; and whoever is rich, let him abstain altogether, and whoever is poor, let him eat reasonably; then when you deliver to them their property, call witnesses in their presence; and Allah is enough as a Reckoner).
18.  About the same equal right He says : (Men shall have a portion of what the parents and the near relatives leave, and women shall have a portion of what the parents and the near relatives leave, whether there is little or much of it; a stated portion) (4 : 7 ) . All of this in one chapter.
19. About the same duties and obligations Allah says : (So their Lord accepted their prayer: That I will not waste the work of a worker among you, whether male or female, the one of you being from the other; they, therefore, who fled and were turned out of their homes and persecuted in My cause and who fought and were slain, I will most certainly cover their evil deeds, and I will most certainly make them enter gardens beneath which rivers flow; a reward from Allah, and with Allah is yet better reward.  ) (3 : 195) .
20. About the equality among all humans regardless of gender, ethnicity, color … Allah says: (O mankind! We created you from a single (pair) of a male and a female, and made you into nations and tribes, that ye may know each other (not that ye may despise (each other). Verily the most honored of you in the sight of Allah is (he who is) the most righteous of you. And Allah has full knowledge and is well acquainted (with all things).  ) ( 49 : 13 )

Rules of inheritance:

Difference between justice and equality:

Suppose that I have ten thousand dollars and I entered a classroom, and divided the money among all the students equally – there is equality but not justice. Qur’an balances equality and justice.

Man has to pay dowry:

(And give women their dowries as a free gift) (4: 4), He has to provide all her needs as a wife, and after divorce (O Prophet! when you divorce women, divorce them for~ their prescribed time, and calculate the number of the days prescribed, and be careful of (your duty to) Allah, your Lord. Do not drive them out of their houses, nor should they themselves go forth, unless they commit an open indecency; and these are the limits of Allah, and whoever goes beyond the limits of Allah, he indeed does injustice to his own self. You do not know what Allah may after that bring about .  So when they have reached their prescribed time, then retain them with kindness or separate from them with kindness, and call to witness two just men from amongst you, and give upright testimony for Allah. With that is admonished, he who believes in Allah and the latter day; and whoever is careful of (his duty to) Allah, He will make for him a way out, Lodge them where you lodge according to your means, and do not injure them in order that you may cause them harm; and if they are pregnant, spend on them until they lay down their burden; then if they suckle(your offspring) for you, give them their recompense and enjoin one another among you to do good; and if you disagree, another (woman) shall suckle for him.  ) (65: 1- 2 - 6).

So, sons get double of inheritance share that daughters get. This is the only case that there is a difference between a son and a daughter. Suppose a son dies and his parents inherit him, father and mother are equal: (Allah enjoins you concerning your children: The male shall have the equal of the portion of two females; then if they are more than two females, they shall have two-thirds of what the deceased has left, and if there is one, she shall have the half; and as for his parents, each of them shall have the sixth of what he has left if he has a child, but if he has no child and (only) his two parents inherit him, then his mother shall have the third; but if he has brothers, then his mother shall have the sixth after (the payment of) a bequest he may have bequeathed or a debt;) (4: 11)   

However, every Muslim has to make a will saying that daughter (for example) should inherit more than son, etc., with society as a monitor of justice. (It is prescribed, when death approaches any of you, if he leave any goods that he make a bequest to parents and next of kin, according to reasonable usage; this is due from the Allah-fearing.  Whoever then alters it after he has heard it, the sin of it then is only upon those who alter it; surely Allah is Hearing, Knowing But he who fears an inclination to a wrong course or an act of disobedience on the part of the testator, and effects an agreement between the parties, there is no blame on him. Surely Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.) (2 : 180 – 182 ).

Right of divorce

Right of man to divorce his wife – Qur’an says it is very complicated. Divorce isn’t the end of marriage – it is the last step of conciliation that will be done under testimony of two witnesses: ((O Prophet! when you divorce women, divorce them for~ their prescribed time, and calculate the number of the days prescribed, and be careful of (your duty to) Allah, your Lord. Do not drive them out of their houses, nor should they themselves go forth, unless they commit an open indecency; and these are the limits of Allah, and whoever goes beyond the limits of Allah, he indeed does injustice to his own self. You do not know what Allah may after that bring about.  So when they have reached their prescribed time, then retain them with kindness or separate from them with kindness, and call to witness two just men from amongst you, and give upright testimony for Allah. With that is admonished he who believes in Allah and the latter day; and whoever is careful of (his duty to) Allah, He will make for him a way out.  ) (research about this in Cairo, appears on our Arabic website:

http://www.ahl-alquran.com/arabic/show_article.php?main_id=59

 A Sunni man has the right to divorce his wife by only uttering the words “You are divorced”. BUT in Shiite law there must be two witnesses present for divorce to hold true, more merciful than Sunni.

Qur’an talks about right of woman to divorce her husband by giving him back he gave her in dowry, under monitoring of society : (Divorce may be (pronounced) twice, then keep (them) in good fellowship or let (them) go with kindness; and it is not lawful for you to take any part of what you have given them, unless both fear that they cannot keep within the limits of Allah; then if you fear that they cannot keep within the limits of Allah, there is no blame on them for what she gives up to become free thereby. These are the limits of Allah, so do not exceed them and whoever exceeds the limits of Allah those are the unjust   ) (2: 229).

In Egypt, they tried to make this a law, but the Sunni Muslim brotherhood rejected the right of a woman to divorce her husband.

Women as witness

Woman is equal to man as witness in everything, but not in the oral testimony in the contracting debts. It has nothing to do with the written testimony:

Allah says :( O you who believe! when you deal with each other in contracting a debt for a fixed time, then write it down; and let a scribe write it down between you in fairness; and the scribe should not refuse to write as Allah has taught him, so he should write; and let him who owes the debt dictate, and he should be careful of (his duty to) Allah, his Lord, and not diminish anything from it; but if he who owes the debt is unsound in understanding, or weak, or (if) he is not able to dictate himself, let his guardian dictate with fairness; and call in to witness from among your men two witnesses; but if there are not two men, then one man and two women from among those whom you choose to be witnesses, so that if one of the two errs, the second of the two may remind the other; ) ( 2 : 282 )

Right of women to work / choose work / equal compensation

Right to travel–

Qur’an talks about right to travel and seeking means of living for all humans, men and woman on basis of equality and opportunities for all the seekers and searchers. Allah says about this earth: (And He placed in it mountains above its surface and He blessed it therein and made therein its foods, in four periods: alike for the seekers.  ) (41: 10).

Allah orders all human , male and female to walk the earth looking for means of living : (He it is Who made the earth smooth for you, therefore go about in the spacious sides thereof, and eat of His sustenance, and to Him is the return after death.) (67: 15)

More over, the woman in Islam is ordered to immigrate like man in the cause of God to avoid religious persecution. If it is hard to travel, permission was given to shorten prayer if there is a real danger ( 4 : 101 ). So, the woman who is able to immigrate and refuses will be put in hell fire:  (Surely (as for) those whom the angels cause to die while they are unjust to their selves, they shall say: In what state were you? They shall say: We were weak in the earth. They shall say: Was not Allah's earth spacious, so that you should have migrated therein? So to those, their abode is hell, and it is an evil resort . Except those who are (really) weak and oppressed - men, women, and children - who have no means in their power, nor (a guide-post) to their way.So those, it may be, that Allah will pardon them, and Allah is oft Pardoning, oft Forgiving) ( 4 : 97 : 99 ).

Early Muslims in Mecca were persecuted, so many of them men and women had to escape to Ethiopia twice, and then the third one was to Al Medina. Some Muslim women immigrated leaving behind their infidel husbands, some girls immigrated independently for the cause. So, they were educated to be activists from the beginning. They established with men the first (and the last) real Islamic state with Prophet Mohammed. Islamic state consists of a deal/contract among individuals who agree to form or create states – women have a role.

Sura ( 60 : 10 : 12 ) gives more details : (O you who believe! when believing women come to you flying, then examine them; Allah knows best their faith; then if you find them to be believing women, do not send them back to the unbelievers, neither are these (women) lawful for them, nor are those (men) lawful for them, and give them what they have spent; and no blame attaches to you in marrying them when you give them their dowries; and hold not to the ties of marriage of unbelieving women, and ask for what you have spent, and let them ask for what they have spent. That is Allah's judgment; He judges between you, and Allah is All Knowing, Wise. And if anything (out of the dowries) of your wives has passed away from you to the unbelievers, then your turn comes, give to those whose wives have gone away the like of what they have spent, and be careful of (your duty to) Allah in Whom you believe. O Prophet! when believing women come to you giving you a pledge that they will not associate none with Allah, and will not steal, and will not commit fornication, and will not kill their children, and will not bring a calumny which they have forged of themselves, and will not disobey you in what is good, accept their pledge, and ask forgiveness for them from Allah; surely Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.)

 Two centuries after Mohammad’s death, they mentioned a woman who immigrated alone twice, without husband or parents, independently from Mecca to Ethiopia (Al Habashah) and to Al Medina. Women immigrated alongside men, to escape persecution, to their own Islamic state in the time of Prophet Mohammed, it was unlimited freedom of speech, belief and political opposition.

The ardent opposition in that time was named hypocrites. The hypocritical men and women used to compete with the believer women and men in the streets of Al Medina, playing different discourse; the believers advocated good and advised against evil, while the hypocrites advocated evil and forbade good. : (The hypocritical men and the hypocritical women are all alike; they enjoin evil and forbid good and withhold their hands; they have forsaken Allah, so He has forsaken them; surely the hypocrites are the transgressors.  )( And the believers, men and women, are protecting friends one of another; they enjoin the right and forbid the wrong, and they establish worship and they pay the poor-due, and they obey Allah and His messenger.     ) (9: 67 & 71)

Sura 9 – Qur’an talks about Al Medina in the time of Mohammad – how the hypocritical women and men are very active in the field of evil – ordering the evils and prohibiting the good things. At the same time, believer men and women were active against that, ordering the good things and rejecting evil, advising others to do good and not to do bad. In the time of Mohammad there was unlimited freedom of speech and belief. Believing women and Non-believing women enjoyed freedom of speech as they wanted, good or bad.

Worship: Controversy between Qur’an, Sharee’a and Fiqh.

Women actually were ordered to join the public Friday prayers just like men. Even in early writings and tradition there is talk of women sharing the mosque in the time of Prophet Muhammad. In the Quran, there is an indication that woman used to retreat ( E’tekaf ) in the night of Ramadan, but not to have  sexual intercourse in this case : (but do not have sex  contact with your wives while you are in retreat in the mosques )( 2 : More details

 Every kind of work is available for earning means of living or to work for God. It is all the same because it is all in the name of God.

Woman is included in every kind of work, in worship and in means of living.

For more details:

Immigration is suffering and hardship : (And whoever migrate in Allah's way, he will find in the earth many hardships and abundant resources, and whoever goes forth from his house migrating to Allah and His Messenger, and then death overtakes him, his reward is indeed with Allah and Allah is Forgiving, Merciful) ( 4 :100 )

In Immigration is rewards: (  And those who migrate for Allah's sake after they are oppressed, We will most certainly give them a good abode in the world, and the reward of the hereafter is certainly much greater, did they but know . : Those who are patient and on their Lord do they rely.) ( 16 : 41 : 42  )

In immigration: is punishment :(Surely (as for) those whom the angels cause to die while they are unjust to their selves, they shall say: In what state were you? They shall say: We were weak in the earth. They shall say: Was not Allah's earth spacious, so that you should have migrated therein? So those it is, whose abode is hell, and it is an evil resort . Except the weak from among the men and the children who have not, in their power, the means nor can they find a way (to escape); As for such, it may be that Allah will pardon them. Allah is ever Clement, Forgiving.  : So those, it may be, Allah will pardon them, and Allah is Pardoning, Forgiving.  )( 4 : 97 : 99)

In Fighting in the cause of Allah;

General orders for all men and women :

(And fight in the way of Allah with those who fight with you, and do not exceed the limits, surely Allah does not love those who exceed the limits) (2: 190)

General excuses :(No blame is there on the blind, nor is there blame on the lame, nor on one ill (if he joins not the war): But he that obeys Allah and his Messenger,- (Allah) will admit him to Gardens beneath which rivers flow; and he who turns back, (Allah) will punish him with a grievous Penalty  ) (48 : 17 )

General rules for men and women according to their deeds and behavior generally:

For the bad deeds and behavior :(whoever does evil, he shall be requited with it) (4: 123)

For the good deeds and behavior : (:And whoever does good deeds whether male or female and he (or she) is a believer-- these shall enter the garden, and they shall not be dealt with a jot unjustly  ) ( 4 : 124 ) .

For more details that confirm equality between male and female:

(So their Lord accepted their prayer: That I will not waste the work of a worker among you, whether male or female, the one of you being from the other; they, therefore, who fled and were turned out of their homes and persecuted in My way and who fought and were slain, I will most certainly cover their evil deeds, and I will most certainly make them enter gardens beneath which rivers flow; a reward from Allah, and with Allah is yet better reward. )(3.195)

 (Whoever does good whether male or female and is a believer, We will most certainly make him live a happy life, and We will most certainly give them their reward for the best of what they did.  ) (16 : 97 )

(Whoever does an evil, he shall not be recompensed (with aught) but the like of it, and whoever does good, whether male or female, and he is a believer, these shall enter the garden, in which they shall be given sustenance without measure) (40 : 40 )

People misunderstand – virgins of paradise. According to Qur’an when people are re-created they are re-created according to their own deeds. All the “winners” on Day of Judgment will be one gender and will be rewarded in the same way – virgins – according to their good deeds.

So, it is about the deeds and the behavior and the work, not about gender.

Right to equal compensation –

Coming to work itself is the issue regardless of who is the one working. When you do some work you are paid for the work itself.

No restrictions at all on the exercise of these rights.

Accordingly, the good example for good people is woman, and bad example for people is also woman:

(Allah sets forth an example to those who disbelieve the wife of Noah and the wife of Lot: they were both under two of Our righteous servants, but they acted treacherously towards them so they availed them naught against Allah, and it was said: Enter both the fire with those who enter. And Allah sets forth an example to those who believe the wife of Pharaoh when she said: My Lord! Build for me a house with Thee in the garden and deliver me from Pharaoh and his doing, and deliver me from the unjust people And Mary, daughter of 'Imran, whose body was chaste, therefore We breathed therein something of Our Spirit. And she put faith in the words of her Lord and His scriptures, and was of the obedient) ( 66 : 10 - 12 )

Here, you find two women who were supposed to be good because they were wives of two messengers of God (Wife of Noah and wife of Lot) but they acted independently against their husbands, so, they became a bad example for all disbelievers.

On the other side, there was Pharaoh of Moses, the worst tyrant, but his wife chose to be a good believer, so she becomes an example for all believers along with Mary the mother of Jesus Christ. Two good women from different background, but they chose the right path and become an example of the good people to mankind.

About Mary (Meryem daughter of Imran and the mother of Jesus, Allah said: (And when the angels said: O Meryem! surely Allah has chosen you and purified you and chosen you above the women of the worldO Meryem! keep obedient to your Lord and humble yourself, and bow down with those who bow)(3: 42: 43).

Working woman in Quranic stories:

Story of Moses:

In the first part of the Quranic story of Moses as a child, women played the primary part. The first part is for the mother and sister and Pharaoh’s wife: (When We revealed to your mother what was revealed Saying: Put him into a chest, then cast it down into the river, then the river shall throw him on the shore; there shall take him up one who is an enemy to Me and enemy to him, and I cast down upon you compassion from Me, and that you might be brought up before My eyes. When your sister went and said: Shall I direct you to one who will take charge of him? So We brought you back to your mother, that her eye might be delighted and she should not grieve) (20: 38 – 40)

For more details: (And We revealed to Musa's mothers, saying: suckle him, then when you fear for him, cast him into the river and do not fear nor grieve; surely We will bring him back to you and make him one of the messengers. : Then the people of Pharaoh picked him up (from the river): (It was intended) that (Moses) should be to them an adversary and a cause of sorrow: for Pharaoh and Haman and (all) their hosts were men of sin. And Pharaoh’s wife said: A joy of the eye, for me and for you; do not slay him; maybe he will be useful for us, or we may take him for a son; and they did not perceive. And the heart of Musa's mother was void (from anxiety), she would have almost disclosed it, had We not strengthened her heart so that she might be of the believers. And she said to his sister: Follow him up. So she watched him from a distance while they did not perceive. And we ordained that he refused suckle at first, until (His sister came up and) said: "Shall I point out to you the people of a house that will nourish and bring him up for you and be sincerely attached to him?".. : So We gave him back to his mother that her eye might be delighted, and that she might no grieve, and that she might know that the promise of Allah is true, but most of them do not know.) (82 : 7 -13  ).

Here, we find some hidden observations:

• There is no indication as to the father of Moses, while he was alive. All the rules are for women.
• Women here were working their nature work towards the child, except his sister who followed her child brother risking and endangering her life.
• There was reference to the women who tried to suckle the child.

In the second part, when he became an adult, women played the main part also when he escaped to Medyan :

(And when he turned his face towards Medyan, he said: Maybe my Lord will guide me on the right path. : And when he came to the water of Medyan, he found there a group of men watering their flocks, and he found besides them two women keeping back (their flocks). He said: What is the matter with you? They said: We cannot water until the shepherds take away (their sheep) from the water, and our father is a very old man. : So he watered (their sheep) for them, then went back to the shade and said: My Lord! surely I stand in need of whatever good Thou send down to me.Then one of the two women came to him walking bashfully. She said: My father invites you that he may give you the reward of your having watered for us. So when he came to him and gave to him the account, he said: Fear not, you are secure from the unjust people. Said one of them: O my father! employ him, surely the best of those that you can employ is the strong man, the faithful one. : He said: I desire to marry one of these two daughters of mine to you on condition that you should serve me for eight years; but if you complete ten, it will be of your own free will, and I do not wish to be hard to you; if Allah please, you will find me one of the good. He said: This shall be (an agreement) between me and you; whichever of the two terms I fulfill, there shall be no wrongdoing to me; and Allah is a witness of what we say.) (28: 22 - 28).

Here, we find some indications:

1 – Women do the hard work of men to help the old father.

2 –One Woman has a strong personality and character to give piece of advice to her father to hire Moses and also has a good understanding of that strange man ( Moses ).

The wife of Moses accompanied him in his journey back to Egypt, and In Sinai Moses was chosen by Allah to be  messenger of Allah to Pharaoh, to save the children of Israel: (So when Musa had fulfilled the term, and he journeyed with his family, he perceived on this side of the mountain a fire. He said to his family: Wait, I have seen a fire, maybe I will bring to you from it some news or a swath of fire, so that you may warm yourselves.) ( 28 : 29 ). (And has the story of Musa come to you? When he saw a fire, he said to his family: Stop, for surely I see a fire, haply I may bring to you there-from a live coal or find guidance at the fire). (20:9 - 10).

Because of the greatness of his mother, Aaron  used to call his brother Moses ( Son of my mother.: (He said: O son of my mother! seize me not by my beard nor by my head; surely I was afraid lest you should say: You have caused a division among the children of Israel and not waited for my word. )(20: 94).

Comparing Pharaoh and Queen of Sheba:

 The Quran does not object to the fact that a woman was a ruler. She was provided every requisite and had a great throne. But the objection was that she and her people worshiped the sun. For that reason king Solomon sent her a message inviting her to embrace Islam. He directed the message to her because she represented her people. That also shows that her reign was considered lawful. From the descriptions in the Quran she was well revered by her chiefs as she was asking their advice in the matter of this message. They were all waiting for her decision believing in her and telling her that they would obey any decision she takes. She was wise enough not to answer Solomon’s letter by waging war or by making it a personal matter but she thought of the well being of her people and how they would suffer from such a war. She was wise to say "if kings enter a town they spoil it and humiliate the most respected ones in it." True because lands have only been spoiled but by tyrant mindless rulers that we still see around us. They would bow to stronger powers and oppress their own people. The queen of Sheba proved her intelligence by sending Solomon a present just to buy herself more time to decide what to do. At the end she proves more intelligent when she embraced Islam and saved herself and her people in this life and in the hereafter and she said "O my Lord I have indeed wronged my soul: I do (now) submit (in Islam), with Solomon, to the Lord of the Worlds".

Look at details in the Quran: (27: 23 - 44).

So, in the Quranic stories we find two major examples of tyrant rulers; one is a man that is Pharaoh and the other is a woman that is the queen of Sheba. And even though the story of Pharaoh was repeated several times the story of the queen of Sheba is only mentioned once. Similarities between Pharaoh and the queen of Sheba They were both tyrant who enjoyed total power. When Pharaoh had total control over Egypt’s wealth and army he made a clear statement saying "O my people! Does not the dominion of Egypt belong to me, (witness) these streams flowing underneath me, what see ye not then?" (43:51). The Pharaohs’ history confirms that the pharaohs had complete power over politics, wealth and military forces especially after they controlled the feudal lords along the riverbanks. They established a central power that would not function without the orders of the "president"!! Similarly the queen of Sheba was the autocratic holder of wealth and power. In the Quran it says "I found (there) a woman ruling over them and provided with every requisite; and she has a magnificent throne." (27:23), and her chiefs confirm her autonomous power by saying "we are endued with strength, and given to vehement war: but the command is with thee; so consider what thou wilt command." (27:33).

 God considers Pharaoh to be representing the Egyptians just as the Queen of Sheba was representing her people. Pharaoh was sent two prophets from God, Moses and his brother Aaron, they were asked to "speak to him mildly; perchance he may take warning or fear (Allah)" (20:44) and in a similar way the queen of Sheba was sent a message from the prophet Solomon since she represented her people. Although there are great similarities between these two rulers yet their reactions were completely different, and so were the destinies of their people. Moses and Aaron’s main mission was to deliver the people of Israel from the Pharaonic persecution and to take Pharaoh Permission to them out of Egypt. They were ordered to say "verily we are messengers sent by thy Lord; send forth, therefore, the Children of Israel with us, and afflict them not."(20:47) God had asked his prophet to ask in a gentle and peaceful fashion as they said "with a sign, indeed, have we come from thy Lord! And peace to all who follow guidance!" (20:47) And Moses was endowed with miracles to convince Pharaoh that he was a true prophet. Pharaoh was perfectly capable of granting Moses’ wish and allowing the Hebrews whom he hated, to leave. He had nothing to fear. On the one hand his army was far too great to consider the Israelites a threat, and on the other hand the persecution had weakened the Israelites to the extent that it took them after that forty years to gather to build up strength in order to enter Palestine. Pharaoh’s pride got in the way and he refused to let those weakened people go with the two prophets. As a result Pharaoh and his army drowned in the sea, sent to punishment until judgment day. The reason for that was the tyranny that leads rulers to assume divinity as he said "I but point out to you that which I see (myself); Nor do I guide you but to the path of right" (40:29) And because of that tyranny the destruction reached Pharaoh’s historical signature "And we leveled to the ground the Great Works and fine buildings which pharaoh and his people erected (with such pride). We took the Children of Israel (with safety) across the sea."(7:137,138).

 The queen of Sheba’s situation with the prophet Solomon was different. For Solomon was a prophet king appointed by God. And from this position he sent her a message inviting her to embrace Islam- and Islam is devoting your heart and soul to God and living in peace with others, and this is the meaning in all God’s messages- and Solomon’s message to the queen could have hurt her pride, but when she read the message she turned to her chiefs saying " Ye chiefs! Here is delivered to me a letter worthy of respect. It is from Solomon, and it is (as follows): ‘in the name of Allah, Most Gracious Most Merciful: Be ye not arrogant against me, but come to me in submission (to the true religion).’ “(27:30, 31) so even though she has full authority, she discussed the matter openly with her chiefs and read the message to them and described it as ‘a letter worthy of respect.’ That was a clear sign from her so that they would not respond negatively and vote for retaliation. And with the same calm politics she was able to reach a happy ending while Pharaoh and his people were resting at the bottom of the sea with their illusory politics. Here is the difference between a tyrant man and a tyrant woman. There is no doubt that a tyrant woman has less animosity and belligerence than a tyrant man.

Muslim woman in real life in the Medieval Age after the death of Mohammed

In the first century, even after Prophet Mohammad – women were very active on both sides –the side of Muslims and the side of other worshippers. Ayesha, the widow of Prophet Mohammed was involved in the political life to the extent that she was a leader of a Muslim army against another one. This has happened when Muslims – in contradiction to the Quran – invaded other countries and the result was civil war between Muslims. Muslim Women were part of those movements. Even in civil wars, women were part of battles.   This confirms that teachings of the Qur’an were applied at the time of Mohammad, but after his death, this dynamic movement went the wrong way.

 These concepts were ignored and abrogated – why?

  Muslims failed because of dictatorship that was the culture of the Middle Ages.The Qur’an is against dictatorship. Details are in my book (Democratic Islam and Muslim tyranny :

http://www.ahl-alquran.com/English/show_article.php?main_id=1846

Placing women in a second degree position was also main aspect of this middle aged culture, so  Muslims in that time responded to that culture of their time and ignored the real Islam. More over, they treated this contradiction between their actual life and the Quran by creating their new human made religion, like Sunnah, Shiite and Sufism.

Why didn’t women at that time protest that their rights were being taken away?

In the second half of the first century Arab Muslims established their empire from the borders of China to the south of Spain. They were at their peak. Women coming from all over – India, Central Europe, North Africa – as slaves. Men at that time had wives, and a great number of slave women who were more beautiful than Arab and free women (In the eyes of Arab men). So, women at that time and for many centuries were of two kinds  1)- The very beautiful : were slaves, served as second class citizens, mastered songs and dancing, 2)- free women, Arabic women, struggled to keep their husband’s attention, struggle was not for political agenda but for personal agenda. Women were competing against each other. However, Muslim woman in that time enjoyed more rights than women in the West. More details in Adam Metz book about the Islamic civilization in the fourth Hijri century.

Finally

Wahhabism has revived and restored the most fanatic Sunni sect in Muslim Medieval Age history and brought it to our modern times in the name of Islam. So, Islam becomes accused wrongly of persecuting women.

Sample 5

Reform the Islamic Schools in the U.S. to confirm and to conform to the American values and the Human Rights culture

http://www.ahl-alquran.com/English/show_article.php?main_id=7473

   Reform the Roots:

It is useless to try to reform the Islamic schools here without reforming their Islamic roots in the Middle East, the Wahabi faith of the Saudi State, and Al Azhar, the most powerful seminary in the Muslim world.

The deep roots of contradiction between Islam as a religion and Muslims as a people, who have their own human-made history, culture and political agenda, began after the Prophet Mohammed’s death. His mighty tribe, Quraysh, used the name of Islam to invade and occupy most of the known world in the seventh and the eighth centuries. To establish their empire, they distorted the Islamic Jihad, a word which originally meant to fig fight just to defend your country, and altered its meaning through the transgression of their actions against peaceful people. In the Quran, God said, “And fight in the cause of God those who are fighting you, and do not transgress the limit, for God love not the transgressors.”(2:190)

They attributed– falsely –a saying of the prophet Mohammed after his death: “I was commanded to fight the peoples until they say there is no God but one God and I am his messenger.” The fanatic Muslims, until now, believed in this Saying [Hadeeth] because it established the roots of terrorist religious culture. In favor of this Hadeeth they ignore more than 500 Quranic verses, which establish the unlimited right of freedom of speech and belief, and more than 70 Quranic verses that advocate peace as the real face of Islam.

In disobeying the real Islamic values of peace, tolerance, justice and freedom, the old Muslims fought each other for the vanity of this life in their famous great civil war, just three decades after Mohammed’s death.

After becoming different military parties, each party tried to justify its way by distorting the Quranic meanings and attributing false sayings to the prophet Mohammed. Thus, the political military parties became religious cults and sects, as each one of them had its own tradition. All of them were in harmony with their culture of the Middle Ages and its values of holy war, religious persecution and theocracy.

The Muslims are still enslaved by their Middle Aged culture, while the West has established a new secular culture. Al Azhar and the Wahabi Saudi cult, with their influence inside the Muslim World, have made it nearly impossible to reform the different aspects of Muslim religious life from inside Islam.

After September11, it has become imperative to reform Al Azhar and the Wahabi faith, not only to reform the Islamic schools in the U.S. but also to save the Saudi State itself, Egypt, Middle East and world peace.

How to reform the roots

It’s easy to reform Islam from inside the religion because Muslims believe in the Quran, as the Holy God’s final preserved Scripture. If we read the Quran according to its terminology and codes, it will be very easy to understand Islam as a religion of peace, tolerance, freedom, justice and human rights. It will be easy, then, to prove this contradiction between Islam and the religious terrorist culture of certain Muslims, proving their real enmity to Islam, exposing them as criminals. This has been my argument in the Middle East for 25 years. It did work in spite of persecution. That persecution itself proves that they have only power, and lack of the real Islamic argument. Their power and influence defend only their lack of Islamic evidence.

 It’s not a problem to face them intellectually from inside Islam, providing the forgotten Islamic values which are the same as many American and Human Rights values.  The challenge will be to find whom it may concern, and respond in the U.S. and the West.  In the first section of this research, after a brief historic glance, I present two proposals to reform the Wahabi faith and Al Azhar.

The Saudi crown familyhas to reform its Wahabi dogma to survive in this century, as it must to choose either its Wahabi faith or its Saudi State. In this respect, the Saudi family has to: 1- Uphold the first Islamic value, the freedom of speech and freedom of belief, giving the unlimited freedom of thought and belief for all people in the Saudi kingdom. This will be a golden opportunity for the Shiites and the Sufis and the Quranic scholars to practice of their beliefs, and to discuss the Wahabi dogma. 2- Give equal opportunities for all the different Muslim cults and other intellectuals inside the kingdom in the media and in all different aspects of religious, cultural and social life. 3- To maintain a real, but graduated reform in the political, economic and social fields. 4- To encourage and help free thinkers and intellectuals in the entire Muslim World to participate in this reform through their writings and insights.

The Egyptian regimehas to complete the reform of the 1030 years old Al Azhar. Instead of being a religious Vatican, Al Azhar must become a real Muslim civil establishment, as there are no religious authorities or any religious foundation in Islam. It needs to reform the Egyptian legislation to eliminate all the rules which give Al Azhar the authority to control the cultural and religious life of Muslims, and to open its university and education for all Egyptians equally. Mainly, this would include providing the same opportunity for Egyptian Christians as all other non-Muslims to attend its free education. While Al Azhar gives free education for Muslims only, its funds come from all Egyptian tax payers, including Christians.

The main reform would be to terminate Al Azhar curriculums and courses that belong to the advocating of superstitions and terrorism of the Middle Ages, and substitute them with  real Islamic curriculums that come directly from the Holy Quran. These new curricula would be written by free Muslim thinkers. In light of the Quran and its terminology and codes, these new curricula will discuss the contradiction between Muslim traditions and the religion of Islam. In this way, al Azhar will present itself as an updated Islamic seminary, serving Islam and the real interest of Muslims in this century and the next.

The Reform of Al Azhar should be accompanied by the reform of the Egyptian regime, politically and economically. By reforming Al Azhar and the Wahabi Saudi cult, the Islamic schools in the U.S. and in the West can also be reformed.

Reform The Islamic Schools in the U.S.

These schools reflect the dominant Muslim Wahabi culture, not only by concentrating on hating non- Muslims, but by retaining the values of the culture of the Middle Ages. As a result, these schools are ignoring the great values of Islam, which are the same values of Western Civilization. It’s useless to reform their curriculum; the only way towards reform is to present to them alternative Islamic subjects, the neglected Islamic values of Peace, tolerance, justice, freedom and democracy. This section of research has these subjects as available materials for these schools, calling on the schools to reconsider this in their teaching.

After incorporating this into the research proposal, the next step is to present these written subjects to the Islamic schools and discuss the real need to change their courses accordingly. If they refuse, then it will be a unique opportunity to discuss this issue in the public eye of the media.  A public debate may disclose some absent facts concerning the secret relationship between some Islamic schools and other fanatic organizations in the Muslim World.

In such a debate, they will be faced with these important questions: If you really believe that Islam is the religion of great values, why do you ignore this in your courses? If you claim you did not have the ability to write it in your courses, and information to this end has now become available, why do you continue to refuse to uphold it in your courses? If you are against the fanatic culture, why do you keep it in your courses?

The final goal of this research is to make these Islamic schools serving Islam compatible with the United States nation in its war against terrorism. However, it’s not enough to reform the Islamic schools here. Islamic mosques in the U.S must be reformed to serve Islam and not the fanatics who continue to hijack Islam and American freedom of speech. This, however, is another important proposal.