Hospitaller:
What he said about Catholics does not concern me.
Well it ought to, because you should have some worries about perpetuating 19th-century Protestant xenophobia.
Hospitaller:
To begin with, I’ve established that *Jihad *is first and foremost warfare against non-muslims,
That’s not what I was disputing. Actually you didn’t prove that either–you only proved that one fourteenth-century figure gave that as the primary meaning. I’m not going to tell Muslims that they have to agree with that figure, or even with the consensus of their own tradition. It’s their religion. Clearly there’s been a strand of Muslim thought that emphasizes the internal struggle against evil as the “greater jihad,” and as a non-Muslim I applaud this.
But this isn’t what we were arguing about. The part of the Adams quote I’m challenging is the claim that jihad must be waged against all who deny that Muhammad is the Prophet. My understanding of Islamic tradition is that opinions differ, but that the general consensus historically was that jihad was not obligatory unless Islam was threatened, but that extending the rule of shari’a was always in principle a good thing to do.
The caliph fights all other people until they become Muslim . . . because they are not a people of the Book, nor honored as such, and are not permitted to settle with paying the poll tax (jizya) (though according to the Hanafi school, peoples of all other religions, even idol worshippers, are permitted to live under the protection of the Islamic state if they either become Muslim or agree to pay the poll tax, the sole exceptions to which are apostates from Islam and idol-worshippers who are Arabs, neither of whom has any choice but becoming Muslim (p. 603, o9.9).
You have omitted part of your quote, so I don’t know what the antecedent of “they are not a people of the Book” is. That’s rather important, don’t you think? I gather that probably the reference is to “idol worshippers.” As it stands, the first part of your quote does not make sense. Your use of ellipses to omit key information borders on dishonesty, because you seem to be trying to give the impression that the antecedent of “they” is “all other people,” and that “all other people” refer to all non-Muslims. If that isn’t what the whole passage says, you are guilty of seriously distorting your source.
The only part of your quote that is coherent is the Hanafi school’s opinion, which flatly contradicts Adams’s quote. Even idol worshippers are allowed to live in peace under Islamic rule if they pay the poll tax. Clearly paying the poll tax does not constitute an admission that Muhammad is the Prophet. Therefore, by your own chosen witness your signature quotation is thoroughly inaccurate.
Is that a personal attack?
Back the quote up, and I’ll retract it. As long as it appears that you have deliberately chosen an erroneous and inflammatory statement as your signature, I see no reason to retract my accusation. But your highly questionable use of your source material hardly gives me a reason to do so.
Edwin