Muhammad in the Quran, Vol. 1: Chapter 22



DISCRIMINATION/DISCREDITING OF NON-MUSLIMS

- or perhaps more correct: Apartheid against non-Muslims; they are the lowest of the low in the society, way below the Muslims - in this and in the next life. Good "knowledge" for building superiority/inferiority complex and culture. Islam as taught in the Quran very clearly is an apartheid culture based on differences in religion. To compare with the old South Africa: Muslims are the only "white" ones - the only ones at the top. Much further down are "the people of the Book" - Jews, Christians, and Sabeans = the "colored" people. And at the very bottom are the "black" ones - the Pagans. Muhammad used this kind of claims, discrimination, and apartheid quite a lot as "arguments".

You will find Muhammad used this frequently in the Quran - and in Hadiths.

¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤

001 3/12d: "Soon will ye (non-Muslims*) be vanquished and gathered together and driven into Hell - - -". Similar often claimed in the Quran, but never proved or documented.

#####002 3/110a: “Ye (Muslims*) are the best of peoples, evolved for mankind - - -”. It is not possible to disbelieve that Muslims are the top of existing humans and human societies, as the Quran says so - and not one believing Muslim seems to be aware of how cheap words are. It also is strengthening the picture of non-Muslims as vermin or at least sub-human. In North Pakistan some time ago there was a debate: Has a non-Muslim half the value of a Muslim or less?

May be worse because this is from high up: Wall Street Journal, 9. April 2002. Compensation - also named "blood money" - for killing or in other ways causing a person's death in Saudi Arabia, was as follows:

  1. 100.ooo riyals if the victim is a Muslim man.
  2. 50.ooo riyals if the victim is a Muslim woman.
  3. 50.ooo riyals if the victim is a Christian man.
  4. 25.ooo riyals if the victim is a Christian woman.
  5. 6.666 riyals if the victim is a Hindu man.
  6. 3.333 riyals if the victim is a Hindu woman.

No comment necessary. A Muslim man is f.x. worth 30 Hindu women. Still no comment necessary - except that this is completely in line with the Quran and with the judicial and moral codes in Muslim culture.

Non-Muslims and especially "Pagans": Declare you are Muslim before you are killed. This will give your children more money to survive on.

003 4/93a: “If a man kills a believer intentionally, his recompense is Hell - - -”. Not a word is said about killing a non-Muslim intentionally. Compare NT: "You shall not kill". But then there is the difference that Muslims are valuable, non-Muslims less so. Also see 4/92b above.

Also remember that this is a never proved claim.

004 6/50e: "Can the blind be held equal to the seeing?" - can a non-Muslim be held equal to a Muslim? Stupid question.

005 11/24b: “These two kinds (of men (non-Muslims vs. Muslims*) may be compared to the blind and deaf, and those who can see and hear well. Are they equal when compared?” On the other hand: Most Muslims are totally blind and deaf to any fact they do not want to see or hear - who is the best, such a Muslim or a person able to see and understand that something is deeply wrong in the Quran and in Islam?

006 13/5e: "- - - Companions of the Fire - - -". One of the negative names Muhammad uses for non-Muslims, who he claims are good only for Hell.

007 13/19f: "(Is a good Muslim not better than) one who is blind (non-Muslim*)?" A rhetoric question with an intended obvious answer. But the correct answer is completely dependent on two other questions and their answers: Is the Quran from a god? - and does it in addition tell the full truth and only the truth?

008 13/19g: "(Is a good Muslim not better than') one who is blind?" The recurring question: Who is most blind ? - the one with little knowledge but honestly searching the truth, or the one with wrong knowledge?

009 16/17a: "Is then He Who creates like one that creates not?" Definitely not - and that is why it is so thought provoking that Allah was unable to prove neither creation nor resurrection.

A. Occam's Broom (the same Occam as the one with the razor): "The intellectual dishonest trick of ignoring facts that refute your argument in the hope that your audience won't notice". (New Scientist 21.Sept. 2013.) This trick is frequently used by Muhammad, by Islam, and by Muslims arguments for the Quran's texts and for Islam - just use your ears and/or eyes, and brain, and you will find lots and lots of samples, f.x. in some of Muhammad's lies in the Quran. (Here Islam skates over the fact that Allah never proved he was able to create anything.)

B. "'Surely' (etc.*) and rhetorical questions - whenever you encounter these in a text, stop and think. The author usually wants you to skate over them as if the claim is so obvious as to be beyond doubt, or the answer self-evident. The opposite is often the case." (Graham Lawton.) The question here is very a rhetorical one. Also this trick is very often used in the Quran, by Islam, and by Muslims.

010 16/75a: “Allah set forth the Parable (of two men: one) a slave (here aka an "infidel") under the dominion of the other - - - and (the other) a man (= a Muslim*) on whom We (Allah*) have bestowed goodly favors from Ourselves, and he spends thereof (freely), privately and publicly: are the two equal?” A rhetoric question with only one answer – of course "we" are better than those who are slaves under pagan gods. (Though it is an open question who really were/are blind slaves under their religion – the Pagans/People of the Book or the Muslims? In intense and extreme sects the followers frequently are informal slaves of the leaders – not of the god(s) but of the leader(s)).

011 25/44b: “They (non-Muslims*) are only like cattle - nay, they are worse astray in the Path.” Non-Muslims less worth than cattle. Well, we have heard that in some madrasas (Muslim religious schools*) they still discuss if non-Muslims have half the value of Muslims or less. It may be true?

But what about Muslims? They follow Muhammad and Islam simply because of "taqlid" (blind belief because the fathers and "everybody" claims the Quran and Islam is the truth, because so their fathers again claimed) - are they similar to a flock of sheep following the leader?012 25/63d: "- - - the ignorant - - -". Who is really the ignorant? - the one who knows nothing? - the one who knows enough to see that things may be seriously wrong? - or the one who is strong as iron in his belief in something which is wrong?

013 28/61a: “Are (these two) alike? - one to whom We (Allah*) have made a goodly promise (Muslim*) - - - and one (non-Muslim*) who We have given the good things of this life, but who (will go to Hell*)?” Another rhetoric question with an obvious answer enlarging “our” self-esteem and feeling of righteousness. But with an addition: Many religions have a problem with non-believers or believers who are not really good people who have a good life in this world. So also Islam. But the Quran explains this very simple - like some other religions: It is Allah who in his unfathomable wisdom has decided it like that - to try the bad person or for some other reason only Allah understands - but Allah is going to punish him in the next life. A fulfilling explanation that leaves the others' envy half satisfied, and their gloating also half satisfied - and our self esteem at least on par or a little in plus.

You find this argument in variations time and again and again in the Quran.

But is the underlying explanation valid? - that it is for to try persons? Because why does a predestining, omniscient god have to try anyone at all? - and why, if it in reality is Allah who predestines everything one does - according to MANY places in the Quran? If he predestines everything, he also predestines what you do during a test. (With full predestination free will for man does not exist - there are immaterial things impossible also for omnipotent gods, in spite of Islam's lame try to explain away the fact that they see this is impossible: "It must be true all the same, because Allah say so in the Quran" (freely quoted after the Swedish "Message of the Quran" - remark A6/141 to verse 6/149).

#####014 32/18b: “Is then the man who believes (Muslim*) no better than the man who is rebellious and wicked (the non-Muslim*)? Not equal are they.” Muhammad forgets (?) to mention that there are many good humans also among non-Muslims - neither rebellious, nor wicked. "Forgotten" on purpose?

And what does this tell about who are haughty, etc.? - non-Muslims? - or Muslims? (A few years ago there was a serious debate in Pakistan: Did non-Muslims have half the value of Muslims? - or less?

May be worse because this is from high up: Wall Street Journal, 9. April 2002. Compensation - also named "blood money" - for killing or in other ways causing a person's death in Saudi Arabia, was as follows:

  1. 100.ooo riyals if the victim is a Muslim man.
  2. 50.ooo riyals if the victim is a Muslim woman.
  3. 50.ooo riyals if the victim is a Christian man.
  4. 25.ooo riyals if the victim is a Christian woman.
  5. 6.666 riyals if the victim is a Hindu man.
  6. 3.333 riyals if the victim is a Hindu woman.

No comment necessary. A Muslim man is f.x. worth 30 Hindu women Still no comment necessary - except that this is completely in line with the Quran and with the judicial and moral codes in Muslim culture.

Non-Muslims and especially "Pagans": Declare you are Muslim before you are killed. This will give your children more money to survive on.

#####015 33/60f: "- - - We (Allah*) shall certainly stir thee (Muslims*) up against them (bad or not Muslims*), then they will not be able to stay in it (the city*) as thy neighbor’s for any length of time". This tells as much as the comment just above. Something to remember when you accept Muslims to your city? There already are demands for special treatment for Muslims many places. We remind you that most - at least 70% on average according to research - are as ok as you and me. But the problem is: Who is who?.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!!!

----------------------------------------------------------------------

###016 33/62a: “(Such was) the practice (kill non-believers without mercy*) (approved) of Allah among those who lived aforetime: no change wilt thou find in the practice (approved) of Allah.” Muhammad here refers to the Mosaic and the Christian religions (and he wrongly sets Allah = Yahweh) when he talks about “those who lived aforetime”. But even though OT is hard against many non-Jews, the war and the killing was to get room for living for the Jews, not wanton murdering just because they were not Jews or for plunder and slaves. And in NT: Try to find a single place saying that non-believers shall be murdered just because they have another religion – such an order simply does not exist. (There are 1-2 places in the OT where Yahweh disliked that the Jews did not kill many enough of the enemies, but because the survivors represented future problems, not because they refused to change religion.) The Quran here actually is a 180 degree contradiction to the very core of the teachings of Jesus.

Any god had been lying if he said this, but Muhammad did not know the Bible well, so may be – just may be – he thought from wishful thinking that he spoke the truth, but no matter he was too intelligent not to know he had no reliable source for the claim. ###Correction: This surah is from 625-629 AD = Muhammad now knew more than enough from the old Jewish scriptures and knew he was lying. In any case it was a good statement for a warlord trying to secure and enlarge his platform of power; Self-centered. Selfish? (This surah like said is believed to be from 625 – 629 AD – before he had gained absolute control by conquering Mecca.)

----------------------------------------------------------------------

NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!!!

----------------------------------------------------------------------

017 33/62b: “Such (to kill non-Muslims not living according to Islam’s laws of suppression of non-Muslims*) was the practice (approved) of Allah among the ones that lived aforetime: ####no change wilt thou find in the practice (approved) of Allah (now or in the future*)”. #####If Islam/Muslims grow strong enough some time, this is what to expect, according to their holy book - "no change" of course. How had the world looked today, if the industrial revolution with its superior weapons, ships and economic and military superiority had happened in the Muslim area? - Islam has no moral, ethical, empathetically, ideological or philosophical ideas against suppressing other people - on the contrary it is a religious duty. Actually Islam has no moral or ethical philosophy at all - that was decided once and for all before 1100 AD by the religion, with al Ghazali - "the greatest Muslim after Muhammad" - as the grave digger for philosophy in Islam with his book "The Incoherence of the Philosophers". (There were a few thinkers for some more time - about 100 more years - in Spain, but they got little influence on the mainstream Islam).

018 34/33c: “We (Allah*) shall put yokes on the necks of the Unbelievers: it would only be a requital for their (ill) Deeds.” That is what those bad people deserve. They are not better. But it is true?

019 35/8a: “Is he, then, to whom the evil of his conduct is made alluring (non-Muslims/Pagans*) - - - (equal to one who is 'rightly guided'*)?” Of course not - Muslims are much better, of course. This even though the famous Muslim al-Ghazali (1058 - 1111 AD) - "the greatest Muslim after Muhammad", according to Islam - marked the end of any new thinking in any science not helpful for Islam, in the eastern and central Muslim world with his book "The Incoherence of the Philosophers" against philosophy in 1095 AD. For more than 800 years there did not come one single new thought or idea bringing humanity forward in any kind of science, "humanoria" included, from all the Muslim world, Maghreb/Spain excluded for some time. (There the ability and freedom to think yourself lasted another ca. 100 years - the death of Ibn Rushd (Averroes) in 1198 can arbitrarily be said to mark the end there). Not one single new thought or new idea in over 800 years!!! Among now some 1.2 BILLION people!!! Yes, it has really to be said: It is difficult to match Muslims and Islam.

Actually new ideas some places for long times meant punishment or even death penalty, though after some time it was agreed on that new ideas building on the Quran and the Hadiths could be accepted, but all other ideas were “Bad new thoughts” and negative or even punishable.

Quite another point is that much of what the Quran makes alluring, good deeds, morally right, etc. collide head on with the essence of the fundamental moral code: "Do to others like you want others do to you". Compare the Quran's moral code - and the sharia laws - to this, and you will understand why some believe the real maker of the Quran, is the dark forces.

020 35/19a: “The blind (non-Muslims*) and the seeing (Muslims*) are not alike - - -”. No, a blind man - like Stevie Wonder - has no value. Also see 35/18d just above.

021 35/22a: “Nor (alike*) are those who are living (Muslims*) and those that are dead (non-Muslims*).” In the stagnant civilization of the intellectually living dead (see 35/8) that is likely to be true of course - Islam was like that from around 1ooo-1100 AD on. (But there have been some small tendencies to new intellectual life in the Islamic areas the last some 60-80 years - though not enough to bring forth many new ideas or new knowledge, mainly to question some of the old ones. NB: We here talk about areas where the religion is a dominant part of life.)

Is it symbolic that intellectual life in medieval Islam lasted longest in the West (Maghreb/Spain?)?

022 38/2a: "But the Unbelievers (are steeped) in Self-glory and Separatism". Do think it over: Is not this in reality a description of Muslims? Muslims does not want to mingle with non-Muslims - the Quran even strongly advices against it. And Islam claims Muslims are much better than non-Muslims - in our presumed modern world some Muslims some places (f.x. in north Pakistan) even discuss if mom-Muslims have half the value of Muslims or less.

May be worse because this is from high up: Wall Street Journal, 9. April 2002. Compensation - also named "blood money" - for killing or in other ways causing a person's death in Saudi Arabia, was as follows:

  1. 100.ooo riyals if the victim is a Muslim man.
  2. 50.ooo riyals if the victim is a Muslim woman.
  3. 50.ooo riyals if the victim is a Christian man.
  4. 25.ooo riyals if the victim is a Christian woman.
  5. 6.666 riyals if the victim is a Hindu man.
  6. 3.333 riyals if the victim is a Hindu woman.

No comment necessary. A Muslim man is f.x. worth 30 Hindu women. Still no comment necessary - except that this is completely in line with the Quran and with the judicial and moral codes in Muslim culture.

Non-Muslims and especially "Pagans": Declare you are Muslim before you are killed. This will give your children more money to survive on.

023 38/28b: “Shall We (Allah*) treat those who guard against evil (Muslims*), the same as those who turn away from the right (non-Muslims*)?” Above we have commented the quotations - and will comment more. But read them alone and pretend you are a believing Muslim. Lots of such statements make an impression, and build up something inhuman inside a person who comes to believe it. (May be a reason why the humanitarian organizations mainly originate in the West, not f.x. in the rich Saudi Arabia? - a fundamental difference somewhere deep down?)

024 39/9a: “Is one (Muslim*) who worship devotedly during the hours of the night - (like one who does not (non-Muslim*)) - - -?” According to the Quran there is a big difference. But who in a primitive or brain washed audience or in an audience WANTING to believe, understand they are manipulated? But what if the Quran is made up? - as it is not from any god (too much is wrong) it must be made in some other way.

025 39/9e: “Are those equal, those who know and those who do not know?” Statements and questions like this you find several places in the Quran, and they are a psychological efficient way to build up a belief in “our” own superiority and the opponents’ inferiority and badness. Many dictators frequently use similar techniques - be it countries or organizations. The not too intelligent and/or those with limited education mostly do not understand they are manipulated. Also there is another point: What is the situation if the Quran is a made up book? - a relevant question as no book with so much wrong is from any god.

And there is yet another point: Who is it who knows? - the one blindly believing, or the one asking questions and checking what is true and what not?

026 39/18g: "- - - those (Muslims*) are the ones endued with understanding". If the Quran is from a god, the understanding is correct. If it is not from a god, the understanding is wrong - and no god ever made a book that full of mistaken facts, contradictions, etc. etc. NB: Also see 13/3j above.

027 39/19a: “Is, then, one against whom the decree of Punishment is justly due (equal to one who eschews evil)?”. Still another technique for manipulation, and in this case partly to induce real discrimination - “they” are bad people and cannot be compared to “us”. May be we even had better shun them - or worse?

028 39/24a: “Is, then, one who has to fear the brunt of the Penalty on the Day of Judgment - - - (like one who guarded therefrom)?” Like 39/22a-d above.

029 39/29a: "- - - a man belonging to (being the slave of*) many partners (non-Muslims*) - - - and a man belonging to (being the slave of) one master (Muslims*) - - -". Muslims even officially are the slaves of Allah. Perhaps a man knowing he was a free man was even better - especially if there is no Allah, and the slavery just is a slavery of mind and perhaps under the religious and religious/political leaders?

And of course the Muslims are the better quality.

030 40/58a: “Not equal are the blind (non-Muslim*) and those who (clearly) see (Muslims*)”. According to the Quran the answer is obvious - and the self-esteem of Muslims increased. There is a feeble feeling, though, that something is wrong. On the one side a book relying only on the words of a somewhat "special" man, and a book containing lots and lots of the hallmarks of cheating, swindling and deceiving. On the other a non-Muslim culture which in spite of mistakes - f. x. taking colonies like each and every empire and even smaller powers have done throughout all times, included Arabia and other Muslim states - has brought most humans a very much better life the last few hundred years - f. x. in medicine the poor today often are better off than the richest king was just 100 years ago.

As far as we know not one single of those modern medicines originated in the Muslim world. Neither did one single of the other new essential ideas.

But in a society where only the next world (real or imagined or wrong? - as it is built on a book with lots of mistakes, told by a man of doubtful moral- al Taqiyya, Kitman, Hilah, "war is betrayal", "break (even*) your oath if that gives a better result") really counts, the Muslims after all are the elite. Of course - - -?

031 40/58b: "Not equal are the blind and those who (clearly) see - - -". This is worth an afterthought when comparing the blindly believing Muslims to non-Muslims seeing that something is seriously wrong in the Quran, and hence with Islam.

#####032 40/58d: “- - - nor are (equal) those who believe and work deeds of righteousness and those who do evil (non-Muslims/Pagans*)”. This is obvious. But what then about those points in the Quran's codes of moral, of ethics, of conduct, of warfare, etc. which are evil? And what about the unjust parts of the sharia laws? (Muslims normally are unable to see the evil such places, because they have been told since they were born that this is just and good and glorious. But anyone - Muslims and non-Muslims - are free to compare such points to "do to others like you want others do to you".

#033 40/58j: A summary of this verse is that Muslims are much better - much better quality - than non-Muslims. A "fact" many (most?) Muslims "know" very well today. Just think about the debate in Pakistan (in 2009?) about whether non-Muslims had half the value of Muslims, or less.

Haughty?

But if Muslims take the power, this may be what we will have to live with. Because of a powerful religion built only on a clearly made up book.

034 45/21h: "Ill is the judgment they (non-Muslims believing they are on par with Muslims*) make". The sentence tells something about Muslims and about Islam. It also shows what Muslims of today are taught and told about non-Muslims. It reminds one of ideas from fascism, Nazism, extreme communism, etc. Further comment not necessary.

035 47/15i: “(Can those in such Bliss) be compared to such as shall dwell forever in the Fire - - -". This is what is called a leading Question - and leading questions often have seemingly clear answers. But in this case the seemingly obvious answer only is correct if the Quran is from a god, and if it in addition tells the full truth and only the truth. Not to mention how wrong it is if there exist other gods - f.x. Yahweh - - - especially if on top of all the Quran and its god are made up f.x. by one or more cheater(s) or by the dark forces.

036 59/20a: “Not equal are the Companions of the Fire and the Companions of the Garden: it is the Companions of the Garden that will achieve Felicity.” There is no doubt: In the eyes of Allah the Muslims are best. And in the eyes of Muhammad they surely were best - - - because they gave him power and warriors? But at least the eyes of Allah will depend on if he exists or not.

037 67/22b: “Is then one who walks headlong, with face groveling (non-Muslims*), better guided - or one who walks evenly on a Straight Way (Muslim*)?” The correct answer in reality will depend on if the claimed straight way really is straight, or if the straightness in reality is an illusion or f.x. a result of blindness or wishful thinking. There also is a strange word far behind in our brain: Was Muhammad also a populist - populists within politics like to make things look easy, etc.

######038 68/35+36: “Shall We (Allah*) treat the people of Faith like the People of Sin? What is the matter with you? How judge you?” Yes, “how judge ye” to believe non-Muslims can be of as good quality humans as Muslims? - shall Muslims and non-Muslims be treated similar?! (But to be down-to-earth: These two verses tell something sinister about the Quran and thus about Muhammad and about Islam.) No comments necessary.

Sub-total Chapter 22 = 38 + 1.986 = 2.024.


>>> Go to Next Chapter

>>> Go to Previous Chapter

This work was upload with assistance of M. A. Khan, editor of islam-watch.org and the author of "Islamic Jihad: A Legacy of Forced Conversion, Imperialism, and Slavery".