Muhammad in the Quran, Vol. 3: Chapter 61


 

RULES FOR BREAKING/DISUSE OF WORDS/PROMISES/OATHS IN THE QURAN

Muhammad in the Quran is very clear on that to break or disuse oaths are ok, especially if this will give a better result. Oaths you did not mean when you said it, hardly counts as a sin at all. Oaths you meant and perhaps have confirmed are sins to break, especially if they are strong ones, but small sins you will be forgiven - in serious cases you will have to pay expiation, though, to be forgiven.

As to give your word or to give a promise is in the same category as to give oaths, though weaker, by implication the rules for breaking/forgiving for breaking oaths, also go for broken words or promises.

It is not said directly, but points in the Quran/Hadiths indicate that it is a greater sin to be dishonest to Muslims than to non-Muslims.

But the acceptance in Islam of the use of dishonesty as working tools backfires: People can never be sure that what they are told is the truth (this may be one of the reasons why conspiracy theories flourish so much in Muslim areas - they cannot rely on what is said, and make up "the real truth" according to what they prefer to believe.)

This point is extra serious concerning the acceptance of breaking or disuse of oaths: Muslims have no reliable way of strengthening their words. Even when they tell the full and only truth, they may be lying, as may be they are telling an al-Taqiyya or are using a false oath.

Another serious effect is that people never can trust leaders, authorities, or scholars, etc. completely: How much is truth and how much is f.x. al-Taqiyya? Is this a reason for all the conspiracy theories about many subject flourishing all over the Muslim areas?

Is there a reason why Muslims and Islam seldom claim that "Islam is the Religion of Honesty"?

It is very difficult to understand why someone can believe blindly in a man accepting and himself living according a moral code like this and like the rest of the moral code in the Quran - and a man wanting respect, power and women - without at least checking what can and what cannot be true of his tales. The only reason is that their fathers and others have told them that the Quran is the truth, because so their forefathers claimed, and then it must be true (taqlid).

Below we quote the main verses concerning Muhammad's/the Quran's/Islam's/Muslims' view on breaking/disuse of oaths.

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

####001 2/106a: “None of our revelations do We (Allah*) abrogate or cause to be forgotten, but We substitute something better or similar”. Well, this is a contradiction – and an abrogation – in itself. (Note: Some Muslims prefer – like here in the Quran – the word “substitute”, as it is a less “loaded” word for them, but in these cases the meaning is exactly identical – only one word is from daily English, the other is derived from Latin (like perhaps also "substitute" originally)). This actually is one of the verses behind the theory of and use of abrogation in Islam. It may also be one of the reasons – may be the main reason – why abrogated verses were included in the Quran originally – they should not be forgotten. But abrogation is absolutely necessary in Islam, because there is so much contradiction, that the situation would be impossible unless they could be eliminated by making a number of the claims and statements, etc. in the Quran invalid. Se separate chapter about abrogation in "1000+ Mistakes in the Quran". The Quran actually contradicts this point by:

  1. 6/115: “- - - none can change His (Allah’s) Words - - -“. Well, he is contradicting himself, as he clearly changes it himself when something forces him to – try and fail? Or change his mind about more blood and injustice from 622 AD on? – or because of other problems or things he has learnt?
  2. 10/64: “Hereafter, no change can there be in the Words of Allah.” For one thing this sentence has serious effect for the ones who say that predestination in the Quran is not real predestination – if Allah has said/thought/written something, no free will of man can change anything - - - which means there is no free will in that connection, and it is predestined as sure as carved in stone. But more relevant just here is that there were many and sometimes large changes in Allah’s words after this “revelation” in ca. 621 AD - Islam changed from quite peaceful to a full-fledged war religion. Islam simply was very much transformed - from peace to thieving/looting, extortion, suppression, rape, slave taking, and blood.

There may be reasons for questions when Allah has to abrogate his own words - sometimes even shortly after they are said. Did he not know better? Did he change his mind after thinking things over? Did he change his mind after learning how Muhammad’s congregation reacted to his words? Did he have to fail and learn? This tells something fundamental about Allah - if he exists. Because of this you will meet Muslims telling you that nothing is abrogated in the Quran - abrogation is not worthy an omniscient god (very right), and that what he sometimes did they say, was to make his words more specific. In some cases they may be right - - - but also that is to abrogate!! - and was he not intelligent enough to see the problem or to express himself clearly the first time? Besides it is wrong, as it far from always is possible to explain it away that way. Or to explain it away at all. It is completely clear from the Quran itself that abrogation is accepted and practiced (see the 3 verses quoted), and the texts prove it is a reality. It also is very clear that abrogations is an integrated reality in f.x. Islamic law.

(2 abrogations).

WHAT IS OBVIOUS IS THAT NO OMNISCIENT GOD WOULD NEED TO ABROGATE HIS WORDS - HE WOULD MAKE THE RIGHT RULE OR THE RIGHT DECISION AT FIRST TRY. (THERE COULD BE CHANGED SITUATIONS, BUT NOT AS OFTEN AS IN THE QURAN.)

##002 2/224e: To quote Asad: "The Message of the Quran", footnote A2/212 (to this verse): "- - - there are several authentic Traditions (= Hadiths*) to the effect that the Prophet Muhammad said: 'If anyone takes a solemn oath (easier ones are little binding*) (that he would do or refrain from doing such-and-such a thing), and thereupon realizes that something else would be a more righteous course (or give better result*)) then let him do what is more righteous (or gives a better result*), and let him break his oath and then atone for it". Definitely not compatible with the Bible.

§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§

###### 003 2/225a: “Allah will not call you to account for thoughtlessness in your oaths, but for the intention in your heart”. If you swear an oath without thinking it over - or not enough over – you are not bound by it. But how are other people to know if the oath you have made, is binding for you or not - or if you will break it? Besides; you may break also a more serious oath if that will give a better result, but you may have to pay expiation to Allah for it. See f.x. 2/224e-f above, and also 5/89, 16/91, 66/2.

One of the proofs for that Yahweh and Allah are not the same god. According to Yahweh you preferably shall not swear at all, but if you do, you are bound by your oath.

Conclusion: Any Muslim can break any oath, no matter how strong and how seriously meant, "if that gives a better result" - pay expiation afterwards if necessary. This also goes for other words and promises, as words and promises are weaker than oaths. How reliable - or unreliable - may then a Muslim, included Muhammad, be?

§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§

###004 3/54ab: ”- - - and Allah too plotted and planned, and the best of planners is Allah.” It in reality is Allah that decides everything – “the best of planners”.

MORE OMNIOUS: MUSLIMS UNDERSTOOD HERE THAT THE NON-MUSLIMS TRIED TO CHEAT AND DECEIVE ALLAH, BUT THAT HE WAS BETTER AT CHEATING AND DECEIVING. BUT AS ALLAH COULD CHEAT AND DECEIVE, ALSO MUSLIMS COULD/OUGHT TO DO IT IF THERE WERE REASONS. THIS THUS IS ONE OF THE VERSES IN THE QURAN BEHIND THE "LAWFUL DISHONESTY" IN ISLAM.

§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§

####005 3/54b: ”- - - and Allah too plotted and planned, and the best of planners is Allah.” This verse in addition is one of the verses the Muslim phenomena al-Taqiyya (the lawful lie), Kitman (the lawful half-truth), and Hilah (the lawful pretending or circumventing - "the dishonesty in disguise") are based on – when Allah can “plot and plan” (indicating using dishonest means) of course his followers can do the same as long as it is not forbidden – which it is not. Also see 2/26h, 2/224e-f, 2/225a, 4/142a, 8/30, 10/21b, 13/42, 27/50, and 86/16 - dishonesty as a policy is one of the fundamental rules in the Quran's moral - or immoral - code. Al-Taqiyya and Kitman are permitted in 8 - 10 wide cases, and advised "if necessary" in 2: To defend and to promote Islam. Worth remembering for Muslims and non-Muslims alike; what is true and what is not true in Muslims' arguments about such things? And how much is true in a religion partly relying on dishonesty? - - - and what then about its claimed prophet, Muhammad? - how much of his words are Kitmans or al-Taqiyyas or deceit, etc.?

Just for the record: Al-Taqiyya, Kitman, Hilah, etc. can be used at least in these cases (for broken oaths there are given no real limitations if the broken oath will give a better result. By implication this also goes for ordinary promises, as an oath is something stronger than a normal promise. Also for deceit and betrayal there are given no real limits. Muhammad said according to f.x. ibn Ishaq, "The life of Muhammad", that "war is deceit" - and according to many Muslims "anything" is war (according to Islam also everything outside Islamic lands are "area of war")):

  1. To save your or others' health or life.
  2. To get out of a tight spot or a dangerous problem.
  3. To make peace in a family.
  4. When it will give a better result than honesty or honoring one’s oath.
  5. To cheat women (should be remembered by girls with Muslim boyfriends wanting sex - or wanting a marriage to get work/residence permit in a rich country.)
  6. To deceive opponents/enemies.
  7. To betray enemies.
  8. To secure one’s money (very clear from Hadiths).
  9. To defend Islam. (Advised if necessary to succeed.)
  10. To promote Islam. (Advised if necessary to succeed.)

But al-Taqiyya, etc. is a double-edged sword: In the short run you may cheat and deceive some ones – actually also in the long run if the opposite part does not know about this side of Muslims and of Islam, or if he/she is naïve.

But in the long run the surroundings learn that it is impossible quite to trust a Muslim in serious questions: When is he speaking the honest truth and when is he using an al-Taqiyya or some other kind of "lawful" dishonesty? - lawful at least according to the Quran and to the Sharia laws.

#####006 5/89a: “Allah will not call you to account for where is futile in your oaths - - -" = oaths you just throw around - f.x. in anger or from habits, or for oaths you for other reasons did not mean, does not count, and is no sin for Allah. Quite a different from normal religions. Besides: How can others know when you mean an oath and when not? (Well, in some cases you can guess, but what about all the border-line cases and the cases where it sounds like you mean it?) The Quran and Islam are very special when it comes to breaking oaths and some other kinds of dishonesty (f.x. al-Taqiyya (the lawful lie) and Kitman (the lawful half-truth)) - it is the only one of the big religions with such rules for accepted dishonesty, and the only of the big religions which accepts dishonesty, even as a part of the religion/religious life.

#####007 5/89b: “Allah will not call you to account for where is futile in your oaths, but He will call you to account for your deliberate oaths: (if you break such one*) for expiation, feed 10 indigent persons, on a scale of the average for the food of your families: or clothe them, or give a slave his freedom. If that is beyond your means, fast for three days. That is the expiation for the (breaking of*) oaths ye have sworn. But keep to your oaths.” In principle: Keep your oaths, at least if you meant them. But if you break them, not much is lost, as it is just to pay expiation, and everything is ok. And if the oath was made without thinking things over, you are not even bound to it or bound to pay expiation for it. Guess if this is different from NT! (- and from most other religions included all the big ones!) (For some reason or other Islam and its Muslims seldom claim that Islam is the religion of honesty.)

But al-Taqiyya like said is a double-edged sword: In the short run you may cheat and deceive someone – actually also in the long run if the opposite part does not know about this side of Muslims and of Islam, or if he/she is naïve. But in the long run one learns that there is no way to really be sure a Muslim speaks the full truth - or the truth at all - in serious questions. (This also may be a big problem for Muslims telling the truth about something without being believed - they have no reliable way of strengthening their words.)

###008 5/89c: "That is the expiation for the oaths ye (Muslims'*) have sworn (and broken*)". Even though it is advisable to keep your oats, if you break one, it is just to pay expiation, and everything is ok. The Religion of Truth?!? - an ironical joke. "The Religion of Honesty"? - not even a joke (may be that is why you seldom hear this last name seldom and never from Muslims and Islam).

009 16/91c: "- - - break not your oaths after you have confirmed it". A bit different from in most religions: "Break not your oaths".<(p>

010 16/91d: "- - - break not your oaths after you have confirmed it." Part of the basis for the sharia laws. Especially interesting here are the words "after you have confirmed it".

011 16/91e: "- - - break not your oaths after you have confirmed it." Well, Muhammad in the Quran and in Hadiths strongly advices you to break your oath if that gives a better result - pay a "fine" (expiation) to Allah afterwards if necessary. No wonder the Muslim areas are full of conspiracy theories about all and everything; When do the authorities and others speak the truth and when is it an al-Taqiyya (lawful lie) or a Kitman (lawful half-truth), etc.?

Besides, if you all the same break a serious oath, you blot out the sin by paying expiation afterwards. Very simple. And a very practical moral code. BUT WHO CAN TRUST EVEN THE OATH FROM A MUSLIM?

And note the words: "- - - after you have confirmed it”. A really strong proof for that Yahweh and Allah are not the same god - and Jesus and Muhammad not in the same line of anything in the world of morality, not to mention line of prophets (in addition to that Muhammad was no real prophet - he was unable to make prophesies).

#####012 66/2a: "Allah has already ordained for you, (O men), the dissolution of your oaths (in some cases)- - -". According to other places in the Quran, the cases when you can break your oat without sinning, are:

  1. Oaths you have given without really meaning them.
  2. Oaths where you later see you will get a more satisfactory result if you break your oat. In serious cases, though, you should pay a "fine" - expiation - to Allah to be forgiven".

Also see 2/225, 5/89,and 16/91 above.

Can anyone please tell us what remains of trustworthiness of a Muslim's words and oaths - especially when you add to this the al-Taqiyya (the lawful lie) and the Kitman (the lawful half-truth) and permitted betrayals? - and his point of view that "war is deceit" (and everything is war). And much worse in this case: WHAT REMAINS OF MUHAMMAD'S TRUSTWORTHINESS - NOT TO MENTION THE QURAN'S TRUSTWORTHINESS?

##013 66/2b: "Allah has already ordained for you, (O men), the dissolution of your oaths (in some cases)- - -". According to other places in the Quran, the cases when you can break your oat without sinning, are:

  1. Oaths you have given without really meaning them.
  2. Oaths where you later see you will get a more satisfactory result if you break your oat. In serious cases, though, you should pay a "fine" - expiation - to Allah to be forgiven".

Also see 2/225, 5/89,and 16/91 above.

One of the at least 200% proofs for that Yahweh and Allah are not the same god, and Jesus not in any line morally connected to Muhammad. NT tells you not to swear at all ( f.x. Matt. 5/34), and if you do it all the same, you have to keep your word.

Well, is Islam "the Religion of Truth"? - or "the Religion of Honesty"?

We repeat: It is very difficult to understand why someone can believe blindly in a man living according a moral code like this and like the rest of the moral code in the Quran - and a man wanting respect, power and women - without at least checking what can and what cannot be true of his tales. The only reason is that their fathers and others have told them that the Quran is the truth, because so their forefathers claimed - "taqlid". (It is telling something that many of the ones trying to find what is true in the Quran and Islam, leave the religion.)

Sub-total Chapter 61 = 13 + 5.750 = 5.763.

>>> 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".