Like many people I watched the recent BBC Panorama programme on racism, I was both shocked and appalled at the naked and violent racism that still exists in parts of the UK. Even more shocking is the racist language used by some Muslims when talking about the ‘Kuffar’. Muslims, most often the victims of racism, should really know better.
As the programme indicated, it was in response to comments by Trevor Phillips, head of Equality and Human Rights Commission, that race wasn’t an issue anymore in Britain. To be fair to him, he meant that in the ‘majority of cases’, and he further stated that British attitudes to race were far more advanced and tolerant than the other European countries.
Anyone with a little experience in this area would confirm this as a no-brainer. Mr Phillips was stating a known fact. Britain generally is a tolerant place, but equally true is the fact there are still areas where savage racism and violence persists.
In the mainstream discourse, racism and racist language has been almost eliminated. But there is a way around that, as the British National Party (BNP) and Nick Griffin have shown. They now say they are not against non-whites, just ‘Muslims’. They have substituted race for religion. But deep down the same attitude remains. When they say ‘Muslim’ they actually mean ‘paki’ or ‘nigger’.
The truth is they couldn’t care, and wouldn’t have a clue who is a Muslim, all that they see is visible difference – colour. The Panorama programme showed two Muslims, but had they been two Sikhs or Hindus, I’m certain they would’ve experienced the same racism and violence. The programme also showed a Sudanese (black) victim of racism and violence. Mindless racists and thugs, don’t really care – they don’t have the capacity to differentiate.
I was equally disturbed and horrified that Muslims are using the same racist language when describing ‘Kuffar’ on this blog! I refer to this comment:
“Maybe then, just maybe, some of our sisters and brothers who believe in ‘making 70 excuses for the spiteful disbelievers’ will step out of their bubbles and give up their boxes of a hunky dory kushti life, rubbing shoulders with those british/english that hate and attack you.”
This is racist language plain and simple. This same statement could easily have been made by a BNP guy about Muslims:
“Maybe then, just maybe, some of our people who believe in ‘making 70 excuses for the spiteful blacks/pakis/Muslims’ will step out of their bubbles and give up their boxes of a hunky dory kushti life, rubbing shoulders with those blacks/pakis/Muslims that hate and attack you.”
Such hatred is not Islamic. If we use such nasty language how how does it make us any different? Islam came to abolish racism, not substitute ‘race’ for ‘religion’ and continue to be racist.
We need to understand that issues of race and faith are very different. Many of the problems faced by British Muslims (lack of education, social deprevation, etc, etc) are to do with race and not religion. The vast majority of Muslims in this country are not white, and many of the problems they face are the same problems experienced by non-Muslims who are not white.
You will see that in the US, most Muslims do not face the same problems of social deprivation, most Muslims there are actually educated and middle class. The social problems are mainly faced by the Muslim converts from an African-American background. As you probably guessed, African-Americans are generally the most deprived anyway – they face the same problems as the Muslim African-Americans!
Don’t get me wrong, Islampphobia is a real and very serious problem. But when non-white Muslims face discrimination or even violence, it is not always because they’re Muslims – it is usually the most obvious reason, the foreign sounding name or colour of skin. The Panorama programme definitely proved that to be the case.
I have no problems using the term Kafir, or Kuffar – but only as a descriptive term. And not as a means to express hatred, or a substitute for racism. Just like there is nothing wrong is referring to a ‘black man’, we shouldn’t be scared or ashamed of using ‘Kafir’ to describe or refer to non-Muslims. But there can never be an excuse for making general comments expressing vile hate, and think that it is somehow acceptable because we say ‘Kuffar’ instead of ‘white’.
We should also not be scared or ashamed of admitting that we believe the Kuffar will go to hell, and we believe faith in Islam is the path to salvation. It may not sound politically correct, but the Christians equally believe they will be saved and Muslims will go to hell.
However, someone being a Kafir does not automatically mean we can say whatever we want, or hurl abuse whenever we want – just because they are Kuffar. In most cases it is the actions we hate and despise, but these same actions are now often committed by Muslims (sadly). Having a Muslim name or being born a Muslim does not give us immunity, Allah judges on Iman (faith) and ‘Aml (action).
In south Africa, white racists call black people ‘Kafir’, that is equivalent to ‘nigger’. Here we now see the BNP refer to ‘Muslims’ when they actually mean ‘niggers’ and ‘pakis’. We would be no better if we started saying ‘Kuffar’ when we really mean ‘white’. Religious terminology is not a license for racism, which is forbidden in Islam.
I feel that your point is well argued, and balanced alhamdulillah. We should be just and merciful in our dealings with everyone, whether muslim or kaafir. At the same time, I believe it is important to distinguish ourselves and dissaciate ourselves from the kuffar in action and belief. This concept of al-walaa wal baraa is essential to a muslim’s aqeedah. You can translate it as ‘alliance/allegience/love for Allah, His Messenger and the believers and disassociation (thus a form of dislike) towards the disbelievers’. And therefore, it is logical that due to our ‘baraa’ of the kuffar, and our loathing of their kufr and denials against Allah SWT, we wish for them to reform themselves and thus love for them iman through our efforts of da’wah.
I emphasise here that it is important to have a balanced understanding of this issue (not in the sense 50% good + 50% bad) and not go to the extreme of calling all kuffar ‘potential muslims’, when there are many levels of the kuffaar. If you look at the big picture, only a minority of ‘islamic workers’ are extreme in the ‘al-muhajiroun’ sense, but a great number tend to adopt extreme liberal views of integration and always pointing the finger at muslims for not assimilating enough, signs of an opbvious defeatist mentality and ineriority complex. The work of the IM is therefore diluted and the victory of this deen is delayed unfortunately.
Can you explain what the levels of Kuffar are and how we distinguish them?
According to Imam Hasan al-Banna, people (muslims and non-muslims) are divided into 7 categories:
“In the eyes of a sincere brother, people belong to seven categories:
1. Striving Muslims
2. Reluctant Muslims
3. Sinning Muslims
4. Non-Muslims living peacefully under the Islamic Law in a Muslim state (i.e. Dhimmies)
5. Non-Muslims having treaties with Muslim states
6. Neutral non-Muslims
7. Non-Muslims at war with Muslim states.
Each group has its own status within the Islamic Law, And on the basis of this classification, we should judge each individual and determine whether he is a friend or an enemy.” [http://web.youngmuslims.ca/online_library/books/tmott/]
astaghfirullaah! are you saying that shaheed banna called non muslims ‘kuffar’?
So what is the scriptual basis for this? And if i were to accept your catagories how will I practically implement this on a day to day basis.
“Hi Dave, can you please identify which one of these seven catagories you fall under? Otherwise I will have to refer to you from now on as Kafir.”
Also Allah makes one distinction here although there are many other examples:
“Allâh does not forbid You to deal justly and kindly with those who fought not against You on account of Religion and did not drive You out of Your homes. Verily, Allâh loves those who deal with equity. It is Only as regards those who fought against You on account of religion, and have driven You out of Your homes, and helped to drive You out, that Allâh forbids You to befriend them. and Whosoever will befriend them, Then such are the Zâlimûn (wrong-doers those who disobey Allâh).” (60:8)
@irrational thought
Generally, from what i know, i can sum up into 3 categories, one can add extra descriptions each. dont take these categories as a solid rule as if every person on earth is either 1,2 or 3. maybe some lie in betweeen etc.
The first rough group of non-muslims are those who are actively working against Islam and the muslims. Through physically themselves, through financial contribution, planning&plotting, speech, media etc etc. these are some descriptions. It is the duty of the muslims to counter their activities.
The second rough group are those that are neither here no there. You can say that they are ’sitting on the fence’ and going about their normal lives, pursuing their interests and are neither for nor against the muslims. Some of these people may also have not received a clear picture of islam and may not know what islam is about. To these people we concentrate our efforts of da’wh.
The third rough group are those who support the cause of Islam and muslims. Many of whom are well known for working for justice, equality etc. The may feel friendly to Islam and like the concepts but adhere to their religion/ non-religion and thus still reject the message of tawheed, risala and akhirah. we co-operate with them in birr and taqwa and do not co-operate in all evil they indulge in. We still maintain baraa with them, thus still give them da’wah.
@irrational thought
subhanallah, its not fard for you to call ‘Dave’ a ‘kaafir’ when you address him. A simple ‘Good morning Dave’, will do! But you have to beleive that he is a kafir, that’s the important thing. Build a relationship with him, and give him da’wah. Get to know him as a collegue, and you’ll know what his position is.
Come on… i know you called yourself ‘irrational thought’, but we don’t have to spell it out for you. Simple day to day inter-personal skills does the job!
@irrational thought
irrational thought,
Before practical application, one has to believe in the heart the truth of a matter. There are many things that dont have a practical bearing on our lives yet we have to take a position regarding them in our hearts and our conscience.
@irrational thought
Well i think your name sums up your argument.
Again another good point made by RATIONAL THOUGHT to which i agree
@amin
notice how the quote says ‘SPITEFUL disbelievers’ and ‘british and english that ATTACK YOU’.
this was deliberately written in this way brother amin (with prior knowledge) so that a distinction (as clarified by yusuf/rational) could be made between ‘average joe’ friendly disbelievers and the spiteful/attacking (i.e. racist) ones as depicted in the panorama programme. You also failed to say that that comment was in DIRECT REFERANCE to the racists in panorama but you chose to msiquote deliberately to make it appear as though it was a racist remark against all whites!
More importantly, in the quote you provided, there is no mention of the term ‘kafir’ nor ‘kuffar’. This kind of reporting is worse than the standards of some tabloid papers in the UK.
The real surprise is that, instead of writing in response to the horrific and sad things reported so emotively by panorama, once again, you wrote an entire article to challenge one of the fellow MUSLIM posters on your blog based on ONE post he wrote, (who DID atleast try and raise awareness of the panorama programme).
I am utterly dissapointed that you have again felt the urge to rectify innocent brothers yet failed to respond to the racists programme itself.
Defeatist inferiority.
The last few posts by authors all have a common factor – muslims are to blame, its our fault, we need to change. What is going on?
[Blog Editor: Your last couple of comments were deleted as you were commenting on editorial policy and asking for replies with regards to editorial policies.
You also were suggesting that the names 'exposed' were deleted because it was true. We have already confirmed that Abu Muhammad is known to us, it is not the brother named. That brother probably has no idea that he is being slandered here.
As stated in the User Guidelines, queries regarding editorial issues or complaints should be emailed to: editor@blog.islamicforumeurope.com
Please email us and we may be able to clarify the identities of authors.]
br Amin, i think submission has a very valid point:
1. The quote ’spiteful disbelievers’ was taken out of context in a very sun/daily mirror-like fashion. If one reads the comments, it is easy to understand that the brother was referring to the racist thugs in the very panorama programme you were speaking about! They were disbelivers – do you contest that? And i dont think even our friends with english degrees can come up with a better word to describe the actions of these thugs other than ’spiteful’. i find it most embarassing that you turn this around add an incorrect/ illogical ‘contexualisation/maqsad’ of this comments and base your whole article on it. this had nothing to do with a genralised racist comment!
2. Sh.Wiki is very accurate in his analysis as well. it has become an unmistakable trend of the majority of the last consequetive posts to seem to blame muslims and attributes fault to them. Yes muhasaba is fruitful, but attributing importance to a matter more than is reality is a sign of short-sightedness or bias. its absolutely disproportionate how you deal with a comment taken out of context through out the majority of your blog post and mention a few things here and there about the BNP and the racism experineced in the programme.
The ummah is in need of forward thinkers, who provide practical solutions and have a positive approach. We are tired of hearing the same ’sit back – complain – and do nothing’ sort of negative whining. We need to pop the bubbles and break the barriers of the defeatist/inferiority metality, which have boxed ourselves into our little comfortable cubicles.
@rational thought In your first comment about this blog you said:
“I feel that your point is well argued, and balanced alhamdulillah. We should be just and merciful in our dealings with everyone, whether muslim or kaafir.”
But after you’ve just found out that the racist language quoted was by ’submission’, (perhaps someone you know?) you have now changed your mind totally. Now you say:
“Yes muhasaba is fruitful, but attributing importance to a matter more than is reality is a sign of short-sightedness or bias. its absolutely disproportionate how you deal with a comment taken out of context through out the majority of your blog post and mention a few things here and there about the BNP and the racism experineced in the programme.”
It is amazing what excuses we will make when if affects those close to us. This is the real bias.
Many Asian Muslims say yes ofcourse there is no racism in Islam, there is nothing wrong with a black Muslim marrying an Asian Muslim etc etc. All very commendable and Islamic – but if their own daughter says she wants to marry a black brother, suddenly the mood changes, and there is a hundred excuses to find a way to stop the marriage.
That is why people cannot be judge of those who are close to them, because there is always likelihood of bias. When you didn’t know whose racist language was being criticised you thought: the point was valid, well argued and BALANACED. But as soon as you were alerted about the commentors identity, you did a full U-turn.
Your bias is clear for all to see. In any case, the blog wasn’t criticising the individual, or calling him racist. Or even denying that there wasn’t a context to the quote. But the whole point was that there is never an excuse to use that ’style of language’ because it is racist to do so. Just because it was in response to rabid racists does not make it right.
As you say it was Muhasaba, advising us of the limits, and how to conduct ourselves without becoming racist or using vile language. So let’s leave it at that. The first part of your first comment was good and recognised the intention and content of the blog.
@hanif and amin
are you suggesting that calling disbelievers kuffaar is racist?
drop the boring analysis of the motivations behind peoples’ posts. You have no idea of their intentions. Dont accuse.
so, are you suggesting that calling disbelievers kuffaar is racist?
@Hanif
I think that people can change their mind on opinions, i do not think that rational thinking knows submission since rational thinking is a new commentor. At first the quotes used were unknown and after submission exposed the editing that took place it became clear the actual reason for the post (deceptive and vindictive again all towards the muslims because it is always our fault)
@Shaykh Wiki Just my observation that’s all. The blog also gave the exact reference of that comment, so it wasn’t that quotes were being made up. The blog was just a analysis, people can agree or disagree with it.
There’s no need to take sides on it. I gotta say that language such as ‘exposed’ is not helpful here and is not correct, nothing needed to be exposed since the comment reference was already clear and people can see for themselves if there was any misquoting or if it was out of context. If I remember correctly, you used someone elses words and points once, for which you were exposed?
The blog was a matter of opinion, the only fact was the language used. Which in the opinion of the author Amin was racist language. I personally think many ordinary people will agree with him, two wrongs don’t make a right. Muslims shouldn’t use racist language or tone.
You also seem to have some kind of victim and seige mentality? Just my opinion.
So you hanif justify that saying kuffar is equal to racism? did you hear the prophet say ‘a believer is no different to a disbeliever…’ or did he say ‘an arab no different to a non arab’?
please check your knowledge of basics br hanif and amin.
err, hanif? do you equate referring to disbelievers as kuffar with racism? (even though it were the white racists that made you cry and punched you in the face?)
@Hanif
Since when has using someones elses words become illegal. This is a blog and last time i checked i did not need to give references. I never said the words i used were my own, if you think i have please show me where i said these are my words? And i dont believe by stating this i was exposed.
I am not taking sides just where i feel someone is right i will agree and defend, and if i think someone is wrong then i will question and discuss. And no i do not have a victim mentality i am just pointing out the fact that recentley all the posts seem to be attacking muslims making it our fault, is it not bad enough to be attacked physically, verbally, mentally and spritually by the kuffar but now muslims are attacking muslims and even believing the kuffars points. These problems are not our fault but really its the kuffars fault, they cannot stand islam and hate it and they will not rest until it is destroyed (mainly leaders of the kuffar)
So forgive me if i sound like a victim i am only pointing out the facts.
wiki, we all know that there are some insincere people on this blog. every muslim must be loyal to the truth and take sides with it even if it is against him.
so if hanif or amin were making genuine and good points, i would have happily agreed with them on that basis and not because i know them from IFE or that they are my friends.
Clearly, hanif doesn’t understand the concept of loyalty to the truth, or that which pleases allaah.
also, hanif seems unable to justify how calling violent racists disbelievers is racism on the part of the muslim.
there arguments are shallow and often fabrications.
@submission you have finally been exposed as a incoherent lunatic. you do not know what you are talking about. the person who doesn’t know what he’s talking about is you. you’re a complete crazy guy with too much time on your hands. get a job or better still, go back to school and get an education.
check this rebuttal to your stupid rant from the editor. if you want to know how to do these hyperlinks just ask man.
@Hanif
Br hanif, i don’t think you understood my intention behind my comments regarding br amin taking comments out of context and twisting the meaning. I’m sure there are othere reasons people defend each other in this world other than the reason, ‘cos he’s my friend’, as you accuse me of.
When i first read the post, i took br amin’s word that the intention behind the comment was indeed racist, thus i commended him for trying to give both sides of the argument, although you could sense it was heavily skewed towards the ‘muslim racist’ part. However, once submission added his clarification, it was only correct for me to actually read the comments being discussed. i found br amin’s portrayal of these comments totally absuard and severly disproportionate, as i am sure you will as well if you have a read.
hope this clarifies your concerns. wassalaam.
leave out the personal insults. you made unfounded allegations, and ‘exposed’ no one but your self.
e.g. http://blog.islamicforumeurope.com/?p=617#comment-2733
comment 116
It’s boiling down to some serious issues in ‘aqeeda for some of the authors here on this blog.
Racism is to deny people of different race ‘equality’. However, faith and belief can raise the rank/value of a man in the sight of god and mankind in ways that race can’t. i.e. an ethiopian muslim whose head is shaped like a prune/grape is far greater than emperors such as julius ceasar.
i.e. a kafir and a mumin is never equal. the believer is always better. Full stop.
If the author suggests that kufr is the same as eemaan, then this is undoubtedly a huge sin. The prophet of god said that
“All mankind is from Adam and Eve, an Arab has no superiority over a non-Arab nor a non-Arab has any superiority over an Arab; also a white has no superiority over black nor a black has any superiority over white EXCEPT BY PIETY AND GOOD ACTION. Learn that every Muslim is a brother to every Muslim and that the Muslims constitute one brotherhood”
The prophet didn’t say “a believer has no superiority over a disbeliever (on account of his faith in god)”. Rather, the hadeeth actually recognises that men are superior on account of piety and good deeds! What is a good deed if belief in allaah isn’t one of them? What is a bad deed if shirk or kufr in allaah isn’t one of them?
These people seek to equate eemaan with kufr in another bid to appear ‘moderate’ and ‘progressive’. Begone with quilliamite thinking. Let us not feel ashamed of our islaam.