Sorry to say, but there must be something really wrong with Pakistan. This sad consideration arose spontaneously after learning of the new terrorist attack that hit the city of Peshawar, claimed by the Khorasan province of the self-styled “Islamic state”, known internationally by the acronym ISKP (Islamic State Khorasan Province). The target of the suicide bomber’s hatred was the Imamia mosque, with about 60 dead and 200 injured. What a great way to prepare for Ramadān, the month of peace and mercy…
THE PESHAWAR ATTACK AND THE ISLAMIC LAW OF WAR
“They weren’t Muslims”, someone objected, referring to the fact that the victims were Shiites. Can this be a justification? Islamically speaking it is NOT, as the law of the jihād with the sword inscribed in the Qur’an clearly states that non-Muslims who are NOT at war with Muslims are NOT legitimate targets. The use of weapons is allowed solely and exclusively for self-defense, while pure and simple aggression is prohibited: “Permission [to fight] is granted to those who are attacked” (Sūrah “Al Hajj”, 22:39); “Fight for the cause of Allāh against those who fight you, but do not start hostilities, because Allāh certainly does not love aggressors” (Sūrah “Al Baqara”, 2:190).
The jihād with the sword launched without being previously attacked, often defined as “offensive”, is also undoubtedly envisaged but always within the notion of self-defense, in order to prevent an attack against Muslims believed to be imminent, or another kind of threat about to materialize. In this regard, see as reference the battles led by Prophet Muhammad (saw) in Badr, Uhud, al-Aḥzāb, Hunain, and other places.
The jihād of pure conquest, outside of self-defense, finds a reference in the taking of the Kaʿba in Mecca, but it is to be considered an extraordinary case, as the object of conquest was absolutely unique. Therefore, it is not applicable to justify any kind of use of weapons, just as you like.
Now, the Shiites of the Imamia mosque in Peshawar, while adhering to a form of belief that has drifted away beyond measure from the Quranic message and the Mohammedan Sunnah, were not going to launch any attack on Pakistani Muslims and, in general, they are not at war neither with them nor with Islām. They are not “brothers” in the Islamic sense, another objection we received to justify the massacre. Still, they were still normal people, like all of us, who were part of the local social context. In short, innocents who did no harm to anyone.
On the same note, if we want to consider Shiism itself at war against Islām, the Shiites of the Imamia mosque in Peshawar fell even more into the category of non-combatants, as they do not have anything to do with the Houthis, Hezbollah, the Iranian Pasdarans or the Iraqi militias, which are worthy counterparts of the self-styled “Islamic state” of terror as well as al-Qāida.
Yes, but the āyāt of the sword says to “kill polytheists wherever you find them”, unless they “repent” and embrāce Islām (Sūrah “At-Tawba”, 9:5). Then, first of all, those who do not know Allāh (swt) should be given the opportunity to know Him and understand the “truth”, but this has not been granted to the Shiites of the Imamia mosque in Peshawar, as to many other non-Muslims before them.
It is no coincidence that, in the next verse, Prophet Muhammad (saw) says: “If any one of the polytheists seek asylum with you, grant him asylum so that he can hear the Word of Allāh; then take him to a place of safety. This is because they are people who have no knowledge” (Sūrah “At-Tawba”, 9:6). Is this not a confirmation of the principle whereby “there is no compulsion in religion”? (Sūrah “Al Baqara”, 2:256).
Furthermore, Prophet Muhammad (saw) restricts the category of “polytheists” mentioned above (9:5) to those who break the agreements stipulated with Muslims, referring precisely to the pact of al-Ḥudaybiyya. However, the Messenger (saw) points out that “as long as they act straight with you, act straight with them. Allāh loves the fearful” (Sūrah “At-Tawba”, 9:7).
As for the Shiites of Peshawar’s Imamia mosque, what pact did they break, or what misbehavior did they commit toward Pakistani Muslims? That is a mystery. Or maybe everything is clear, because it is always about the same Shaytanic obsession with violence. An obsession that leads to making the āyāt of the sword an absolute commandment, as if it were the only verse the Quran is composed of, denying the validity of everything else: from the verses immediately after the āyāt of the sword itself, up to the whole body of Islām’s truths and commandments, including over 140 verses that call Muslims to peace and non-violence.
An obsession without limits, which openly violates the teachings of Prophet Muhammad (saw) as well ‒ “Do not act brutally. Do not exceed the proper bounds. Do not mutilate. Do not kill children and hermits” (Ibn Kathir, 190) ‒, while dishonoring the following great Islamic military tradition, when Muslims complied with the example of the Prophet (saw) in achieving their territorial conquests.
Therefore, we reiterate with an even greater force: Dāʿish Ḥarām! (داعش حرام)
Pakistan is grievously possessed by the Shaytanic obsession with violence, in a variety of different forms. One of them is terrorism, and it is not just about Dāʿish, given the presence in the country of a myriad of organizations, parties, gangs, and militias that have been torturing the population for decades, by sowing death and destruction in the name of Islām with thousands and thousands of victims. The terrorist version of the Shaytanic obsession with violence has also been exported abroad, and testimony to that are the Taliban-Qāidist massacres in Afghanistan, which also hit numerous civilians during the Western occupation.
The shaytanic obsession with violence also expresses itself through the infamous blasphemy law, or at least through the cruel and unjust application that is made of it. In the majority of cases, this law affects innocent human beings, including Muslims, who are victims of slander and personal vendettas. Last but not least, how can we forget that Pakistan has long hidden as a fugitive al-Qaīda’s leader Osama bin Laden, and that Pakistan hosts religious schools where Muslim girls are taught how to behead?
In short, Pakistan is indeed a “sick” country. And let the usual gossip-mongers with the long gray beard (and a guilty conscience) say that we work for Modi, the Indian president. The allegation is devoid of any basis. Actually, we cannot wait to write about Modi in a future article, where it will be highlighted how the Hindu extremism that is currently persecuting our Muslim brothers and sisters in India is also a consequence of the Shaytanic obsession with violence of which the Pakistani neighbor is not able to free himself. Against this background, we can just address our prayers to Allāh subhanahu wa ta’ala, so that He may let the grace of His healing descend on Pakistan. It really needs it.