It was reported that some Islamic enthusiasts in Niger damaged churches in the capital town Niamey to record their protest against Charlie Hebdo Magazine. We strongly condemn such un-Islamic actions. Our Prophet (PBUH) has clearly prohibited from resorting to such actions. We may find examples from his life.
The Prophet’s Example
The Prophet of Islam was eventually forced to migrate to Medina. In spite of all the oppo¬sition and even physical torture that his followers suffered in Mecca, Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) always approached the unbelievers of Mecca with tolerance. At one stage of his mission, the Prophet (PBUH) read to them a short chapter from the Quran:
“O you who do not believe! I worship not what you worship, and you are not worshipping what I worship; nor am 1 worshipping what you wor¬ship; neither -art you worshipping what I worship. Therefore, to you your religion; and to me my religion!” (chap. 109)
When Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) migrated to Medina, he found that besides those who hid, accepted Islam. There was a large Jewish com¬munity in Madina City but this did not bother him He did not contemplate on forcing them into the fold of Islam, instead, he made a peace agreement with them and called them ahlul kitab—“the people of the Scripture”. This was indeed the supreme example of tolerance shown towards the followers of other religions.
The peace agreement between the Prophet and the Jews of Medina guaranteed the phys¬ical safety and security of the Jewish community and also the freedom to practice their religion freely.
The letter written to the Christian King of Abyssinia, ends with the words: “I have conveyed the message and now it is up to you to accept it. Once again, peace be upon him who follows the true guidance.”
We have an interesting historical document with us from our fourth Imam, ‘Ali Zaynul Abidin (a.s,). This document is entitled as Risalat-ul-huquq which means “The Charter of Rights”.
In this Risalah, the Imam has mentioned the rights related to vari¬ous issues and people in human soci¬ety. The last part is on the rights of non-Muslims in a Muslim society. Among other things, it says: “And there must be a barrier keep¬ing you from doing any injustice to them, from depriving them of the protection provided by God, and from flaunting the commitments of God and His Messenger concerning them.
Because we have been told that the Holy Prophet said, “Whosoever does injustice to a protected non- Muslim, then I will be his enemy (on the Day of Judgment),” In a letter which Imam ‘Ali wrote for his Governor in Egypt, he says, “Sensitize your heart to mercy for the subjects, and to affection and kindness for them. Do not stand over them like greedy beasts who feel it is enough to devour them, for they are of two kinds; either your brother in faith or like you in Creation.” {Nahju ‘l-Balagha, letter 53).
The Muslim History
Unfortunately, the events after the First World War to the present time have created an atmosphere in the Western world where Islam is branded as a religion of terror and where Muslims are generally labeled as terrorists. History books, especially by the Orientalists, like to present picture of the Muslims as holding the Qur’an in one hand and the sword in another—thus implying that wherever the Muslims went, they gave only two choices to the conquered people: Islam or death.
Muslims ruled India for many centuries, but majori¬ty of its citizens always remained non-Muslims. India came under Muslim rule by force, but Islam pen-etrated among the people of India by propagation and example of the Sufis. This is a fact which has been clearly elaborated by the famous journalist-writer of India, Khuswant Singh, in the first volume of his The History of Sikhs.
One thing about the issue of tolerance towards Minorities and freedom of practicing religion; if we were to compare the attitude of the Muslim rulers towards Minori¬ties living under their rule during the nineteenth century—with the atti¬tude of the Europeans and the Americans towards their Minorities, it can be said that the record of the Muslims would be much better.
It would be sufficient to quote Roderic H- Davison, a prominent Western historian of the Ottoman Empire on the issue of tolerance towards the minorities, Davison writes, “It might in fact have been argued that the Turks were less oppressive of their subject people than were Prussians of the Poles, the English of the Irish, or the Americans of the Negroes – There is evidence to show that in this period {late 19th centu¬ry}, there was emigration from inde-pendent Greece into the Ottoman Empire, since some Greeks found the Ottoman government is more indulgent master {than their own Greek government}”.
