Tools of the Worshipper

Reliance of the Traveller and Tools of the Worshipper, is

the in-depth manual of Islamic law based on the Shafi'i school of thought, with a detalied index and commentary on specific rulings... 'Umdat al-Salik wa 'Uddat al-Nasik (Reliance of the Traveller and Tools of the Worshipper) is a classic manual of fiqh. It represents the fiqh rulings according to the Shafi'i school of jurisprudence.

And guess what? Due to the magic of e-commerce, a 1,200 page translation of this official manual is available on Amazon.

And thus one can read for one's self.

But let us look at a summary according to what the first "user comment" at Amazon indicates:

Reliance of the Traveller provides exceptional insight to Islamic values. The revised edition, edited and translated by Nuh Ha Mim Keller, is certified by al-Azhar University, the Muslim worlds most prestigious institution of higher learning with the following "...We certify that this translation corresponds to the Arabic original and conforms to the practice and faith of the orthodox Sunni community (Ahl al-Sunnah wa al Jamma'a)."

So this is the real deal.

ordinary citizens who value "truth" may find the passages contained in Book R, Section 8, Lying (pages 744 - 746) quite illuminating.

Lying is permitted in war, settling disagreements, and a man talking with his wife or she with him. If a praiseworthy aim is attainable by lying...it is permissible to lie if attaining the goal is permissible and obligatory to lie if the goal is obligatory. (p. 745)

"When, for example, one is concealing a Muslim from an oppressor who asks where he is, it is obligatory to lie about him being hidden. Or when a person deposits an article with one for safekeeping and an oppressor wanting to appropriate it inquires about it, it is obligatory to lie about having concealed it, for if one informs him about the article and he then seizes it, one is financially liable (to the owner) to cover the article's cost."(p. 745)

The religion explicitly tells them to cover up for each other, too:

The Reliance of the Traveller further discusses slander. "Slander means to mention anything concerning a person that he would dislike, whether about his body, religion, everyday life, self, disposition, property, son, father, wife, servant, turban, garment, gait, movements, smiling, dissolution, frowning, cheerfulness, or anything else connected with him." (p.730) 'Do you know what slander is?' They answered, 'Allah and His Messenger know best.' He said, 'It is to mention of your brother that which he would dislike.' Someone asked, 'What if he is as I say?' And he replied, 'If he is as you say, you have slandered him, and if not, you have calumniated him. The Muslim is the brother of the Muslim. He does not betray him, lie to him, or hang back from coming to his aid. All of the Muslim is inviolable to his fellow Muslim: his reputation, his property, his blood. Godfearingness is here (the heart). It is sufficiently wicked for someone to belittle his fellow Muslim." (p.730.)

Hmmm, such prohibitions on criticism from Big Mo himself look oddly like cult-like characteristics, no?

Now, as we know from The Boy Who Cried Wolf, once you've compromised your trustworthiness, people won't believe you when you do actually tell the truth. That is obvious to all.

So isn't it curious that this Islamic culture teaches that to lie to the infidel is lawful, and even obligatory?

What does that tell us about their calculation concerning the need for them ever to be able to have a trustworthy dialogue with us?

It tells us clearly: this culture has NO INTEREST in having a meaningful, trustworthy dialogue with the infidel! They have already chosen to be implacably hostile, and to opportunistically deceive and lie for immediate gain.

I can already hearing the left whining, "but but but, you're saying we just have to disbelieve them outright? To be ever suspicous? That smacks of witchhunts and McCarthyism! What if they have something true to tell us?"

Hey, I didn't write Tools of the Worshipper. Just passing on what their accepted mores are. But given such knowledge, we can skip a step and revise the old saying to simply:

Fool me once, shame on me!