Mehdi Hasan | Islam Is A Peaceful Religion | Oxford Union

Summary

In this impassioned debate, a Muslim representative counters accusations that Islam is inherently violent, citing historical and contemporary contributions of Muslims to science and culture. He emphasizes that Islam, like other major religions, is based on love, compassion, and faith. The speaker refutes stereotypes by highlighting the vast majority of Muslims who reject violence and terrorism, urging the audience to consider the peaceful teachings of Islam and not to generalize based on the actions of a few extremists.

Takeaways

• 🕌 The speaker identifies as a Muslim and considers themselves an ambassador for Islam, emphasizing their belief and following of the religion.
• 🗣️ The speaker apologizes for acts of violence committed by individuals claiming to represent Islam, such as the Bali bombings, but criticizes the notion that these acts represent the entirety of the religion.
• 🇬🇧 The speaker points out the irony of a conservative UK Prime Minister having to denounce views that generalize and stereotype Islam as inherently violent.
• 📚 A factual correction is made regarding the birthplace of Islam versus Saudi Arabia, highlighting the importance of accurate historical context.
• 🔢 The speaker acknowledges the contributions of Islamic scholars to the field of mathematics, such as Al-Khwarizmi's development of algebra and algorithms.
• 🏛️ The speaker refutes the idea that Islamic scholars and theologians did not contribute to the intellectual and scientific advancements of Europe.
• 📰 The speaker addresses accusations of anti-Semitism within the Muslim community but also points out the historical context of anti-Semitism's origins in Christian Europe.
• ✝️ The speaker argues against the conflation of Christianity with acts of violence committed by individuals claiming to act in the name of Jesus.
• 📊 The speaker cites statistics from polls indicating that the vast majority of Muslims reject acts of terrorism and violence, suggesting that these acts are not religiously motivated.
• 📖 The speaker calls for humility and understanding when discussing the complexities of religious texts and their interpretations, emphasizing the peaceful teachings of Islam.
• 🌍 The speaker concludes by urging the audience to consider the implications of their vote, highlighting the contrast between the peaceful majority of Muslims and the violent actions of a minority.

Q & A

Who is the speaker addressing in the beginning of the transcript?

The speaker begins by addressing the President, ladies and gentlemen, and uses the greeting 'assalam alaykum', indicating a formal and possibly multicultural audience.

What is the main theme of the speaker's opening remarks?

The speaker's opening remarks focus on apologizing for certain acts committed in the name of Islam, positioning himself as an ambassador for Islam, and emphasizing his identity as a Muslim.

What historical error does the speaker correct regarding the origin of Islam and Saudi Arabia?

The speaker corrects a historical error by stating that Islam originated in 610 AD, while Saudi Arabia was established in 1932 AD, thus pointing out a 1322-year discrepancy in the timeline provided by another speaker.

Who is Al-Khwarizmi and why is he significant in the context of the speech?

Al-Khwarizmi is identified as one of the greatest mathematicians of all time and a Muslim who contributed to the development of algebra and algorithms, which are foundational to modern computing.

What does the speaker criticize about the argument presented by Daniel Johnson?

The speaker criticizes Daniel Johnson for attributing the intellectual advancements of the West solely to Judeo-Christian Europeans, ignoring the contributions of Muslim scholars.

What point does the speaker make about the prevalence of anti-Semitism in the Muslim community?

The speaker acknowledges the presence of anti-Semitism in some parts of the Muslim community but clarifies that he did not attribute it to the religion of Islam in his article in the New Statesman.

How does the speaker respond to the claim that Islam is inherently violent?

The speaker refutes the claim by stating that Islam, like most mainstream religions, is based on love, compassion, and faith, and that violence is not inherent to the religion.

What does the speaker say about the role of Islam in acts of terrorism?

The speaker argues that Islam is not the cause of terrorism, citing statistics that the vast majority of Muslims reject acts of terrorism and that those who engage in violence do so for political reasons, not religious ones.

Who is Robert Pape and what is his view on the connection between suicide terrorism and religion?

Robert Pape is a leading terrorism expert who studied every case of suicide terrorism between 1980 and 2005 and concluded that there is little connection between suicide terrorism and religious fundamentalism.

What does the speaker suggest is the common misconception about Sharia law?

The speaker suggests that the common misconception is that there is a single, universally agreed-upon book of Sharia law, when in reality, there is much debate over what Sharia law entails.

What is the speaker's final plea to the audience regarding the motion 'Islam is a religion of peace'?

The speaker urges the audience to vote in favor of the motion, emphasizing that the majority of Muslims are peaceful and that voting 'no' would legitimize the views of those who promote hate and division.

Outlines

00:00

🤔 Apologizing for Misconceptions

The speaker begins by addressing the audience as a Muslim and an ambassador for Islam. He apologizes for certain violent acts attributed to Islam, such as the Bali bombings and the murder of Theo van Gogh, and criticizes the notion that these acts represent all of Islam. He challenges the speaker from the other side of the house for their views, suggesting that they are anathema and could lead to repercussions within their political party. The speaker also corrects a factual error regarding the birthplace of Islam and highlights the contributions of Muslim mathematicians to modern technology, such as algebra and algorithms. He counters the narrative that Muslims are holding back intellectual progress by citing historical examples of Islamic scholars who influenced the Renaissance and the Reformation in Europe.

05:01

🙏 Debunking Stereotypes

In this paragraph, the speaker refutes the idea that Islam is inherently violent by emphasizing the compassionate and merciful nature of God in Islam. He contrasts this with the actions of extremists and argues that Islam, like Christianity, is based on love and compassion. The speaker also addresses the issue of violence in the context of religious texts, stating that Islam allows for military action under certain conditions, but that the majority of Muslims do not interpret their faith as a justification for violence. He criticizes the opposition for lacking expertise in Islam and for making sweeping generalizations. The speaker cites the work of a terrorism expert who found that most acts of suicide terrorism are driven by secular and strategic goals rather than religious fundamentalism. He also references polls showing that the majority of Muslims reject violence and terrorism, and he quotes Islamic scholars who have condemned acts of terrorism in the name of Islam.

10:03

🌟 The Majority Speaks for Peace

The speaker concludes by challenging the opposition to explain why the vast majority of Muslims do not engage in violent behavior if Islam is truly a religion of war. He points out that the actions of a tiny minority of extremists do not represent the beliefs of the global Muslim population. The speaker calls for the audience to consider the implications of their vote, urging them to reject the notion that Islam is a religion of violence and to support the peaceful message of the Quran as believed by the majority of Muslims. He contrasts the peaceful Muslims with those who seek to promote hate and division, and he implores the audience to vote in favor of the motion that Islam is a religion of peace.

Keywords

💡Islamophobia

Islamophobia refers to the fear, prejudice, or discrimination against Muslims or Islam. In the video, the speaker addresses the issue of Islamophobia by criticizing the generalizations and stereotypes made about Muslims and Islam, highlighting the importance of not allowing phobias and bigotry to dictate perceptions of an entire religion and its followers.

💡Religious Extremism

Religious extremism is the act of advocating or adopting extreme practices in the name of religion. The speaker argues against the notion that Islam inherently promotes extremism, emphasizing that acts of terrorism are carried out by a small minority and do not represent the beliefs of the majority of Muslims.

💡Terrorism

Terrorism is the use of violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims. The video discusses the misconception that terrorism is a product of Islam, with the speaker refuting this by citing statistics and scholarly opinions that show the vast majority of Muslims reject violence and terrorism.

💡Crusades

The Crusades were a series of religious wars between Christians and Muslims during the Middle Ages. The speaker mentions the Crusades as an example of historical violence carried out in the name of Christianity, pointing out that violence has been perpetrated by followers of various religions throughout history.

💡Sharia Law

Sharia Law refers to the Islamic religious law derived from the Quran and the traditions of the Prophet Muhammad. The speaker challenges the notion of a monolithic 'Sharia Law' by stating that it is a subject of debate and interpretation, and that suggesting there is a single version empowers extremists.

💡Golden Age of Islam

The Golden Age of Islam refers to a period in the Islamic world characterized by cultural, economic, and scientific flourishing. The speaker highlights the contributions of Muslim scholars during this era, such as the development of algebra and algorithms, to counter the argument that Islam has held back intellectual progress.

💡Fatwa

A fatwa is a legal opinion or interpretation issued by an Islamic scholar. The speaker refers to fatwas issued by respected Islamic scholars condemning terrorism and violence, using them as evidence that mainstream Islamic teachings do not support extremism or terrorism.

💡Secular Goals

Secular goals are objectives that are not specifically religious in nature. The speaker cites a terrorism expert's findings that most acts of suicide terrorism are driven by secular and strategic goals, such as compelling democracies to withdraw from certain territories, rather than religious fundamentalism.

💡Majority vs. Minority

The speaker emphasizes the distinction between the actions of a tiny minority of extremists and the beliefs of the vast majority of Muslims. This concept is central to the video's message, which argues against generalizing the actions of a few as representative of an entire religion.

💡Peaceful Muslims

The term 'Peaceful Muslims' is used to describe the majority of Muslims who do not engage in violence or terrorism. The speaker argues that these individuals are the true representatives of Islam and that their voices should not be overshadowed by the actions of a minority.

💡Humanism

Humanism is a philosophical stance that values human dignity and seeks solutions to human problems through reason. While not explicitly mentioned in the script, the speaker's plea for understanding and compassion towards Muslims reflects a humanistic approach to addressing religious and cultural differences.

Highlights

Speaker begins by identifying as a Muslim and apologizing for acts of violence committed in the name of Islam.

Apology for the Bali bombings and the murder of Theo van Gogh, distancing these acts from the essence of Islam.

Criticizes the opposition for making 'astonishing claims' in their speech.

Misrepresentation of Islam and its contributions to civilization, such as the Golden Age of Islam.

Correction of a factual error regarding the birthplace and timeline of Islam versus Saudi Arabia.

Highlighting the contributions of Muslim mathematicians like Al-Khwarizmi to modern technology.

Critique of the opposition's selective use of facts and misinterpretation of history.

Acknowledgment of anti-Semitism within some Muslim communities but refutes it as a religious cause.

Reference to historical Jewish persecution in Christian Europe, contrasting with a hypothetical Muslim统治的 Europe.

Denouncement of the opposition's conflation of Christianity's past with its core values.

Emphasis on Islam being a religion of peace, not violence, and the importance of context in interpreting religious texts.

Citation of expert analysis that links terrorism not to religion but to strategic goals.

Irony in the opposition's and terrorists' shared view of Islam as inherently violent.

Call for humility in discussing religious violence, referencing historical Christian violence.

Rejection of the idea that Islam sanctions killing indiscriminately based on cherry-picked verses.

Reference to mainstream Islamic scholars who have denounced terrorism.

Statistic highlighting the vast majority of Muslims rejecting violence and terrorism.

Challenge to the opposition to explain why the majority of Muslims do not act violently if Islam truly promotes it.

Urging the audience to vote in favor of the motion that Islam is a religion of peace.

Appeal to not legitimize hate and division but to trust in the peaceful teachings of Islam.

Transcripts

[Music]

[Applause]

thank you very much Mr President ladies

and gentlemen good evening assalam

alaykum lovely to see you all here

tonight we are having a very

entertaining night are we not with some

very interesting things being said uh

from the other side of the house tonight

um let me Begin by saying as a Muslim as

a representative of Islam I would

consider myself an ambassador for Islam

a believer in Islam a follower of Islam

and its Prophet so in that capacity let

me Begin by apologizing to anarie for

the barle bombings I apologize for the

role of my religion and me and my people

uh for the killing of Theo van go for

seven seven yes that was all of us that

was Islam that was Muslims that was the

Quran I mean

astonishing astonishing claims uh to

make in the very first speech tonight on

a day like today where the conservative

prime minister of the United Kingdom is

having to come out and point out that

these kind of views are anathema and I

believe you're trying to stand for the

labor party to become an MP in Brighton

if you do and you make these comments

I'm guessing you'll have the whip

withdrawn from you but then again UK

Kips On The Rise they'll take you the

BNP they might have something to say

about your views this is what n Hasan

always say by the way by the way by the

way by the way by the way just on a

factual Point since we heard a lot about

the second speaker about how backward we

Muslims all are on a factual point you

said that Islam was born in Saudi Arabia

Islam was born in 610 ad Saudi Arabia

was born in 1932 ad so you only

1,322 years off not bad not bad start

there uh talking of maths by the way a

man named alisi was one of the greatest

mathematicians of all time a Muslim

worked in the Golden Age of Islam he the

guy who came up with not just algebra

but algorithms without algorithms you

wouldn't have laptops without laptops

Daniel Johnson tonight wouldn't have

been able to print out his speech in

which he came to break us Muslims for

holding back the advance and

intellectual achievements of the West

which all happened without any

contribution from anyone else other than

the judeo-christian people of Europe in

fact Daniel David Levering the author of

The poit prizewinning historian and

author of The Golden Crucible point out

that there would be no Renaissance there

would be no Reformation in Europe

without the role played by I Sina and

rush and some of the great Muslim

theologians philosophers scientists in

bringing Greek texts to

Europe as for this being our University

I will leave that to the imagination as

to who is our and who is there I studied

here too um an astonishing astonishing

set of uh speeches so far making this

case tonight uh a mixture of just

cherry-picked quotes facts and figures s

self- serving selective a farago of

distortions

misrepresentations misinterpretations

misquotations uh Daniel talked about my

article in the new Statesman which got

me a lot of flak where I talked about

the anti-Semitism that is prevalent in

some parts of the Muslim Community which

indeed it is uh of course I didn't say

in that piece that it was caused by the

religion of Islam in fact modern

anti-Semitism in the Middle East was

imported from finish the sentence

Christian judeo-christian Europe where I

believe

some certainly bad things happened to

the Jewish people in fact Tom fredman

Jewish American columnist of New York

Times told me in this very chamber last

week that he believed had Muslims been

running Europe in the 1940s 6 million

extra Jews would still be alive today so

I'm not going to take lessons in

anti-Semitism from someone who's here to

defend the judeo-christian values of a

continent that murdered 6 million Jews

uh moving swiftly

on moving swiftly

on you doing exactly absolutely well I'm

about to make that point no no no I'm

about to make that point you're right I

agree with you I agree with you I agree

with you 110% that is my point I don't

think Europe is evil or bad I'm a very

proud European I don't want to judge

Europe on the basis but if we're going

to play this gutter game where we pull

out the barle bombing and we pull out

examples of anti-Semitism in Islamic

then of course I'm going to come back

and say well hold on I mean look let's

be very clear Daniel here was a last

minute replacement for Douglas Murray

who had to pull out and Douglas and I

have a well documented differences but

to be fair to Douglas as to be fair to

anmarie and to Peter atheists atheists

see all religions as evil violent

threatening what the problem I have with

Daniel's speech is that Daniel comes

here to rount this robust defense of

Christianity forgetting that his fellow

Christians people who said they were

acting in the name of Jesus gave us the

Crusades the Spanish Inquisition the

anti-jewish programs European

colonialism in Africa and Asia the

Lord's resistance Army in Uganda not to

mention countless Arsen and bomb attacks

on abortion clinics in the United States

of America to this very day I would like

a little bit of humility from Daniel

first before he begins lecturing other

communities and other faiths on violence

Terror and

intolerance but no thank

you some water some water but I would

say this to address the gentleman's very

valid point here I'm not going to play

that game I don't actually believe that

Christianity is a religion of violence

and hate because of what the L does in

Uganda or what what Crusaders did uh to

Jews and Muslims in Jerusalem when they

took back the city in the 12th or 13th

whatever Century it was I believe that

Christianity like Islam like pretty much

every mainstream religion is based on

love and compassion and faith I do

follow a religion in which 113 out of

the 114 chapters of the Quran Begins by

introducing the god of Islam as a god of

mercy and compassion I would not have it

any other way I don't follow a religion

which introduces my God to me as a God

of War as some kind of Greek god of

wrath as a god of hate and Injustice not

at all as Adam pointed out you go

through the Quran and you see the mercy

and the love and the justice and yes you

have verses that refer to Warfare and

violence of course it does this is not

aemotion about pacifism I'm not here to

argue that Islam is a pacifistic faith

it is not Islam allows military action

violence in certain limited contexts and

yes a minority of Muslims do take it out

of that context but is it religious we

talked about willich Daniel and anarie

have suggested that it's definitely

religion that's behind all of this well

actually

what I find so amusing tonight is we're

having a debate about Islam and the

opposition tonight have come forward we

have a graduate in law a graduate in

modern history a graduate in chemistry

and you know I admire all of their

intellects and their abilities but we

don't have anyone who's actually an

expert on Islam a scholar of Islam a

historian of Islam a speaker of Arabic

even a terrorism expert or a security

expert or a holster let alone to talk

about what Muslims believe or think

instead we have people coming here

putting forward the views putting

forward these sweeping opinions Listen

to Professor Robert Pape of the

University of Chicago one of America's

leading terrorism experts who unlike our

esteemed opposition tonight studied

every single case of suicide terrorism

between 1980 and 2005 315 cases in total

and he concluded and I quote there is

little connection between suicide

terrorism and Islamic fundamentalism or

any of the world's religions rather what

nearly all suicide terrorist attacks

have in common is a specific secular and

strategic goal to compel modern

democracies to withdraw military forces

from territory that the terrorists

consider to be their Homeland and the

irony is when we talk about terrorism

the irony is that the opposition and the

Muslim terrorist the al-Qaeda types

actually have one thing in common

because they both believe that Islam is

a warlike violent religion they both

agree on that they have everything in

common AMA bin lad would be nodding

along to everything he's heard tonight

from the opposition that he agrees with

[Applause]

them the problem is the problem is that

mainstream Muslims don't the majority of

Muslims around the world don't in fact a

gentleman here can started quoting all

sorts of polls Gallup carried out the

biggest poll of Muslims around the world

of 35,000 50,000 Muslims in 35 countries

93% of Muslims rejected 9/11 and suicide

attacks and of the 7% who didn't they

all when pulled and focus grouped cited

political reasons for their support for

violence not religious reasons and as

for Islamic scholars and what they say

well Daniel talks about our University

of Oxford we'll go down to Oxford's

Center for Islamic Studies get hold of a

man named shik aifi Al akiti who is a

massively well credentialed and well

respected Islamic scholar who was

studied across the world who in the days

after 77 published a fatwa denouncing

terrorism in the name of Islam calling

for the protection of all non-combatants

at all times and describing suicide

bombings as an innovation with no basis

in Islamic law go and listen to she one

of Pakistan's most famous Islamic

scholars who published a 600 page fatwa

condemning the killing of all Innocents

and all suicide bombings unconditionally

without any ifs or buts there's nothing

new here this is mainstream Islam

mainstream scholarship which has said

this for years you don't go out and kill

people willy-nilly in the High Street or

anywhere else on a bus or a mall based

on verses of the Quran that you

cherry-pick without any context any

understanding any interpretation or any

commentary of information

please well it doesn't happen apparently

I didn't say it doesn't happen at all I

never said it didn't happen I don't

blame Islam yes it's a very good point

and a lot of us a lot of us are

campaigning against that and we're

campaigning against it in the name of

Islam we're campaigning against it in

the name of various interpretations of

Islam anarie comes and scares us with

her talk of sharia law I would like to

see the book of sharia law it doesn't

exist people argue over what Sharia law

is and you empower the

extremists by saying there is only one

version you Empower them all I don't

believe you took any interruption

so I think you should stay there for a

moment what we de what we're dealing

with we are dealing I took your point I

took your point here we are dealing with

a 1400 year old Global religion followed

by 1.6 billion people in every corner of

the world a quarter of humanity of all

backgrounds cultures ethnicities and yet

the opposition tonight wants to

generalize stereotype smear in order to

desperately win this debate and here's

my question if we're going to generalize

and smear if okay people say yesterday's

bombers and we've got to be careful

there's a trial going on were

yesterday's attackers sorry motivated by

Islam big debate I don't believe they

were let's say they were let's say fisel

Shazad the Time Square bomber was

motivated by Islam let's assume for sake

of argument that Richard Rees the shoe

bomber was by Islam if Islam is

responsible for these killings if Islam

is what is motivating these people and

Islam is therefore not a religion of

Peace a religion of War then ask

yourself this question why aren't the

rest of us doing it why is it such a

tiny minority of Muslims are

interpreting their religion in the way

that the opposition claim they are let's

assume there are 16,000 suicide bombers

in the world there aren't let's assume

there are for the sake of argument

that's

0.001% of the Muslim population globally

what about the other 99.99% of Muslims

who the opposition tonight either ignore

or smear the reality is that the rest of

us aren't blowing ourselves up tonight

the reality is that the opposition came

here tonight not worried about the fact

that me and Adam might P pull open our

jackets and blow ourselves up to that CU

we're followers of a warlike Warrior

religion which wants to take over Europe

and Daniel's University the the issue is

this the issue is

this unless the opposition can tell us

tonight and Peter Atkins is here one of

our great atheist intellectuals can tell

us tonight can they can answer this

question tonight why don't the vast

majority of Muslims around the world

behave as violently and aggressively as

a tiny minority of politically motivated

extremists then they might as well give

up and stop pretending they have

anything relevant to say about Islam or

Muslims as a whole ladies and gentlemen

let me just say this to you think about

what the opposite of this motion is if

you vote no tonight think about what

you're saying the opposite motion is

that Islam isn't a religion of Peace

it's a religion of War Of Violence of

Terror of aggression that the people who

follow Islam me my wife my retired

parents my six-year-old child that 1.8

million of your fellow British residents

and citizens that 1.6 billion people

across the world your fellow human

beings are all

followers promoters Believers in a

religion of violence do you really think

that do you really believe that to be

the case they say that in the Oxford

Union the most famous debate was in 1933

when Adolf Hitler looked out for the

result of the king and country motion

where they voted against fighting for

king and country and Hitler was

listening out for the result well

tonight 80 years on there are two groups

of people around the world who I would

argue are waiting for the result of

tonight's vote there are the millions of

peaceful non-violent law-abiding Muslims

both in the UK Europe Asia Africa and

Beyond who see Islam as the source of

their identity as a source of spiritual

fulfillment of Hope of Solace and there

are the phobes the haters the bigots out

there who want to push the Clash of

civilizations who want to divide all of

us into them and and ours and their

ladies and gentlemen I urge you all not

to fuel the arguments of the phobes and

bigots don't legitimate their divisions

don't legitimize their hate trust those

Muslims who you know who you've met who

you hear who don't believe in violence

who do want you to hear the peaceful

message of the Quran as they believe it

to be taught to the majority of Muslims

the Islam of peace and compassion and

mercy the Islam of the Quran not of

al-Qaeda ladies and gentlemen I beg to

propose this motion to the house I urge

you to vote Yes tonight thank you very

much for your time

[Music]