The Koran has a lot to say about “hypocrites”. Muhammad and Allah are very troubled by both their existence and their activities. However the Koran is rather less forthcoming about the nature of the hypocrisy itself in many (though not all) cases. Thus, to find out the sort of attitudes and actions that cause the Koran to level the charge of hypocrisy against people we have to turn to other sources. Muslims have faced the similar problems in understanding many of the verses of the Koran. Consequently there are many commentaries (Tafseers) on the Koran which therefore address this and other problems. Muslim Authors (e.g. “H. Yahya”), though drawing on the same sources as I, seem to concentrate on the “characteristics” (all very bad) of the Hypocrites (to help Muslims identify them), rather than on what was the cause or nature of the “hypocrisy” in the first place.

This article does not claim any originality. On the contrary, all that is being undertaken is a drawing together of the Koran verses related to hypocrites and the Tafseers on these verses in order to clearly identify the Islamic understanding of this word.

To that end presented below are the verses related to “hypocrites” in the Koran (Hilali-Khan translation{1}) and identified in ibn Kathir (D).

In a departure from my normal methodology of presenting all the relevant evidence, I am simply giving the results of the study and the references used. The reason is quite simple: length of article. The “longer form” which did indeed present the verses and included a summary of the Tafseers{4} was running at over 26,000 words and I leave it to your imagination as to the length of the article with Tafseers quoted verbatim.

I thought that this was rather too long for publication here and so decided to omit the details. However, in the interests of veracity I have provided a list of Koran verses that support each “type” of hypocrite identified, as well as a list of the Tafseers used to arrive at my conclusion.

Anyone wishing to check my accuracy is thus enabled to do so.

In the original article I arranged these verses chronologically{2}, not in the normal sequence of the Koran{3} because this gives the view of how the Koran's attitude changes over time.

Regrettably, this aspect of my investigation is lost in this short version, but it has no bearing on the overall conclusions.


Hypocrites in the Koran

As will be seen from the list below, there are many types of hypocrite{5} mentioned in the Koran. In some cases the actual verse of the Koran contains the word “hypocrite(s)”, in others the verse is related to hypocrites by the writers of Tafseer, thus the use of some verses may be less obvious at first sight.


According to the Koran, hypocrites are:

  • ·Muslims who are :
  • ·“weak”, “half-hearted”, “imperfect” or “doubters” in faith (29:10-11; 2:10-12,20; 8:49 (al-Jalalayn); 3:154, 156; 33:12-19,72-73; 4:88,140-142; 57:14; 47:16; Sura 63; 24:47-50; 48:6; 9:45-49, 124-127; 5:52).
  • ·“fake” Muslims”, i.e. those that have only the outward practice (orthopraxy), but no Islamic belief. (107:4-5; 2:8-9,10-12; 4:142; 13-14,19, 21; 59:11-12; 33:72-73; 24:47-50; 4:72; 48:11-16; 9:61-63,64-68, 97-98; 5:41)
  • ·“bought” Muslims, those induced to convert through bribery (33:60-61; 9:58-59(?)), often, therefore, weak or fake Muslims also.
  • ·incomplete in their professions of faith (2:13-14; 5:41,61). This applied in particular to the Medinan Jewish “converts” who (according to Shafi) professed belief in Allah and the last day, but not Muhammad (not surprisingly!), thus outwardly they were quasi-Muslim, whilst inwardly they remained Jews – a special case of b).
  • ·Muslim through fear of violence, despoilment or murder from “true-believer” or “sincere” Muslims (3:154 [ibn Abbas], Sura 63; 58:14-19; 9:56-57, 97-98).
  • ·apostatising from Islam, either open (rarely) or un-declared. (29:10,11; 2:16; 8:49; 4:88, 115, 137-138, 142; 33:12-19,60-61 [ibn Kathir]; 47:25; Sura 63; 58:14-19; 9:45-49, 64-68, 73-74 [though Maududi views this differently], 9:94-96, 124-127).
  • ·lax in prayer (107:4-5) or other Islamic duty (2:27, Sura 63)
  • ·reluctant to follow Islamic (Sharia) Law, or who only use it if doing so offers them an advantage (2:10-12; 3:72-73; 4:60-61, 115; 24:47-50, 9:124-127).  See also 2e (below)
  • ·close friends with non-Muslims (2:10-12, 4:140-141; 5:52) (elsewhere the Koran says Muslims can be friendly to non-Muslims).
  • ·unwilling or reluctant to wage jihad, fight non-Muslims and die for Islam (2:204-6; 8:49; 3:121; 47:20-21, 29-31; 3:156,167-168,188; 4:72; 24:53; 61:2-4; 48:11-16; 9:42, 45-49,  53-54, 56-57, 64-68, 81-83, 86-87, 94-96, 97-98 ){6}. To “turn away” from fighting in Jihad renders the Muslim an apostate (47:20-21 – Shafi).
  • ·inclined (originally) to challenge Muhammad. Today this has morphed into any rejection of Islamic orthodoxy (3:156; 4:140-141; 33:1, 36-38, 48, 60-61; 58:14-19; 48:6; 9:58-59, 61-63, 73-74).
  • ·Take the part of non-Muslims in a dispute or discussion (2:27; 4:88; 59:11-12; 33:1)
  • ·“subversive Muslims”. People who pretend to be Muslims in order to undermine Islam from within (2:204-206; 33:60-61 [ibn Kathir, Maududi]; 3:188; 47:16; Sura 63; 24:63; 58:14-19; 48:6; 9:42, 61-63, 64-68, 73-74; 5:41). See note {7} below.
  • ·Liars, either to other Muslims and/or to themselves (by hiding sins). (2:204, Sura 63)
  • ·Are only Muslim for personal gain (2:204-206; 9:75-78, 97-98) – related to c) also.
  • ·Non-Muslims who:
  • ·choose (in terms of a decision or act of will) to remain non-Muslim (2:16,27,44; 4:140-141; 3:72-73; 47:16; ). (I think the 'rationale' is that non-Muslims “know” that Islam is “true” the moment they hear about it. See also {8}).
  • ·pretend respect for Muslims (2:13-14, ), though perhaps this is so out of fear.
  • ·Showed interest in becoming Muslim (and may have been bribed as an inducement{9}) then did not convert (8:49 – ibn Kathir).
  • ·Lie to Muslims (3:118-119; 3:173,188; Sura 63) to “harm” Islam (3:188)
  • ·reject Shariah Law as their legal code (2:10-12; 4:115;) or who only use it if doing so offers them an advantage (4:60-61, according to al-Wahidi and Maududi; 3:72-73)
  • ·Seek to harm the Muslims in some way, e.g. undermine their faith, betray them to enemies etc. (3:118-119)
  • ·argue with or disapprove of Muhammad or doubt his actions etc. for some reason (33:36-38 )
  • ·mock Muslims (9:79)
  • ·selfish people (Maududi), both Muslim or non-Muslim.
  • ·peacemakers or arbitrators (either Muslim or non-Muslim) between Muslims and non-Muslims (2:10-12 – ibn Kathir). I should state that I find this view of ibn Kathir's odd to say the very least, since it is contradictory to K.8:61 “But if they [non-Muslims] incline to peace, you also incline to it, and (put your) trust in Allah. Verily, He is the All-Hearer, the All-Knower.”See also {10}.
  • ·those who say “bad” things about “good” Muslims, thus one is a hypocrite as well as a “blasphemer”{10} to criticise Muhammad! (24:11-26)
  • ·to be treated as non-Muslims. That is: any hypocrite (Muslim or non-Muslim) is to be treated as if they are Kaffirs. (2:8-20 – Shafi extended commentary; 9:73-74 Maududi, 9:84 Shafi).
  • ·Are witches and wizards. (See ibn Kathir's commentary on Sura 113.){11}



The word “hypocrite” in the Koran is both a cypher and a catch-all for Muslims as well as being applied to non-Muslims.

It is a cypher because it can mean an apostate from Islam, [see 1f) above]. The identification of apostates as a group within “hypocrites” is important because Muslim apologists often say that the Koran does not speak of punishing apostates. Linguistically this is true: the word “apostate” does not occur in those Koran verses, but given that “hypocrite” is a cypher for apostate, the Koran does speak about apostates, by defining them as one “class” of Muslim “hypocrite” – the problem is to dissect out when this particular meaning is relevant.

It is a catch-all in that any failure on the part of a Muslim to live a less than fully Islamic life (except under Darura{12} or Maruna{13}) makes a Muslim a “hypocrite” (K.66:9 may be understood in this light). This is the case even if the person converts out of fear for his/her life – s/he is a hypocrite if s/he does not become a fully orthodox (or “true-believer”) Muslim{6}.

Almost amusingly a person bribed into Islam{9} is also a hypocrite, not having full faith in Islam – to which one is almost forced to ask “And what did you expect, Mo? Sincerity from someone you bribed?”

Another important category of Muslim “hypocrite” is the Muslim who doesn't want to see Shariah Law (in all its barbarity) fully enforced – and that not only within the Muslim community, but upon all people of course.

Also declared “hypocrites” are those Muslims who form close associations with non-Muslims, Muslims should only be “best friends” with other Muslims and should not take the part of a non-Muslim if they are in dispute with a Muslim. A corollary of this is that some Muslims understand this to mean that they must shelter and support (at least through silence) those Muslims who indulge themselves in terrorist activity or the preaching thereof{14}.

Somewhat ironically perhaps the Koran text itself thus tells us that “Quranite”{15} Muslims are also “hypocrites”, as are “Reformist”{16} Muslims. And so are “peace-loving” (“moderate”) Muslims - those unwilling to kill in sword-Jihad against non-Muslims. Thus the definitions of “hypocrite” as applied to Muslims acts as a “lock-out” on any attempts to reform Islam: such attempts can only be made by those the Koran – and thus Islam – itself calls “hypocrites”, since they are seen as “challenging the message of Muhammad”.

In fact the Koran and commentaries make a Mussalman's willingness to “wage (sword) jihad in the way of Allah with their possession and their person - i.e. risk life and limb”{17} (K.4:95; see also: 9:20,88; 61:11) a touchstone for being an orthodox Muslim [see 1j above for the negative confirmation]. Any one who isn't so willing is also a “weak” or “half-hearted” Muslim – referred to in the Koran as “those with a disease in their hearts” or similar to describe anyone who has any doubts about Islam's teachings.

The final group of (notional) Muslims that are declared to be “hypocrites” - and to be fair this category has the merit of being deserved – are the “subversive Muslims”. These are people who only joined Islam in order to undermine it from within. Not surprisingly, such folk are frowned on by the Koran{18}.

Turning to non-Muslims, the Koran more or less declares all non-Muslims “hypocrites” - at least those who have heard the message of Islam. The notion here is that once a person hears{19} the message they “know in their heart” the 'truth' about Islam. Therefore any failure to convert is the result of their hypocritically refusing to acknowledge this 'truth'. This is implicit in the word used in the Koran to describe non-Muslims - “Kaffir”. This word means “one who covers (up the truth)” and was originally used (and occurs in this sense in the Koran) for the “tillers of the soil” who “cover up” the seeds after planting them.

Again it is ironic to note that the Koran regards as (even greater, perhaps,) “hypocrites” those non-Muslims who “make nice” to Muslims whilst disliking or fearing them. The irony is that the Koran tells Muslims to do just this to non-Muslims if the Muslims are in fear of the non-Muslims (K.3:28) and the Bukhari hadith tells Muslims to “smile in the face of some people although our hearts curse them.” (also quoted in ibn Kathir on this verse).

The final two major groups of exclusively non-Muslim hypocrites (or, perhaps, hypocrites “twice over”) are those who don't want Shariah Law enforced on them (though why someone would not want a legal system enforced on them that discriminates against them I simply cannot imagine – and, yes, I am being sarcastic) and those who actively seek to “harm” Muslims.

In this latter-most case (that of “harming”) one can well see that persons who try to subvert Muslims particularly from within the Islamic community could be seen as “hypocritical” since they would have to be operating in a covert way. However, this is not the only meaning attached to the “harm-doers”. Given that the Koran says that all non-Muslims really “know that Islam is true”, then  “harm-doers” can be understood to mean anyone who says anything “nasty” about Islam (even if true!) since anything that “disturbs – or challenges – the 'spiritual' peace” of the Islamic community is deemed harmful.

The Koran makes it clear that the particular hypocrisy of selfishness applies to both Muslim and non-Muslim alike and given that selfishness is one of mankind's least attractive traits, I find myself in agreement with the intention of the Koran (to castigate such people), though the language is curious since it is predicated on the idea that such people are aware of their “wrong-doing” which is not a given for all and why call them “hypocrites” at all? Why not just stick with selfish? The only reason I can deduce (and it is only a deduction) is that hypocrites go to hell, therefore lumping everybody with whom the Koran disagrees together as “hypocrites” is a convenient way of saying “and you're going to hell too!”

A curious form of hypocrisy is that of “telling tales” about Muslims. It is fair enough to call  “tattlers” hypocrites for spreading nasty rumours about nice Muslims{20}, however there is a further implication and that is that Muslims should “cover” for one another by simply not believing that the “best of mankind” and such “superior” people as Muslims{21} would do illegal or immoral things. This, I suggest, is a less-than-healthy attitude in that it means that the victims of abuse will have little or no chance of redress since the prevailing mind-set is simply not to believe them.

As will be seen from the above the word “hypocrite” is used in the Koran to describe a wide range of people, both Muslim and non-Muslim, who do something – anything – that is contrary to the teachings of Islam.

Thus the most succinct definition of “hypocrite” within the Koran might be “not a true-believer Muslim”.

An interesting point which bears on this topic is the idea of “the four (types of) hearts”:

  • ·the heart that is clear like a shining lamp - the [true] believer's heart.
  • ·the heart that is covered and tied up – the non-Muslim's heart.
  • ·the heart that is upside-down – the apostate's heart.
  • ·the heart that is clad in armour – the “hypocritical” Muslim's heart in which is a mix of faith and hypocrisy.

The point here is that the “shining lamp” of the believer's heart will enable them to see their way as they cross the “narrow way” into paradise. All others (without such light) will inevitably lose their footing and fall into hell – thus one element of the importance of being a “true-believer” Muslim.

This leaves the problem of defining a “true-believer” Muslim. This is a major issue within Islam itself as can be seen from the habit of various groups of Muslims to declare other groups of Muslim non-believers or apostates by declaring Takfir{22}. A corollary of this is the need for many Muslims to be seen as “true-believers” and thus avoid any risk of censure within their community. This in turn leads to increasingly literalistic interpretations of the Koran, because this is easier to defend, whereas a more nuanced approach to Koranic exegesis opens the practitioner up to the charge of not being a real Muslim. Thus we see the increasing “radicalisation”{23} of Islam today as group after group seems to want to outdo the other in orthodoxy and self-righteous pietistic behaviour, a sort of “race to the bottom” in Islamic interpretation{24}. Thus in the “Arab Spring” Countries of Egypt and Tunisia for instance the “moderate Islamist”{25} governments are being challenged by the “radical Islamist”{25} Salafists and one is left wondering what more “radical” group would arise to challenge the Salafists if they seized power. In other words Islamic interpretation is like a set of Russian dolls in that “inside” every group is another yet more orthodox in its interpretation. (Another analogy is the rhyme about fleas{23}.)


Note and References.

  • ·I use the Hilali-Khan translation because it comes from the Islamic University of Medina, Saudi Arabia and has the imprimatur of the highest Saudi religious Authorities. As such, it is the nearest thing to an “authorised” version that exists. Where the English of this translation is unclear I have compared it to some 14 others and amended the phraseology for clarity.
  • ·Arrangements of the Suras by chronology are always somewhat speculative since the effort requires that events alluded to within the verses are tied to Muslim-authored histories and Biographies which were often written down many years after the events. Thus it is debatable as to whether these sources can be deemed in any way independent. Furthermore, even if it is so allowed, all that can be truly dated is the passages to which such historical links can be made because the Hadith show that Muhammad appended new recitations to older ones on the same or similar subjects.
  • ·Approximately longest to shortest with no reference to chronology.
  • ·The Tafseers used are: al-Jalalayn, al-Wahidi (though not technically a Tafseer), ibn Abbas, ibn Kathir and Tustari for “ancient” sources and Maududi and Shafi for modern (20th century) ones.
  • ·Ibn Kathir has this to say at the start of his Tafseer on these verses: “The revelations about the characteristics of the hypocrites were revealed in Al-Madina, this is because there were no hypocrites in Makkah. Rather the opposite was the situation in Makkah, since some people were forced to pretend that they were disbelievers, while their hearts concealed their faith [in Islam].” Thus ibn Kathir sees no hypocrisy in pretending to be a non-Muslim if you're actually Muslim, it's only hypocrisy to pretend to be Muslim if you're really a non-Muslim. According to Islam, when a Muslim pretends to be a non-Muslim s/he is practicing “Maruna” to blend in or to avoid unwanted attention!
  • ·This is another very important point since it implies that to be a “true believer” Muslim one must be (at the minimum) ready and willing to “fight in the way of Allah” as part of Jihad against non-Muslims. As such it means that pacifist Muslims are, by definition, hypocrites.
  • ·At the start of his Tafseer on Sura 2, Maududi has this to say: “During this period, a new type of "Muslim," munafiqin (hypocrites), had begun to appear. Though signs of duplicity had been noticed during the last days at Makkah, they took a different shape at Al-Madinah. At Makkah there were some people who professed Islam to be true but were not prepared to abide by the consequences of this profession and to sacrifice their worldly interests and relations and bear the afflictions which inevitably follow the acceptance of this creed [i.e. “half-hearted” Muslims]. But at Al-Madinah different kinds of munafiqin (hypocrites) began to appear. There were some who had entered the Islamic fold merely to harm it from within. There were others who were surrounded by Muslims and, therefore, had become "Muslims" to safeguard their worldly interests [i.e. fake Muslims]. They, therefore, continued to have relations with the enemies so that if the latter became successful, their interests should remain secure. There were still others who had no strong conviction of the truth of Islam [i.e. half-hearted or even fake Muslims again] but had embraced it along with their clans. Lastly, there were those who were intellectually convinced of the truth of Islam but did not have enough moral courage to give up their former traditions, superstitions and personal ambitions and live up to the Islamic moral standards and make sacrifice in its way [i.e. reluctant Muslims].” Thus Maududi states that hypocrites or “Munafiqin” can be: half-hearted, reluctant or fake Muslims, or fifth-columnists.
  • ·(4:97-99) This verse and its commentary is more important than might be suspected at first sight. Recall that the “hypocrites” here are quasi-Muslims who continue to live amongst non-Muslims despite their being Muslim lands open to them where they could lead the “full life of a Muslim” (Maududi). What then of Muslims living today in non-Muslim lands? How can they justify their continuance there? Maududi in his commentary to this verse answers the question directly: “As regards "migration in the way of Allah", it is an obligation with two exceptions: one may remain there to struggle [i.e. wage Jihad] for the establishment of Islam and to change the system of life based on unbelief into the system of Islam; just as the Prophets and their immediate followers did in the initial stages of their mission; or one may remain there in a state of great disgust and repugnance as long as one is unable to find any way out of it.” In other words: provided the Muslims are engaged in Jihad to bring that Country into the Darul Islam, they are allowed to remain there. The second point to consider is this: those “quasi-Muslims” fought against “true-believer” Muslims. Thus the second cause of their vilification is precisely this: that Muslims fought on the side of Kaffirs against Muslims. Implicit is that doing so make the Muslim a “hell-bound hypocrite”. On this basis it is understandable why Muslims in non-Islamic Countries are often under-represented in Law Enforcement, the Military and the security services. (See also Koran 25:52 and 28:86 for example.)
  • ·(8:49) This oddity needs a little amplification. One use of both Zakat and war-booty is for it to be given to non-Muslims “for the reconciliation of hearts” to Islam – i.e. as a bribe to induce conversion (or otherwise benefit Islam). If, therefore, some of the Pagans at Badr had previously been bribed by Muhammad in an unsuccessful attempt to induce them to convert their characterisation as “hypocrites” makes more sense. (Let me add that such bribery is the only reason why Zakat may be given to non-Muslims, in the case of war-booty an allied non-Muslim force also receives its due share.)
  • ·It is very odd, if not downright perverse, to hear and read Muslims call those who “insult the prophet” blasphemers because only God (or a god) can be blasphemed, which means that (according to Islam) it is impossible to blaspheme Muhammad!
  • ·This, incidentally, explains the Muslim outrage over the “Harry Potter” films even though none of the characters were expressly Muslim.
  • ·Darura – necessity. This doctrine permits a Muslim to set aside parts of Islamic belief and/or practice at necessity. Thus if Muslims can't kill apostates due to the law of the land, they may, without wrong-doing, set aside that portion of Islamic law. But note that this does not mean that they reject that law, merely that it is set aside. Indeed, under “Darura”, such things must be re-instated once conditions permit.
  • ·Maruna - flexibility. A Muslim may “disguise” his/her faith by acting “Un-Islamically” if doing so accrues a greater benefit to Islam. An example of this was the 9/11 terrorists who wore western clothes, drank alcohol and visited strip-joints (reportedly) so that they would not be identified as “Islamists”.
  • ·Americans, in particular, may be aware of CAIR's (openly short-lived) campaign to stop Muslims cooperating with the FBI, see here, here and here.
  • ·Quranite Muslims are those (usually Sunni Muslims) that make the (baseless) claim that it is only the Koran (Quran) that need be followed. The claim is baseless since the Koran itself declares almost fifty (50) times that Muslims must obey Muhammad (as well as Allah) and follow Muhammad's example. Since Muhammad's words are not found in the Koran (at least thus Muslims claim though careful textual analysis controverts this view) the Muslim must turn to the Sunnah and in particular the Hadith (especially the Sahih collections of Bukhari and Muslim) to find Muhammad's orders, directions etc. and the Sharia Law (which is the out-working of the commandments in the Koran and the example of Muhammad). Thus the Quranite Muslim is actually disobedient to the Koran s/he claims to uphold as the “one true Authority” by neglecting the Sunnah and Sharia.
  • ·“Reformist” Muslims are a broad Church of Muslims. At one pole are those who seek to virtually re-write the Koran (at least in translation) to white-wash into non-existence all the “nasty” verses. Others seek to “open the door to” ijtihad (personal interpretation, often based around the “history” of various verses) and thus use exegetics and casuistry to achieve the same end.  (To be fair, these groups are trying to produce a civilised form of Islam.)  A milder form are those who merely tone down nasty verses (again usually in translation) by use of interpolation and/or selective use of sources. The irony, perhaps, is that if we define “reform” in the terms best known in the West (i.e. the Protestant reformation), then a “reformist” Muslim is a Wahhabi and supports Al-quaeda.
  • ·In fact “sword-Jihad” (jihad bis Saif) is but one of four types of jihad; “Jihad of the heart” aka “Jihad of the soul” (jihad bil qalb/nafs), “tongue-Jihad” aka “pen-Jihad” (Jihad bil lisan /qallam) and “hand-Jihad” (jihad bil yad) are the others. Of these, only “heart-Jihad” is aimed at the Muslim, the others are aimed at overcoming the non-Muslim in various ways. Some Muslim writers subsume sword-jihad into hand-jihad.
  • ·Those with a sense of irony will note that the Muslim Brotherhood considers “undermining from within” an entirely legitimate practice when applied to the overthrow of the West, it's only “hypocrisy” when people do it to Islam.
  • ·I should add that some Muslim writers regard “hearing” as meaning more that just having Islam preached at one, but equally others do not and this latter opinion has more weight in the Koran.
  • ·The origin of this goes back to the allegation of adultery levelled against Aisha by some Muslims, much to Muhammad's (and Allah's) discomfort. These allegations were dealt with by “revelation” of verses – thus we can see just how upset 'Allah' was by this.
  • ·These sentiments are found in: K.3:110 “You are the best community...” and K.3:139 “... you are superior...”
  • ·“Takfir”. I should state that Islamic tradition frowns on those who declare Takfir on others who are Muslim, yet this has been firstly a ploy used in history and secondly a technique used today to “justify” Muslim-on-Muslim (“green on green”) killing. This same doctrine lies at the heart of the 1400 year Sunni-Shia fratricide, thus the use of Takfir – even though “officially” frowned on – is endemic in Islam.
  • ·I would argue that “radicalisation” is the wrong term; rather it is either increasing orthodoxy or increasing literalism, i.e. reform (as in a “return to the origins”). Thus Muslims “radicals” are really Islamic reformers.
  • ·I should note that all strands of Koran interpretation have been around almost from the inception of Islam. Which has the greater following at any given time has depended on a very wide set of conditions in history as can be seen from the alternation of “liberal” and “oppressive” periods in Islamic history and it is clear that a “liberal” period is always followed, sooner or later, by an orthodox back-lash, just as we see today with the increasing “radicalisation” (reformation) of Islam.
  • ·The terms “moderate Islamist” and “radical Islamist” really have no meaning. In the first place both groups agree on the same aims – a worldwide Islamic Caliphate – they just disagree on the (level of) use of violence entertained in achieving their goals and the degree of tolerance they permit those Muslims who don't fully accept their methods.
  • ·For those that don't know it: “Large fleas have, upon their backs, little fleas to bite 'em. Little fleas have smaller ones and so ad infinitum”.


Bibliography and Further Reading.

  • ·“Interpretation of the meaning of the Qur'an in English.” Dr. Muhammad Taqi-ud-Din Al-Hilali and Dr. Muhammad Muhsin Khan, 1992. Islamic University of Medina. (“Hilali-Khan” translation.)
  • ·“Asbab al-Nuzul.” Ali ibn Ahmad al-Wahidi (Trans. Mokrane Guezzou), 2008 Royal Aal al-Bayt Institute for Islamic Thought, Amman, Jordan. (Technically this is not a Tafseer since it deals with the “the occasions, reasons, and contexts for the Revelation of the Holy Qur’an” to quote it's introduction. But by this very fact it also frequently illuminates the meaning of a verse and for this reason has been used herein.)
  • ·“Tanwir al-Miqbas min Tafsir Ibn 'Abbas”, attributed to: Abdullah Ibn 'Abbas or Muhammad al-Firuzabadi. (Trans. Mokrane Guezzou), 2007. Royal Aal al-Bayt Institute for Islamic Thought, Amman, Jordan
  • ·“Tafsir ibn Kathir”, Alama Imad ud Din Ibn Kathir (concise version).
  • ·“Tafseer al-Tustari.” Sahl b. Abdullah al-Tustari (Trans. Annabel Keeler and Ali Keeler), 2011 Royal Aal al-Bayt Institute for Islamic Thought Amman, Jordan
  • · “Tafhim al-QurHYPERLINK ""'HYPERLINK ""an.” Sayyid Abul Ala Maududi.
  • ·“Maariful Quran.” Maulana Mufti Muhammad Shafi. (Revised by Mufti Muhammad Taqi Usmani), 1995-2004. Darul Uloom Karachi, Pakistan.
  • ·“The Hypocrite According to the Koran.” Harun Yahya, 2004. Available from: (I should note that some of his Koran references are not truly about hypocrites according to the Tafseers.)
  • ·“What is the definition of a Hypocrite in Islam?
  • ·Muslims be careful from the Muslim hypocrites [sic]

Comments powered by CComment

Joomla templates by a4joomla