Have you ever read about, or personally experienced, the strange disturbing change of a seemingly well-adjusted, normal Muslim — someone who is a good neighbor, workmate and citizen — who becomes either radicalized or worse, violent? Major Nidal Hasan is one of the saddest examples. Hasan was convicted of killing 13 people and injuring more than 30 others in the Fort Hood mass shooting on November 5, 2009.
Often, when this happens, so-called experts rush to explain that this is the sad example of a very personal emotional disturbance, or a psychic break, that could happen to any person of any religious or ideological affiliation. Such so-called experts might say that the event should be entirely separated from the individual’s adherence to Islam.
I believe this is an effort to whitewash a dangerous Islamic doctrine that is seldom discussed, but is a significant belief in Islam. In Arabic, it is called al-Wala’ Wal-Bara’.
This phrase is difficult to translate, but in practice it represents alliance with or support for fellow Muslims, on one hand, and disavowal, enmity, and contempt for non-Muslims, on the other. This doctrine inculcates the sense that Muslims are to firmly support their Muslim brothers, but be antagonistic to non-Muslims. Thus, if there is conflict between non-Muslims and Muslims, every Muslim must support his Muslim brothers against the non-Muslim infidels.
A Muslim who lives in a Western system run by the kuffar (infidels) is confronted with an emotional dilemma. Being a good citizen and neighbor within the infidel society produces cognitive dissonance and guilt feelings. He or she is failing his/her Muslim brethren and Allah, if his/her country, or adopted country, is at war with a Muslim majority country, or at war with an Islamist organization such as Taliban or al-Qaeda. They are to support their coreligionists’ cause even against the interests of country in which they are citizens.
To explain this doctrine, many Muslims often cite a passage from the Qur’an’s fifth chapter, Surat al-Maida: “O you who believe, do not take Jews and Christians as patrons; they are patrons of each other. Whoever amongst you affiliates with them, he is one of them. God does not guide the folk who do wrong.” (Quran 5:51)
Take, for example, al-Jaza’iri, a Salafi commentator on the Quran, who explains the basic idea behind the doctrine we are considering. He says, “Those who support the enemies of Allah and his prophet have abandoned their patronage of Allah, Muhammed and the Muslims (…) You will see in the hearts of those who support them a sickness.”
Al-Jaza’iri defines that sickness as doubt, hypocrisy and Shirk (associating an idol with Allah in worship).
Al-Jaza’iri concludes, “It is generally agreed that lack of active support for the Muslim cause is an abandoning of a major precept of true faith.”
In addition, al-Qurtubi, in his commentary, identifies this phenomenon (al-Wala’ wa al-Bara’) with the Battle of Uhud (624 A.D), when early Muslims were defeated by the Meccan pagans, and hypocrites among the Muslims who had secret deals to support the Jews while proclaiming themselves to be with the Muslims. This idea has planted in a belief in many Muslims that one is obeying this Quranic precept only through overt support for Muslim victory in conflicts with non-Muslims.
Another commentator, al-Bayḍāwī, says that Muslims must not rely upon Non-Muslims or associate with them as if they are dear.
But as-Samarqandī gives a harsher verdict and says that the Muslim who takes this kind of patronage and friendship with Jews and Christians is actually in their false religions, and will join them in hellfire.
This doctrine combines with the Quranic description of non-Muslims as Unclean (Quran 9:28) and worse than animals (Quran 7: 179).
The Quranic patriarch Ibrahim (Abraham) declares the Muslim hatred against non-Muslims: “Indeed, there is an excellent example for you in Ibrahim and those with him, when they said to their people, “We disown (bara’) you and what you worship instead of Allah. We disbelieve in you. Enmity and hatred has arisen between us and you forever, unless you believe in Allah alone.” [Quran 60:4]
This is an effective emotional witches’ brew of ideas that implants a contempt for non-Muslims in the Muslim’s psychology. At the same time, a Muslim may feign outward conformity to the non-Muslim society in which a Muslim lives. This may be called, in some situations, in particular in Shiite Islam, Taqiyyah; the practice of concealing one’s belief and foregoing ordinary religious duties when under threat.
The popular contemporary Saudi author, Dr. Ahmed b Umar al-Bazmoul, in his book on this topic, Al Wala’ wa al-Bara’, claims that even open business dealing with the infidels and sharing in mutual home visits and gift-giving is all viewed as transgressing the Quranic injunction in Quran 5:51.
In sum, this doctrine raises emotional pressure on devout Muslims in the West until many feel that they must be against the infidel state or power. They must take actions that are antagonistic in order to truly self-actualize their Islamic faith in a way that honors Allah, his prophet and the Muslim community.
As long as contempt for the other is an Islamic “ethical” value, there will be Muslims who live in the midst of a people they hate and disdain. That emotional tension will make some of them an unintentional/unwitting Fifth column in any society in which they live, but do not control.
Darrell Pack is an Arabist and a member of the Islamic Reform Forum.
Dude says
It’s called “NonIslam-o-phobia” and it fills the scriptures. It is the hatred of everything that is not Islam.
That Nonislamophobia is the source of Islamophobia.
mortimer says
Al Walaa wal Baraa is the mirror image of what the fake ‘Islamophobia’ is supposed to be. Only, W-B is much worse than Islamophobia. W-B is a canonical, codified method of Islamic apartheid and supremacism.
W-B explains the mindset of jihadists.
Michael Copeland says
“As a muslim I must have hatred of everything non-Islam” – Anjem Choudary
“Enmity and hate shall forever reign between us” – Osama bin Laden
See more at “Islam’s Agenda: Muslims Speak”
https://gatesofvienna.net/2020/02/islams-agenda-muslims-speak/
mortimer says
Bravo to Darrell Pack. Al Walaa wal Baraa is the MOST important Islamic teachings for kafirs to learn … because it affects them more than any Islamic doctrine.
No one will understand Islam, who has not learned and mastered the teaching of W-B. It is that important.
Darrell Pack has done a service to non-Muslims by bringing this to their attention. W-B is an ‘ESSENTIAL’ teaching (usul ud-deen) which is ‘necessary’ for Islamic salvation. All Muslims are required to practice sacred contempt towards kafirs. It is a core requirement to hate kafirs ‘for the sake of Allah’.
I agree with Pack on the COGNITIVE DISSONANCE that Muslims *MIGHT* potentially feel. I think in practice that most Muslims ignore W-B and don’t dwell on it because they are not cognizant of it. They simply stay away from kafirs because it is customary and put unpleasantness out of their minds.
They wish well to everyone (with the exception of Jews in Israel) and they don’t go into Islam deeply.
If most Muslims truly understood the implications of W-B, I think many Muslims would leave Islam.
I recommend the following article :
Hating ‘for the Sake of Allah’- 03/26/2018 by Raymond Ibrahim — https://www.raymondibrahim.com/2018/03/26/hating-sake-allah/
Anjuli Pandavar says
“this doctrine raises emotional pressure on devout Muslims in the West until many feel that they must be against the infidel state or power. They must take actions that are antagonistic in order to truly self-actualize their Islamic faith.”
—
Indeed. There is also a cumulative correlation between the increasing emotional pressure and the extremeness of the action needed for expiation to be felt.
Thank you for laying all of this out so clearly.
mortimer says
Only a minority of Muslims seems to be aware of W-B even though it is ‘essential’.
W-B is canonical, codified religious bigotry. It is non-optional; it is compulsory. Most Muslims ignore this teachings in their day-to-day lives while working amidst the dirty kufaar.
A Muslims is require to SOCIALLY DISTANCE himself from a dirty kafir.
James Lincoln says
mortimer says,
“A Muslims is require to SOCIALLY DISTANCE himself from a dirty kafir.”
Apparently some muslims who are purposely coughing, sneezing, and spitting on non-muslims during this current pandemic did not get the memo…
gravenimage says
Unfortunately, all too many Muslims *do* practice this.
Boromir's Horn says
Interesting analogy that can be summed up to “the spoiled apple will always spoil”
David says
Islam is rotten to the Kor-an.
mortimer says
Pack translates W-B as “ALLIANCE and DISAVOWAL”.
Quote: “This phrase is difficult to translate, but in practice it represents alliance with or support for fellow Muslims, on one hand, and disavowal, enmity, and contempt for non-Muslims, on the other.”
W-B literally means ‘comradeship’ (Walaa) versus ‘cleansing’ (baraa). Muslims ‘CLEANSE’ themselves from the filthy culture of non-Muslims and from the pollution of their physical presence.
At worst, W-B constitutes an excuse for mistreating and destroying the well-being, reputation and even the lives of non-Muslims.
W-B creates a culture and an atmosphere of contempt directed by Muslims against non-Muslm kafirs.
Muslims mostly conceal this contempt:
Sahih Bukhari records that Abu ad-Darda’ said, “We smile in the face of some people although our hearts curse them.”
Ibn Kathir wrote in his commentary on chapter 3 verse 28 of the Quran:
“BELIEVERS ARE ALLOWED TO SHOW FRIENDSHIP TO THE DISBELIEVERS OUTWARDLY, BUT NEVER INWARDLY. For instance, Al-Bukhari recorded that Abu Ad-Darda’ said, “We smile in the face of some people ALTHOUGH OUR HEARTS CURSE THEM.””
Hesham Shehab says
Great citation. Thanks
commonsense says
Fine commentary, Mortimer.
Shirley Ann says
What about Christian & Jewish Americans, who seem to go “NATIVE” when they’re around Muslims, they become APOLOGISTS for ISLAM? IS THERE AN ISLAMIC NAME FOR THEM? In Ft, Hood, A Gen Kelly sat near the Coffins of Dead Americans, while later, Stating, that he just hope this event would Not deter his Muslim-Out/Reach Program. He later Resigned or Retired.
Mural says
Yes. The name for this is called stupidity.
rubiconcrest says
You may not believe this but a very well know author beat you to the recognition of this sudden transformation of Muslim friend to deadly foe. Antoine de Saint-Exupéry in “Wind, Sand and Stars”, 1939, pg 99-100, made this observation: … I had known el Mammun when he was our vassal. Loaded with official honors for services rendered …. by the French government …. he seemed to lack for nothing that belonged to the state of an Arab prince.
… And yet one night, without a sign of warning, he had massacred all the French officials in his train … and had fled. Treason is the name given to these sudden uprisings….brief glory that will go out like a rocket against the low wall of European carbines…..
… And yet the story of el Mammun was that of many other Arab chiefs. He grew old…. Pondering thus el Mammun discovered one night that he had betrayed the God of Islam and had sullied his hand by sealing in the hand of the Christians a pact in which he had been stripped of everything…. It is possible that he was fond of the officers he murdered. But love of Allah takes precendence. Good night el Mammun. God guard thee!”
rubiconcrest says
Thank you Darrell for your work in providing in the doctrinal reasons behind these seemingly inexplicable actions by Muslims. My god it does take study to learn what we are dealing with when it comes to Islam.
Another comment by Antoine de Saint-Exupéry was that the Arabs they took to see Paris were amazed that there were so many people and that no one was armed!
commonsense says
Very illuminating posts, rc. Thanks.
rooare says
I’ll bet me little loved ones and many others I know get tired of hearing me say “never trust Muslims”. But they will continue to hear it for it’s true one can never trust a Muslim,one never knows when they’ll turn on you like a rabid animal.
FYI says
“Do for others what you want them to do for you”
allah MISSED this,the Golden Rule{defined as being the MEANING of the law of Moses and all the prophets}Matthew 7 v 21
But then allah also MISSED that essential 2nd chief commandment of God revealed in the Torah{ a book allah confirms as being TRUE koran 3:3}didn’t he?allah also MISSED the 1st chief commandment of God{Deut 6:4-9}:by giving permission to violate the Exodus 20 laws{read your koran} this law cannot be satisfied.
“Do not bear a grudge against anyone,but settle your differences with him so that you will not commit a sin because of him.Do not take revenge or continue to HATE him,but
LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR as you love yourself.I am the Lord”
LEVITICUS 19:17-18{the Second Chief Commandment of God}
Here’s one for the islamic “scholars”:isn’t it a bit odd that allah{“the greatest of all deceivers” koran 3:54}COMPLETELY MISSED THAT,the Golden Rule and the 2nd chif commandment which is WHY islam is so filled with hate?
Isn’t wala wal baraa a violation of this CHIEF LAW OF GOD?You know it is!
Did you notice that the koran’s teachings do NOT conform to the Exodus 20 laws?
FYI says
Typo:
Matthew 7 v 12 The Golden Rule
{Matthew 7 v 21 is the requirement that needs to be fulfilled to enter the Kingdom of God}
OTTER says
Some ideas are so repulsive that people have difficulty in comprehending them and denial set in. Islam is mankind’s worst and -sad to say–most powerful idea.
gravenimage says
Yes–there is a great deal of denial about the savagery that Islam teaches.
Right after 9/11 I read the Qur’an to see if it really taught violence. I confess that at the time I thought there might be a few ambiguous passages that *might* seem to teach violence, rather like that of a few verses in the Old Testament, but I was completely shocked by what I found, and the Hadith and SIra are as bad or worse.
commonsense says
I began as you did..reading suras online (posts by the Muslim Students Association, U. of Cal.), and being horrified. This was just after 9-11. Shortly afterward, I bought the paperback Penguin Edition of the Qur’an (transl. N.J. Dawood), then books by Montgomery, Lewis, Trifkovic, Spencer, Warraq, Bat Ye’or, Fallaci, Bostom,et al., plus other Qur’an translations (e g. Pickthall) and Reliance of the Traveler. I remember, years ago, when I first discovered Jihad Watch, Hugh Fitzgerald cited other valuable sources – books by Schacht, Lal, Rodinson, and others now forgotten. I wish I had read these as well, but probably never will; old age and life’s demands make this unlikely.
commonsense says
Correction: Montgomery Watt, not Montgomery.
Tailless Baboon says
It’s said that there are many types of deceit permitted by Quran apart from Takiyya.If that’s true,could anyone provide the entire range of deceptive tactics permitted?( with pronunciation).
Thanks,
gravenimage says
Tailless Baboon, here is a good description of the types of Islamic lying:
Taqiyya (Shia) or Muda’rat (Sunni): tactical deceit for the purposes of spreading Islam.
Kitman: deceit by omission.
Tawriya: deceit by ambiguity.
Taysir: deceit through facilitation (not having to observe all the tenets of Sharia).
Darura: deceit through necessity (to engage in something “Haram” or forbidden).
Muruna: the temporary suspension of Sharia in order that Muslim immigrants appear “moderate.”
(thanks to Hesperado for this list)
I would also toss in Tu Quoque–the usually false implication that what the Infidels do or have done is either just as bad as what Islam calls for, or that they should not be allowed to speak about the horrors of Islam, because of something the West did hundreds or even thousands of years ago.
This is quite a list–but given Allah being referred to admiringly as “the Best of Deceivers” it hardly surprises.
Wellington says
No one more than mortimer over many years now here at JW has pointed out all the deleterious, nefarious, and downright wicked implications for mankind of “al walaa wal barraa.” So, kudos to mortimer for this.
Islam is awful, not gracious, does not embrace a Golden Rule for all, and with a reputed founder who was a brutal, albeit diabolically clever, narcissistic phony—and accompanied no less this putrid religion by a made-up hate manual for its chief religious work and a completely and awful fictional deity. And this is just for “starters.”
In any case, thanks again, mortimer, for your diligence over a very long time for pointing out that “al walaa wal barraa” is at the heat of Islam and thus at the center of Islam is a profoundly dark heart. Few, if any hearts, darker.
gravenimage says
Very much agree about Mortimer, Wellington–your reply had not posted when I made my comment, below.
gravenimage says
Al-Wala’ wa al-Bara’: Islam’s Doctrine of Contempt for the Other
……………………..
Many thanks to Darrell Pack for this important article.
And thanks again to poster Mortimer, who has been exposing this repulsive Islamic doctrine for some time here on Jihad Watch.
OTTER says
Islam’s capacity for hatred is beyond belief. Think of dogs. Can you think of any living thing that is so genetically and pathetically programmed to love even the most miserable of us humans than dogs? No. But Islam has managed, indeed, managed to hate dogs! How can one even begin to plumb the depths of its pure, terrifying evil genius?
David Grisez says
Islam is both a religious system and a government, political system. As a result of its teaching Islam is the ultimate us versus them system. It is Muslims only being kind and good to fellow Muslims and being hostile and at war with all non Muslims.
Patrick B. Ludwig says
Al Wala wa al Baraa
While all the explanations and analyses of this fundamental principle of islam are entirely correct, I do believe they are over-complicating a very simple and natural phenomenon. One could call it “Loyalty to the Pack”.
Most of us personally know a couple, a family or a closely knit group of people constantly bickering with each other, perhaps even resorting to violence – aka. domestic violence.
And have were surprised, even disturbed, by the ferocity with which members of these communities would defend against perceived attacks or criticism from outsiders.
The loyalty with which a beaten spouse might support and defend the spousebeater, returning again and again to more misery, even from hispital.
The reluctance to press charges agaubstca pedophile spouse.
Even a strongly fragmented pack will stand together against an enemy.
Nations, societies, communities work on this principle, so do armies, police-forces, schools, political parties, families, the mafia.
And so do packs of wolves, gangs of chimpanzees, herds of sheep, even hives of wasps and bees.
You are either in or out.
It is only very recently that some – mainly western societies have started to turn from the collective to the individual.
This change of focus enables an individual to freely (more or less) leave the fold and experiment with other – non conforming – ideas.
But it only needs a common enemy for these individuals to return to the old ways. Provided that the process of de-collectivation has not progressed so far that the individuals have not dissociated themselves so far that the common enemy is not anxmore perceived as such – in short, that they have forgotten their roots.
This individualisation comes at a price – the comfort of belonging. Loneliness.
When dissociation from the group is total, the roots are forgotten or perceived as harmful and when loneliness becomes unbearable, these individuals seek a new group, to regsin this sense of belonging. In religions, cults, cultures, nationalities, whatever. The closer knit these groupings, the better. They “go native”. The join islam, daesh, al qaeda, the KKK, white aryan nations, born again christianity, the arny, hells angels or even the republican party.
And that is why “enlightened” societies will always lose against islam. Unless they return to their own fold. Examples ar Hungary with Victor Orban, Russia with Wladimir Wladimirovich Putin, the USofA with Donald Trump – MAGA and many more.
To use an example from Chinggis Han:
“A single arrow can be broken by a child. A sheaf of arrows will withstand an army.”
A lesson, that every politician has learned. The necessary glue is ideology. Any ideology will do as long as it creates a sense of identity.
gravenimage says
Patrick, you are right that sticking together is a general human trait.
But most people *don’t* murderously hate and want to violently conquer those who may peacefully think differently from themselves.
No Muzzies Here says
Explains why there is no hope that the practitioners of this religion can ever become civilized, sensible, non-violent, reasonable, cooperative members of a civilized nation.
OLD GUY says
Non-Islam is the ideology of Muhammad and the koran. Islam is no different from any dictatorship, it is all about power and control. In order for Islam to maintain and grow it’s control it must use violence and have an enemy that they are continually fighting. They create a fear factor in their population through this enemy and use violence both against the supposed enemy and their population that may oppose their rule.
Sounds like the same plan HITLER used in Germany. History does repeat its self.
don vito says
May someone quickly point out, to dhimmicrats, this is where their alliance with saracens is headed. Oh never mind, the dhimmicrats wouldn’t believe the warning anyway. They know better, they believe in science.
gravenimage says
You don’t have to reject science in order to recognize Islam as a threat. This seems like an odd claim.
Aussie Infidel says
don vito, Are you confusing science with Leftist ideology? Without the benefit of science, the West would be about as advanced as the Islamic world. Science can’t solve all our problems, but it sure beats praying to your favorite Deity to help you defeat your enemies. Certainly the Saracens are bad news. And their Leftist enablers are traitors who should be sent packing, to experience life in some Islamic shit-hole country. Perhaps then they might realize that their utopian ideas are simply fantasies. And if the Muslims were ever to gain political power, Leftists will be among the first to be invited to accept the Shahadah – or be summarily executed.
tim gallagher says
It seems clear to me that Islam is an ideology that is full of hatred for non-Muslims and this doctrine discussed in this article is a central part of this Muslim hatred. I consider that almost all Muslims are bound to have a bad attitude to all aspects of life as it is lived by non-Muslims. So I therefore conclude that it is a totally futile and downright dangerous and idiotic policy that all our western nations are following when they let Muslims migrate into our countries. Letting these haters of our way of life into our countries is extreme stupidity. I agree with No Muzzies Here’s comment just up above – most Muslims cannot make decent citizens of our countries. Islam is completely incompatible in its view of all aspects of life. Hungary and the Visegrad bloc countries get it, but so many buffoons in our western societies still think that Muslims, these haters of our way of life, deserve respect. Talk about self-destructive.
Aussie Infidel says
Daryl Pack has done a good job in exposing this little understood Islamic doctrine of contempt for everything unIslamic. I must admit that I didn’t realize just how significant Al-Wala wa al-Bara was until I read one of Mortimer’s early posts on this doctrine; or even that it was part of the Sharia (Reliance of the Traveler, Acceptance and Hatred, w59.2). Readers might now understand why many Muslim immigrants have little desire to assimilate into Western society. Most likely, these Muslims will remain a potential fifth column in our midst, and according to the Muslim Brotherhood directive, attempt to “destroy Western society from within”.