Islam and Antisemitism

From the Religious Perspective and the History of Muslims rescuing Jews under Persecution

by Dr. Zahid Aziz

Chapter 6. Imam of Main British Mosque at Woking denounces Anti-Jewish Fascism in 1939

The Mosque at Woking in Surrey, England, served as the national centre of Islam in the UK for some fifty-five years, from 1913 to the mid-1960s. The Imam of the Mosque was regarded by the press and government as the representative of Muslim opinion in Britain. During these years a monthly magazine, The Islamic Review, was published from the Mosque.

In The Islamic Review issue of March 1940, a letter to the Imam from a British reader is published which, among other comments and questions, asks the Imam:

“I am a member of the British Union (Leader, Sir Oswald Mosley); is this party compatible with Islam?”1

The British Union was a fascist party which was antisemitic and supported Hitler’s Nazi ideology.

The reply by the Imam, Abdul Majid, almost two pages in length, is nearly all devoted to answering this question.2 We reproduce his answer below, in which we have highlighted certain parts in italics.

“You wish to know if your membership of the British Union, whose Leader is Sir Oswald Mosley, is compatible with the teachings of Islam. Now, in reply to this, I write to say that I can only give some guiding principles as enunciated by Islam, leaving it for you to decide the issue. Islamic polity is controlled by certain guiding principles. The first and the most important is that God has no associates neither in His essence nor in His attributes and the stress laid upon this by Islam can be best understood when we remember that though we are expressly asked in the Quran to obey our parents implicitly it is enjoined upon us to disobey them at the risk of their displeasure, if they ever invited us to polytheism (the Quran, 17:23).

“The second, as a corollary to the foregoing, teaches us to remember that all human beings are equal both spiritually and morally and are equal before the eyes of law. Even a king forms no exception. We Muslims do not believe in the myth which is embodied in the sentence

‘the king can do no wrong.’

“The Quran, consequently, teaches us that everything in the world is created by God for the service of man.

“The third principle is that there should be no compulsion in matters religious (the Quran, 2:256); there should be absolute freedom of conscience and no one is to be persecuted because of his religious persuasions.

“God alone is the source of our moral conduct; it is His attributes that are our watchword. Our Prophet Muhammad once said:

‘Imbue yourselves with the Divine Attributes;’

“that is to say, take Him for your prototype. According to Islam it is God who is the ruler and the chief of the world. His Will is the source of all legislation in Islam. Have we ever seen God making any distinction in the dispensation of His favours between a white and a black? We, therefore, have no right to be intolerant towards others or assume haughty airs towards those who do not belong to the same faith as we do or have not the same colour of skin as we have.

“Now Nazism, as I understand it, is absolutely opposed to these fundamentals — the source of all conduct and legislation in Islam. The present-day legislation in Germany is inspired by racial discrimination and religious distinctions. It, to begin with, believes in racial superiority, it believes in exiling people for their religious opinions. It has actually pulled down synagogues.I have no idea if these are the aims of the British Union. In case they are, then there can be no two opinions on the matter.Islam has come to establish in reality the Brotherhood of Man which is the imperative need of the present-day world. Enough of dissensions. Let us talk of ways enabling us to treat each other as brothers and members of one family.

“To illustrate further the foregoing I cite to you the case of the Jews. I know the Jew is inassimilable and that there are many who believe that the present-day troubles are due to the financial machinations and control of the affairs of the world by the Jews. I need hardly point out to you that such statements are sweeping. It is not all the Jews who are guilty. There are good and honest Jews too. Why should they suffer for the misdeeds of their co-religionists?

“As a Muslim, I would not persecute the whole community for the crime of the few; I would not exile the Jews bag and baggage in punishment of the few guilty ones. I would try instead to bring about changes in our economic system without persecuting the Jews as Jews. When you and I wish to introduce desired reforms in our own midst, we try to restrict the activities of such as obstruct our reforms and jeopardise their existence. A discrimination is made on the basis of the crime but not on the basis of the race or religion. Only those are made to suffer penalty who harm the interests of society; only those are brought to book who create trouble. It is not only inhuman and unjust, it is also irreligious to condemn a person because of his race or religion. In Islam there is no colour distinction; in Islam religious differences are not regarded as synonymous with lack of the existence of truth or goodness in those who are not Muslims. The Quran says:

‘Every one who does good shall have reward from his Lord’ (2:62; 5:48).

“The duty of a Muslim ends with his having pointed out to a non-Muslim the error in his belief.”

This reply was written before the persecution of Jews by Nazi Germany had reached the atrocious extent of the Holocaust and their mass, state-organised extermination. The Imam has here thoroughly condemned Germany’s discriminatory legislation and actions against the Jews for being Jews, he has declared it as

“absolutely opposed”

to the very fundamentals of Islam, and stated that

“there can be no two opinions on the matter”.

What makes the Imam’s strong and clear stand-point even more remarkable is that at that time there was widespread antisemitism among the British people. Those British newspapers which today are prominent in supporting the state of Israel, and denouncing instances of antisemitism, were at that time in 1939 opposed to allowing persecuted Jews from Germany to enter the UK.

Imam’s Address at the Eid-ul-Fitr Prayers:

The same issue of The Islamic Review (March 1940) carries a report of the Eid-ul-Fitr function held at the Woking Mosque on 13 November 1939.3 In his address or sermon (khutba) the Imam, towards the end, dealt with the teachings of Islam regarding the three kinds of objects for which Muslims are permitted to go to war. The third of these objects, the one which the Imam emphasised, was, in his words:

“To enable every person to follow his religious convictions, to whatever persuasion he may belong.”4

He went on to say:

“Islam came to establish freedom of conscience and action in general but particularly in religion. A Muslim is bound to wage war against any person, whether of his own kith and kin and religion or not, who interferes with the beliefs of a non-Muslim. … It is to be noted that Muslims are ordered to sacrifice their lives not only to save their own mosques but the religious houses of other peoples as well.”5

Applying this principle, the Imam ends his sermon as follows:

“What should be the attitude of us Muslims towards the present war? In view of the above remarks, our duty as Muslims is quite clear. … We Muslims have suffered much at the hands of the French and the British. Fate had thrown us into the arms of one another. Clashes and injustices were perhaps only natural.

“The Zionist policy in Palestine has done us great harm. Untold miseries has it brought upon our brethren in the faith in that country. But the very fact that synagogues have been pulled down in Germany upon the slightest pretext makes it obligatory upon us Muslims to throw our weight into the cause of the Allies.6

“The Allies may be fighting for the defence of democracy and we Muslims possibly may not agree with the definition or the signification attached to that word by European diplomats. Nevertheless, in the present circumstances, our attitude is quite clear. Unless and until religious liberty is restored, no Muslim should think that he has done his duty.”7

Having quoted the above extracts, we declare with the fullest confidence that at that time when this sermon was delivered it would have been rare to find anyone among the general British population and its leaders of opinion who regarded it as their duty, their moral religious obligation, to fight for the protection of synagogues and religious freedom of Jews in Germany.

Footnotes:

  1. The letter is dated 3 November 1939 and occupies the whole of p. 118. ↩︎
  2. The reply is dated 7 November 1939 and occupies pp. 119–120. ↩︎
  3. For a report of that function, see The Islamic Review, February 1940, pp. 42–44. ↩︎
  4. The Islamic Review, March 1940, p. 96. ↩︎
  5. The Islamic Review, March 1940, p. 97. ↩︎
  6. The bolding of this text is ours. ↩︎
  7. The Islamic Review, March 1940, p. 98. ↩︎

Top