Yesterday the Wall Street Journal published an op-ed piece titled Muhammad on the High Seas, a short article on the alleged role that religion (Islam) has in the relatively recent spate of Somali piracy. I was shocked to see that it was written by a Boston University professor or religion and author of a best-selling book on religious literacy; ironically, I think it makes some rather elementary errors.
The author laments the lack of coverage the Somalian piracy has received from a religious perspective. Sure, there are sociological and economic troubles driving the pirates, but he suggests that Islam is just as much at the core of the their actions. His claim rests on the fact that the Somali population is 99% Muslim and that Islam’s earliest followers, including the Prophet Muhammad (s.a.w.) carried out similar acts of piracy in order to sustain their communities in times of impoverishment (the author refers here to “ghazu” [or ghazw], i.e., expeditions in the pursuit of plunder).
The essential point of the author’s article, so it seems, is to raise awareness to the religion of Somali pirates in an attempt to give Islam a place in what motivates them. He seems to uphold this goal even in spite of statements like, “ the ghazu was a recognized part of … Arabian economy” – not Islamic economy – and “… there is little indication that Somali piracy is motivated by any god other than greed.”
These two statements cut to the heart of the matter. The ghazw, while it was performed by Muslims, was not inherently Islamic. Somali piracy, while it is carried out by some Somalians who are Muslims (or are likely Muslims), is not necessarily Islamic piracy. This is the case even if a Somali Muslim pirate were to justify his actions with Islam. In such an event the author suggests that, “Muslims must reckon with and revise traditions of Islamic interpretation that can be used to justify crimes on land or, in this case, at sea.” As an example (for the majority of his readers), so must Christians, “revisit age-old practices and beliefs that have no place in the modern world (e.g., anti-Semitism)….”
It seems to me that he makes this suggestion in an effort to get Muslims to come out and denounce piracy as unIslamic and to make sure their texts and traditions aren’t manipulated. If that is really the author’s goal, it might be better served by an article demonstrating the gaps between religion and piracy, the historic connections between culture and ghazw, etc.
It seems to me that we must be more responsible (especially as scholars of religion!) in the role we give to religion in any event. Does obesity in North America + majority Christian population in North America = Christian obesity or obesity as a Christian problem? If a Christian man justifies his obesity with the Bible, who or what do we blame? That is an outlandish example, but I wonder if it doesn’t rather adequately illustrate the dangers of trying to connect religion and piracy.
The author is definitely correct on one point; we do need to, “weigh religious causes alongside economic and political ones.” But that doesn’t always mean all causes are relevant.
Image from guardian.co.uk, “… Central Regional Coast Guard, the main pirate group operation off the coast of Somalia.”
The University of Birmingham, U.K. announces “A Celebration of the Mingana Collection Online” – a one-day conference celebrating the launch of the University’s 
It’s not something to poke fun at, but it does illustrate one “pastoral concern” for the umma: making sure a mosque faces the correct direction. If you’ve been in a mosque, you will have noticed the mihrab, a niche decorated with varying degrees of lavishness that marks the qibla (the direction of prayer, i.e., Mecca). With the increasing heighths of non-religous structures in Mecca, various rooftop observers there recently noticed that many older mosques in Islam’s most holy city were actually facing the wrong direction (see 