Islam and Humanity: Consequences of a Contemporary Reading: First Authorized English Translation of Al-islam Wa-i-insan 3959940181, 9783959940184

Table of contents :
9783959940191
9783959940191
Half Title
Title
Copyright
Contents
Foreword: Shahrour and His Public
Translator’s Introduction
A Word of Thanks
Consequences of a Contemporary Reading
Introduction
Preface
Chapter One: Who are the Muslims?
1-The Meaning of Islam from the Book
2-The Righteous Deed
3-Dissent is the Meaning of Opposition to Islam in the Book
4-God’s Approval Applies to All Muslims
Chapter Two: Who are the Believers?
1-The Meaning of Īmān (Faith) in the Book of God
2-The Difference between the Messengerhood and the Prophethood
3-The Sunna of the Messenger and the Sunna of the Prophet
4-Necessary Obedience in the Realm of Messengerhood
5-Obedience to Him (ṣ) in the Messengerhood is Combined Obedience
Chapter Three: There is No Force in Islam
1-The Difference between Obedience and Force
2-Freedom is the Foundation of Worship
3-Types of Despotism that the Human Being Must Confront
4-The Guilt Complex
5-The Case of Covering
Chapter Four: The Citizen and Loyalty to Islam
1-The Meaning of Community, People, and Nation
2-Loyalty to Islam is Loyalty to Human Values
3-The Citizen (Attachment to the Nation-State is an “Attachment to the Homeland”)
4-The Fighting Belief
5-The Difference between Shāhid (Witness on the Basis of Previously Acquired Knowledge) and Shahīd
Conclusion

Citation preview

Islam and Humanity: Consequences of a Contemporary Reading

Islamic Studies at Gerlach Press Colin Turner The Qur’an Revealed: A Critical Analysis of Said Nursi’s Epistles of Light ISBN 9783940924285, 2013 Sadik J. al-Azm Secularism, Fundamentalism, and the Struggle for the Meaning of Islam. Collected Essays. (3 vols set) ISBN 9783940924209, 2014 Aziz Al-Azmeh The Arabs and Islam in Late Antiquity: A Critique of Approaches to Arabic Sources [Series: Theories and Paradigms of Islamic Studies] ISBN 9783940924421, 2014 Sadik J. al-Azm On Fundamentalisms ISBN 9783940924223, 2014 Sadik J. al-Azm Islam – Submission and Disobedience ISBN 9783940924247, 2014 Sadik J. al-Azm Is Islam Secularizable? Challenging Political and Religious Taboos ISBN 9783940924261, 2014 Sadik J. al-Azm Critique of Religious Thought First English Translation of naqd al-fikr ad-dini with a New Introduction by the Author ISBN 9783940924445, 2014 The Caliphate and Islamic Statehood – Formation, Fragmentation and Modern Interpretations (3 Vols Set) Ed. by Carool Kersten ISBN 9783940924520, 2015 Mohammed Khalifa Der Orient - Fiktion oder Realität? The Orient - Fiction or Reality? A Critical Analysis of 19th Century German Travel Reports [Text in German with English Summary] ISBN 9783940924469, 2015 Nasrin Rouzati Trial and Tribulation in the Qur‘an. A Mystical Theodicy. With a Foreword by Colin Turner ISBN 9783940924544, 2015 Wahhabism - Doctrine and Development (Critical Surveys in Islamic Denominations Series, 2 Vols) Ed. by Esther Peskes ISBN 9783940924506, 2016 Mohsen Mirmehdi Systematische Theologie des Korans. Systematic Theology of Qur‘an. [Text in German with English Summary] ISBN 9783959940443, 2018 The Fatwa as an Islamic Legal Instrument: Concept, Historical Role, Contemporary Relevance (3 Vols) Ed. by Carool Kersten ISBN 9783959940207, 2018 Islamic Rational Theological Discourses and the Legacy of Kalam. Gestation, Movements and Controversies. (3 vols.) Ed. by Mustafa Shah ISBN 9783959940481, 2018 Mahshid Turner The Muslim Theology of Huzn: Sorrow Unravelled ISBN 9783959940405, 2018

www.gerlach-press.de

Muhammad Shahrour Islam and Humanity: Consequences of a Contemporary Reading First Authorized English Translation of Al-Islam wa-l-Insan by George Stergios

With a Foreword by Dale F. Eickelman

GerlachPress

First published 2018 by Gerlach Press Berlin, Germany www.gerlach-press.de Cover Design: Frauke Schön, Hamburg Set by Anne Jeschke, Gerlach Press Printed and bound in Germany

© The Author and Gerlach Press 2018 All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reprinted or reproduced, or utilised in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any other information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher. British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data. A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library. Bibliographic data available from Deutsche Nationalbibliothek http://d-nb.info/1137020547

ISBN: 978-3-95994-018-4 (hardcover) ISBN: 978-3-95994-019-1 (eBook)

Contents

Foreword by Dale F. Eickelmanvii Translator’s Introduction by George Stergiosx A Word of Thanks Consequences of a Contemporary Reading

xi xiii

Introduction1 Preface3 Chapter One: Who are the Muslims?

7

1—The Meaning of Islam from the Book11 2—The Righteous Deed

13

3—Dissent is the Meaning of Opposition to Islam in the Book59 4—God’s Approval Applies to All Muslims Chapter Two: Who are the Believers?

64 69

1—The Meaning of Īmān (Faith) in the Book of God

70

2—The Difference between the Messengerhood and the Prophethood

76

3—The Sunna of the Messenger and the Sunna of the Prophet

95

4—Necessary Obedience in the Realm of Messengerhood

98

5—Obedience to Him (ṣ) in the Messengerhood is Combined Obedience 103

Chapter Three: There is No Force in Islam

119

1—The Difference between Obedience and Force

119

2—Freedom is the Foundation of Worship

126

3—Types of Despotism that the Human Being Must Confront

136

4—The Guilt Complex

145

5—The Case of Covering

157

Chapter Four: The Citizen and Loyalty to Islam

173

1—The Meaning of Community, People, and Nation

173

2—Loyalty to Islam is Loyalty to Human Values

179

3—The Citizen (Attachment to the Nation-State is an “Attachment to the Homeland”)

188

4—The Fighting Belief

193

5—The Difference between Shāhid (Witness on the Basis of Previously Acquired Knowledge) and Shahīd (Eyewitness)

198

Conclusion207

The numbers in square brackets in the text indicate the pagination of the original Arabic book published by Dar al-Saqi, Beirut 2016, e.g. [A 12] refers to Arabic page 12.

Foreword: Shahrour and His Public Dale. F. Eickelman (Dartmouth College)

The ambitious goal of Islam and Humanity: The Consequences of a Contemporary Reading is to set out in a single, compact volume an approach to understanding the Qur’an—meant here in the broadest sense of God’s message to humankind. Terrorism, democracy, social justice, ethics, morality, responsibility to family and community, governance, inheritance, and interfaith understanding—Shahrour tackles today’s burning issues and those of earlier times. From his first book in 1990 to the present—now nearing three decades—Shahrour appeals to logic and reason make his case. His preferred vehicle is the printed word, not images, television debates, You Tube, or tweets. Deliberately austere in presentational form, his ideas have nonetheless resonated throughout the Arabic world and in translation. Shahrour’s vision of how to read the Qur’an in our present age was first set out in al-Kitab wa-l-Qur’an: Qira‘a mu‘asira [The Book and the Qur’an: A Contemporary Reading], an 800-page book first published in Arabic in Damascus and Beirut in 1990. The original edition quickly sold out, requiring a reprinting three months later, and a Beirut edition in 1992 (15,000 copies). As of 1996, 13,000 copies were sold in Syria, where the book’s price, half a month’s official salary for an educated professional at the time, would have been expected to limit its circulation. By any measure, al-Kitab was an Arab world (and London) best seller. In many places, it quickly sold out or circulated only in photocopy. Banned in Saudi Arabia and, reportedly under Saudi pressure in the early 1990s, prohibited also in the UAE, Qatar, and Egypt, the book quickly sold out but nonetheless circulated in photocopy form. In September 1991, I was vii

Islam and Humanity: Consequences of a Contemporary Reading

unsuccessful in finding the book in Kuwait in religious bookstores, but the bookshop owners with whom I spoke all said that they knew of the book but were advised by their shaykh not to read it. I then asked my driver to take me to a non-religious bookstore. In the first engineering bookshop we tried, I found dozens of copies of the book. In Casablanca around the same time, the book was readily available in the Habus quarter. Despite its formal prohibition in Egypt, some 3,000 copies were sold there by 1991 (as the book’s Damascus publisher told me in 1996), and an Egyptian publisher subsequently produced a splendidly printed pirate edition in the mid-1990s (Shahrour gave me a copy). In Oman, Sultan Qaboos circulated copies to the country’s senior officials, encouraging its reading but expressing no opinion on its argument. Dr. Shahrur participated in a conference organized by the Moroccan periodical, Prologues, on the subject “Culture, Ethics, and Democracy in the Light of Modernism,” held on 7 December 1995. Although I was not present in Casablanca for the conference, one of my Moroccan colleagues present said, “How can Shahrour write about the Qur’an? He cannot speak Arabic!” If by “Arabic” is meant the formal Arabic (fusha) of the Arab world, Shahrour would be the first to acknowledge his limitations. Born in Damascus in 1938, he completed secondary education in Syria, then won a scholarship to study engineering in the Soviet Union, returning to Damascus in 1964. He left Syria again in 1968 to take M.A. and Ph.D. degrees in soil mechanics and foundation engineering at the University College, Dublin. Returning to Syria in 1972, he became a faculty member in the Engineering at the University of Damascus, from which he retired in 2000. Shahrour says that his Russian is fluent—he says that he can recite from memory long passages of Pushkin—but for writing in Arabic, he relied for years on an “Arabist,” the Syrian Jamil al-Qassas, who would render his writings into literary Arabic. In all of Shahrour’s writings, over 2,000 printed pages to date, he ignores his critics. In 1996, next to his book on display in several bookstores, I saw tens of book-length replies, often imitating the cover style of Shahrour’s books. His primary concern since 1990 has been to work out the logic of his arguments and explanations. In this respect, as my Pakistani colleague, viii

Foreword

Khalid Masud, said to me when we read together in Islamabad his second book, State and Society (1994), Shahrour generally proceeds like an engineer, outlining each chapter at the outset and then completing the outline. The axioms presented on page 7 of the present book follow the same pattern. Shahrour’s reading of the Qur’an is “modern” in that he directly engages the reader. In Kitab, he argues that “If Islam is sound (salih) for all times and places,” then we must not neglect historical developments and the interaction of different generations. We must act as if “the Prophet just died and informed us of this book” and interpret his message anew. The reader must actively interpret the meaning of the Qur’an. The Prophet Muhammad conveyed the last of God’s revelations; now, writes Shahrour, humankind is on its own to perfect itself and adapt to modern conditions. Earlier this year, Islam and Humankind won the 2017 Sheikh Zayed Book Award in the category “Contribution to the Development of Nations,” an indication of its continuing relevance to contemporary issues. A Very Short Reader’s Guide. For those interested in placing Shahrour’s seminal work in its wider contexts, I recommend my brief review of alKitab, the first in English: “Islamic Liberalism Strikes Back,” Middle East Studies Association Bulletin 27, no. 2 (December 1993): 1-6. A more complete discussion of Shahrour’s ideas and methods is contained in his The Qur’an, Morality, and Critical Reason: The Essential Muhammad Shahrur, translated, edited, and introduced by Andreas Christmann. This book also contains a pair of interviews with Shahrour: one that I conducted with him in Damascus in 1996, pp. 501-23, and one that Christmann conducted with him in Abu Dhabi in 2007, pp. 525-35.

ix

Translator’s Introduction George Stergios

I wish to acknowledge the debt I owe to Andreas Christmann, the translator of a previous volume of Muhammad Shahrour’s works: The Qur’an, Morality, and Critical Reason: The Essential Muhammad Shahrour (Brill: Boston, 2009). That volume not only made it possible for me to familiarize myself with Dr. Shahrour’s rich and complicated theology, but also provided a model for this translation in both general and local aspects. Because that translation was done in collaboration with Dr. Shahrour, I followed how it handled the choice of English translations of the Qur’an, using the Yusuf Ali translation (The Holy Qur’an: English Translation of the Meanings and Commentary , Medina: King Fahd Holy Qur’an Printing Complex, 1410 AH/1990) as the default translation, but dispensing with Ali’s extensive use of antiquated English personal pronouns and irregular capitalization. However, when that translation did not capture Shahrour’s understanding, I resorted to other translations, noting which translation I used, AA for Arthur J. Arberry (Arthur J. Arberry, The Koran Interpreted, 2 vols., London: George Allen & Unwin, 1963) and AH for Abdel Haleem (The Qur’an, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005). On those rare occasions that none of the available translations captured Shahrour’s understanding, I revised one to do so, noting in the following parenthesis that I had taken such a liberty on Shahrour’s behalf.

x

A Word of Thanks

I must direct a word of thanks to everyone who contributed to the preparation of this book, and especially to the researcher Professor Asya Waʿeel, the researcher Professor Eman Sahl, my private secretary Sultan al-ʿAwa, and to all of those who had a role in the bringing of this book to light. This English edition of Islam and Humanity based on the Arabic edition published in 2016 could not have been issued without considerable efforts. I wish to thank Kai-Henning Gerlach and those people around him at Gerlach-Press for their collaboration and George Stergios for his efforts in translating it from the Arabic edition. Also, I am grateful to Dale F. Eickelman for the valuable time he spent in writing a foreword for this book. I also thank Yasser Hassoun who read the English manuscript and made a lot of important corrections and improvements to it in accordance with the original Arabic edition.

xi

Consequences of a Contemporary Reading

Religion lacks the instrument of compulsion: compulsion belongs to the state. Religion forbids and prescribes and proscribes, but it does not prevent; The state prescribes and proscribes and prevents but it does not forbid. Religion can be separated from power, but it cannot be separated from society. The source of human values is religion, and they represent moral authority for the state and society; A rise in status comes with an increase in moral responsibility. The power of religion is in its authority over the conscience; the power of the state is in its authority over the laws. The scope of the authority of religion is wider than the scope of the authority of the law. Religion defines the absolutely taboo; the law organizes what is permitted. The absolutely taboo is inclusive and eternal, but the law (the organization of the permitted) is provisional and evolving. The authoritative revelation sealed the taboos; The Sunna of the Prophet pursued the organization of what is permitted (the civil law); The Sunna does not have an inclusive, eternal character and it is not a source of judicial analogies; There is no second revelation and what is called the infallibility of the Imams does not exist.

xiii

In the Name of God, Most Merciful

Introduction

We proceed from our conviction that Islam is a religion of mercy and tolerance, and that it is a religion of co-existing with others in peace and tranquility in an ethical framework that allows everyone the enjoyment of all their freedoms and human dignities, since it is a world religion which comprehends all of humanity, as in the word of God: ‘O mankind! We created you from a single (pair) of a male and a female, and made you into nations and tribes, that you may know each other (not that you may despise (each other). Indeed, the most honored of you in the sight of God is (he who is) the most righteous of you. And God has full knowledge and is well acquainted (with all things).’ (The Dwellings 49:13) Islam is not a religion of violence or killing or destruction, as is propagated about it. We see that we must reexamine the erroneous reading of the religion and introduce Islam from its original spring, that is, the authoritative revelation, based on a contemporary reading that harmonizes with the level of knowledge of the 21st century and the present state of scientific and ethical development. We have gathered the thoughts in this book from our earlier publications. We hope that it fulfills the purpose of our composing it. Because, as the title indicates, Islam and Humanity: Consequences of a Contemporary Reading, it explains how Almighty God addressed mankind in His definite revelation, disregarding religious community, intellectual orientations, and ethnic or national origins, but rather focusing on the human being as a human being, and how He directs it divinely in order that its humanity ascends intellectually and ethically to build a human world which encompasses all 1

Islam and Humanity: Consequences of a Contemporary Reading

[A 10] differences. For we are convinced that only such a wide religious perspective can provide a chance for every human being live his humanity wherever he is, and universal social stability. Muhammad Shahrour Damascus, June 14, 2016 Corresponding to 9 Ramadan 1437 H.

2

Preface

Every time we stand before the word of God—‘If anyone desires a religion other than Islam (submission to Allah), never will it be accepted of him; and in the Hereafter He will be in the ranks of those who have lost (all spiritual good)’ (The Family of Imran 3:85)—we find ourselves wondering how we can understand Islam in the ideal way that God Almighty desires. In our search for an answer to that essential question in our life, we find ourselves pulled this way and that by what we hear about Islam from different quarters, views sometimes contradictory and sometimes unclear. Therefore, we opt to return to the basic source that can introduce us to the ideal picture of Islam, that is, the Book of God Almighty, so that we can commune with the spirit of its texts to come to an understanding of our religion in the form God approves and makes clear to us in the Book. It is a book that reveals to us a light that illuminates the path of our life in this world and the way to save ourselves in the Hereafter. It is a direct divine address to us, and He has placed in it a guarantee of the integrity of our religion and opened in it the way of arriving to His love and favor. We only need to dive into the depths of its texts with total confidence in our sound human nature in search of the truth to discover our religion from anew in a sound form, free of blemishes. Thus, we can rediscover the essence of ourselves just as it was in its truth before being marred by the doubt raised by the plurality of views and speculations, because of the gift with which God favored the human being rather than the rest of the earthly creatures, that is, the blessing of an intellect that enables the human being to distinguish between fact and illusion, that is, between truth and falsehood, and between good and evil, that is, between goodness [A 12] and corruption, and, thus, be able to construct the world on a sound foundation. 3

Islam and Humanity: Consequences of a Contemporary Reading

The journey of the human being in the search for the truth began when Adam acknowledged his sin after his disobedience, and his Lord commanded his repentance to Him, the Almighty: ‘Then learnt Adam from his Lord words of inspiration, and his Lord turned towards him; for He is Oft-Returning, Most Merciful.’ (The Cow 2:37) This journey reached its climax when Abraham suffered the most extreme conditions of internal conflict because of the worship of idols prevailing in his society and the call of his intellect to reject that and search for the truth: ‘Lo! Abraham said to his father Azar: “Take you idols for gods? For I see you and your people in manifest error.”’ (The Cattle 6:74) Abraham had wandered a while in confusion and vacillation because he rejected the worship of stone idols and was searching for the Lord Creator, the possessor of mighty power. Then he worshipped different idols and endured a bitter intellectual struggle in searching for the truth: ‘So also did We show Abraham the power and the laws of the heavens and the earth, that he might (with understanding) have certitude. When the night covered him over, he saw a star: he said: “This is my Lord.” But when it set, he said: “I love not those that set.” When he saw the moon rising in splendor, he said: “This is my Lord.” But when the moon set, he said: “unless my Lord guide me, I shall surely be among those who go astray.” When he saw the sun rising in splendor, he said: “This is my Lord; this is the greatest (of all).” But when the sun set, he said: “O my people! I am indeed free from your (guilt) of giving partners to Allah. For me, I have set my face, firmly and truly, towards Him Who created the heavens and the earth, and never shall I give partners to Allah.”’ (The Cattle 79–7:75) Despite the faith of Abraham in God alone and his consequent closeness to Him, his mind was always searching for evidence to enhance the degree of his conviction, and therefore Abraham demanded from his Lord material evidence that he was the sole creator to reassure his heart: ‘When Abraham said: “Show me, Lord, how You will raise the dead,” He replied: “Have you no faith?” He said “Yes, but just to reassure my heart.” Allah said, “Take four birds, draw them to you, and cut their bodies to pieces. Scatter them over the mountain-tops, then call them back. They will come swiftly to you. Know that Allah is Mighty, Wise.”’ (The Cow 2:260) In this way the evidence 4

Preface

appeared that he demanded from his Lord to gain total certainty that He is the Highly Exalted, He is the Creator of everything, and He is the one God who deserves worship. That faith buttressed by material evidence imparted to Abraham [A 13] the strength and resolve to confront Nimrod and silence him with cogent argument: ‘Have you not turned your vision to one who disputed with Abraham about his Lord, because Allah had granted him power? Abraham said: “My Lord is He Who gives life and death.” He said: “I give life and death”. Said Abraham: “But it is Allah that causes the sun to rise from the east: Do thou then cause him to rise from the west.” Thus was he confounded who (in arrogance) rejected faith. Nor does Allah give guidance to a people unjust.’ (The Cow 2:258) It is clear how the voice of reason must always rise above the voice of ignorance because it silences it with decisive arguments and sound logic. For fact must be distinguished from illusion and the truth must win over falsehood, no matter how the latter may rise and surge. We begin here, then, our journey in search of the divine truth in the Book of the Almighty, which contains texts that address the intellect in order to illuminate for it its way in life and impel it beyond the narrow circle of loss into the wide horizon of knowledge so that it can approach God by sight: ‘Say thou: “This is my way: I do invite unto Allah, on evidence clear as the seeing with one´s eyes, I and whoever follows me. Glory to Allah! and never will I join gods with Allah!” ( Joseph 12:108) For this vision represents the consciousness that enables us to distinguish between truth and falsity thanks to the gift of discernment that God gave to us. To reach this point, we must first become familiar with our Creator and to the religion which He approves for us by way of the Book in order that our minds awaken from their errors and we reach the level of security that God conveys to us in the Book. In the beginning, we make a conscious study of what is in its texts that gives us the power to emerge along with our societies from the swamp of ignorance and backwardness so that we understand the religion as God wants us to understand it and so that we can conduct ourselves with others from our conscious understanding of it free of distortions, and thus we contribute in building ourselves and our societies in a proper human way to rise with them to the front of the march of progress. 5

Chapter One Who are the Muslims?

When we begin to discuss the subject of religion, we immediately think of the word “Islam” [islām], and we find that the Almighty God stated to us in the Book that Islam is the religion of God that He approves for His worshippers: ‘The religion before Allah is Islam (submission to His will).’ (The Family of Imran 3:19). If this is the case, what is this religion that the Almighty calls “Islam”? The desire to propose our question directly to the Highly Exalted to investigate the splendid truth of His Noble Book without undue protraction compels us to note that it mentions the terms “assenting,” “Islam,” “Muslim,” and “the Muslims” in various places that we must approach to understand what they mean: 1—In the era of Noah: ‘Relate to them the story of Noah. Behold! He said to his people: “O my people, if it be hard on your (mind) that I should stay (with you) and commemorate the signs of Allah, yet I put my trust in Allah. Get you then an agreement about your plan and among your partners, so your plan be on to you dark and dubious. Then pass your sentence on me, and give me no respite. But if you turn back, (consider): no reward have I asked of you: my reward is only due from Allah, and I have been commanded to be of those who submit to Allah´s will (in Islam) [min al-muslimīn].’ ( Jonah 10:71–72). 2—In the era of Abraham and Lot: —‘Abraham was not a Jew nor yet a Christian; but he was true in faith, and bowed his will to Allah´s (which is Islam) [ḥanīf muslim], [A 16] and he 7

Islam and Humanity: Consequences of a Contemporary Reading

joined not gods with Allah.’ (The Family of Imran 3:67) —Lot: ‘We brought forth such believers as were in it, but We found not therein except one house of those that have surrendered themselves [bait min al-muslimīn].’ (The Wind that Scattter 51:35–36, AA) 3—In the era of Jacob: ‘Were you witnesses when death appeared before Jacob? Behold, he said to his sons: “What will you worship after me?” They said: “We shall worship your god and the god of your fathers, of Abraham, Ismaʿil and Isaac, the one (True) Allah: To Him we bow (in Islam) [wanahhu lahu muslimūn].”’ (The Cow 2:133) 4—In the era of Joseph: ‘“O my Lord! You have indeed bestowed on me some power, and taught me something of the interpretation of dreams and events, O You Creator of the heavens and the earth! You are my Protector in this world and in the Hereafter. Take my soul (at death) as one submitting to Your will (as a Muslim), and unite me with the righteous.” ( Joseph 12:101) 5—In the era of Moses, the sorcerers, and the Pharaoh: —Sorcerers and the Pharaoh: “But you do wreak your vengeance on us simply because we believed in the signs of our Lord when they reached us! Our Lord! pour out on us patience and constancy, and take our souls unto you as Muslims (who bow to your will)!’ (The Heights 7:126) —The Pharaoh: ‘We took the Children of Israel across the sea: Pharaoh and his hosts followed them in insolence and spite. At length, when overwhelmed with the flood, he said: “I believe that there is no god except Him Whom the Children of Israel believe in: I am of those who submit (to Allah in Islam) [min al-muslimīn].” ( Jonah 10:90) 6—In the era of Jesus: ‘When Jesus found unbelief on their part He said: “Who will be My helpers to (the work of ) Allah?” Said the disciples: “We are Allah´s helpers: We believe in Allah, and do to you bear witness that we are Muslims.”’ (The Family of Imran 3:52) 7—In the era of Mohammed (ṣ): —‘Say: “What has come to me by inspiration is that your Allah is One Allah: will you therefore bow to His Will (in Islam) [muslimūn]?” (The Prophets 21:108) —‘The desert Arabs say, “We believe.” Say, “You have no faith; but you (only) 8

Chapter One: Who are the Muslims?

say, ´We have submitted [aslamnā] our wills to Allah,´ for not yet has faith entered your hearts.’ (The Dwellings 49:14) —‘It may be, if he divorced you (all), that Allah will give him in exchange consorts better [A 17] than you, who submit (their wills) [muslimāt], who believe…. (The Prohibition 66:5) We observe that these verses contained terms with a direct relationship to Islam and Muslims, and the historical sequence of the verses indicates that the term Islam had application long before the mission of Mohammed, beginning from Noah and passing through Abraham, Lot, Jacob, Joseph, Moses, and Jesus, and then reaching finally to Mohammed (ṣ). Islam, then, is characterized by a long tradition of sending messengers, and every messenger came with one religion, and it is a religion of the unity of God the Creator of all things, since they proclaim the unity of the Almighty God, He alone and none sharing in His Divinity. According to the previous sequence of verses that show that all those messengers were Muslims and all who followed them are considered Muslims in the sight of Almighty God, Islam has a universal character. However, although these verses demonstrate to us that the religion of God is one and it is Islam, they do not explain to us what is Islam and what are its pillars. Why are these called Muslims but not those others who do not follow the messengers? This forces us to dive deeper into the texts of the Glorious Book so that we become familiar with its religion of Islam by sight and awareness.

9

Islam and Humanity: Consequences of a Contemporary Reading

The eras after the messengerhood: all peoples of the Earth until the Day of Judgment

‘Say: “What has come to me by inspiration is that your Allah is One Allah: will you therefore bow to His Will (in Islam) [muslimūn]?” (The Prophets 21:108)

The Temporal Line of Development of Islam “But you do wreak your vengeance on us simply because we believed in the signs of our Lord when they reached us! Our Lord! pour out on us patience and constancy, and take our souls unto you as Muslims (who bow to your will) [muslimīn]!’ (The Heights 7:126)

Era of Jesus

Era of Mohammed (ṣ)

Era of Joseph

‘…Said the disciples: “We are Allah´s helpers: We believe in Allah, and do to you bear witness that we are Muslims.”’ (The Family of Imran 3:52)

Era of Moses

‘“…You are my Protector in this world and in the Hereafter. Take my soul (at death) as one submitting to Your will (as a Muslim), and unite me with the righteous.” ( Joseph 12:101)

Era of Jacob

‘Were you witnesses when death appeared before Jacob? Behold, he said to his sons: “What will you worship after me?” They said: “We shall worship your god and the god of your fathers, of Abraham, Ismaʿil and Isaac, the one (True) Allah: To Him we bow (in Islam) [wa-nahhu lahu muslimūn].”’ (The Cow 2:133)

Era of Abraham and Lot

‘Relate to them the story of Noah. Behold! He said to his people.... and I have been commanded to be of those who submit to Allah´s will (in Islam) [min al-muslimīn].’ ( Jonah 10:71–72).

Era of Noah

‘Abraham was not a Jew nor yet a Christian; but he was true in faith, and bowed his will to Allah’s (which is Islam) [ḥanīf muslim]....’ (The Family of Imran 3:67) ‘We found not therein except one house of those that have surrendered themselves [bait min al-muslimūn].’ (The Wind that Scattter 51:35–36, AA)

‘Those who believe (in the Qur’an), and those who follow the Jewish (scriptures), and the Christians and the Sabians, any who believe in Allah and the Last Day, and work righteousness, shall have their reward with their Lord; on them shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve.’ (The Cow 2:62)

10

Chapter One: Who are the Muslims?

1—The Meaning of Islam from the Book The texts of the Book did not limit Islam to the followers of the Prophet Mohammed (ṣ) but also applied it to those messengers and their followers who preceded them, as we have seen. However, we must search for what distinguishes it, that is, the pillars of Islam, to be aware of them and committed to them in our life and in our conduct with others, because the Almighty God would not demand from the human being that he be a Muslim without explaining to him how to be a Muslim. In accordance with that, we find the following texts define Islam for us in the following way: —‘Who is better in speech than one who calls (men) to Allah, works righteousness, and says, “I am of those who bow in Islam”?’ (Explained in Detail 41:33) —‘Say: “What has come to me by inspiration is that your Allah is one Allah: will you therefore bow to His will (in Islam)?”’ (The Prophets 21:108) —‘…. he said: “I believe that there is no god except Him Whom the Children of Israel believe in: I am of those who submit (to Allah in Islam).”’ ( Jonah 10:90) —‘Our Lord! make of us Muslims, bowing to Your (Will), and of our progeny a people Muslim…’ (The Cow 2:128) From the sequence of these verses we understand that Islam is, without doubt, the faith that assents to the existence of God and the Last Day, combining this assent with doing what is righteous: everyone who believes in God and the Last Day and does what is righteous is considered a Muslim according to the Glorious Book. In order to reach a deeper understanding, we must return to the word of God: ‘Those who believe (in the Qur’an), and those who follow the Jewish (scriptures), and the Christians and the Sabians, any who believe in Allah and the Last Day, and work righteousness, shall have their reward with their Lord; on them shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve.’ (The Cow 2:62) That verse indicates that the followers of Mohammed are “those who believe,” the followers of Moses are those who “follow the Jewish (scriptures),” [A 20] the followers of Jesus are “Christians,” and the people of other religious communities like the Zoroastrians, Shaivis, and Buddhists 11

Islam and Humanity: Consequences of a Contemporary Reading

and others are “Sabians,” and belief brings them all together under a common denominator despite their different religious communities. Every one of them who believes in God and the Last Day and does what is righteous will have his reward from his Lord, and in full measure. We know with certainty that Islam in its general meaning embraces every religious community whose followers are committed to faith in God and faith in the Last Day and the righteous deed, and this agrees with what we said previously, that the religion of God is one and it is Islam and that the difference between people has its source in the difference of religious communities. Therefore, everyone who believes in God and the Last Day and does what is righteous is considered a Muslim whether they are followers of Mohammed (ṣ), Jews, Christians, or from another religious community. Almighty God has composed three pillars for Islam: A—A faith assenting to the existence of God B—A faith assenting to the Last Day (and note that assenting to the Last Day implies assenting to the Resurrection). In other words, faith in God and the Last Day is an axiom beyond dispute among Muslims and it represents the price to enter Islam. C—The righteous deed These three pillars imply that Islam is built on two aspects: The purely theoretical aspect which is exemplified by belief in God and the Last Day, and the practical aspect which is exemplified in the righteous deed, since a theoretical faith only has a value when good practical behavior emerges from it and reflects it. In this way, we understand the word of the Great Prophet–if true–: “All creatures are Allah’s family, and Allah loves most those who treat his family well and kindly.” Our faith assenting to the existence of God and the Last Day implies our faith that we have a Lord and a day in which we will be resurrected and judged according to our earthly deeds, and this faith will lead us naturally to the righteous deed: ‘Say: “I am but a man like yourselves, (but) the inspiration has come to me, that your Allah is one Allah: whoever expects to meet his Lord, let him work [A 21] righteousness, and, in the worship of his Lord, admit no one as partner.’ (The Cave 18:110) For how do we believe in God and not 12

Chapter One: Who are the Muslims?

violate his unity (commit shirk) and what are the good deeds that makes us Muslims when we undertake them?

2—The Righteous Deed The Almighty God in His Noble Book makes clear to us the foundations of the righteous deed that enable the human being performing it, combined with faith in God and the Last Day, to be considered a Muslim. For the behavior of a human being offers to others the picture of his thought and convictions that are embodied for them by means of its actions. Since Islam is a religion of human nature, the foundations of the righteous deed must, by nature, consistent with our ethical dispositions: ‘So [Prophet] as a man of pure faith, stand firm and true in your devotion to the religion [liʾl-dīn ḥanīf]. This is the natural disposition [fiṭra] God instilled in mankind— there is no altering God’s creation—and this is the right religion [al-dīn al-qayyim], though most people do not realize it.’ (The Romans, 30:30, AH) For Islam is human nature and human nature is Islam. For the nature that inspires the ant to enter inaudibly so as not to be trampled by feet and inspires the tortoise to dig a hole at the shore and bury its eggs is the same nature that inspires the human being to believe that God is one, as we read in word of God: —‘Say: “I am but a man like yourselves, (but) the inspiration has come to me, that your Allah is one Allah: whoever expects to meet his Lord, let him work righteousness, and, in the worship of his Lord, admit no one as partner.’ (The Cave 18:110) —‘And your Lord taught the bee to build its cells in hills, on trees, and in (men’s) habitations.’ (The Bee 16:68) We stand here before the term “right” [qayyim] that appears in verse 30 in the Sura The Romans and in three other places in the authoritative revelation: —‘But set you your face to the right religion before there come from Allah the day which there is no chance of averting: on that day shall men be divided 13

Islam and Humanity: Consequences of a Contemporary Reading

(in two). Those who reject faith will suffer from that rejection: and those who work righteousness will spread their couch (of repose) for themselves (in heaven): That He may reward those who believe and work righteous deeds, out of his bounty. For He loves not those who reject faith.’ (The Romans 30:43–45). [A 22] —‘“If not Him, you worship nothing but names which you have named, you and your fathers, for which Allah has sent down no authority: the command is for none but Allah: He has commanded that you worship none but Him: that is the right religion [al-dīn al-qayyim], but most men understand not...’ ( Joseph 12:40) —‘The number of months in the sight of Allah is twelve (in a year), so ordained by Him the day He created the heavens and the earth; of them four are sacred: that is the straight [qayyim] usage. So wrong not yourselves therein, and fight the pagans all together as they fight you all together. But know that Allah is with those who restrain themselves.’ (The Repentance 9:36) —‘‘So [Prophet] as a man of pure faith, stand firm and true in your devotion to the religion [liʾl-dīn ḥanif]. This is the natural disposition [fiṭra] God instilled in mankind—there is no altering God’s creation—and this is the right religion [al-dīn al-qayyim], though most people do not realize it.’ (The Romans 30:30, AH) The sequence of verses exhibits the different aspects of the term “right” with which the Exalted God describes His religion. In the verses 43–45 of the Sura The Romans, the term is linked to the righteous deed which is, in general, consequent to faith in God, that is, with the meaning that special value of Islam lies in that it is a religion that directs the human being to righteousness by urging him towards human values. In verse 40 of the Sura Joseph the term “right” has the same meaning but in a more precise sense since it is linked with the worship of God by making religion right for the people since it calls them to freedom from every kind of slavery to pressures and forces, and instead directs them to God with full choice by committing to human values and the enjoyment of them, the first of which is the value of responsible freedom. In verse 36 of the Sura The Repentance, the term “right” is linked with not wronging yourself, and that requires the 14

Chapter One: Who are the Muslims?

endowment of a responsible human conscience and the adhering to human values and righteous deeds. Islam directs the life of the human being to righteousness by urging him towards the human values through which the soul is pleased, revived, and experiences its humanity, and making hated the low and wicked in the acts contrary to our nature by which the human soul is corrupted and loses its purity and confidence from the bodily, emotional, or intellectual points-of-view. The things through which the soul is pleased are human values and thus God makes them lawful in The Book. The opposite is the foul and these are the things [A 23] that corrupt the soul. Thus, God forbids them in The Book, as the word of God attests: ‘…He will make lawful for them all good things and prohibit for them only the foul; and he will relieve them of their burden and the fetters that they used to wear….’ (The Heights 7:157) The Highly Exalted God created us and appointed us as the caretakers of the earth and He wants nothing but good for us. Therefore, He created Islam as a religion that urges us to righteous deeds that help convey humankind to the highest stage of human advancement, while it forbids us from everything foul that contradicts it and impedes the path of that development. We still must discover what are the human values that make the human being a Muslim, and they will be the shared values among all the heaven-sent messengerhoods, including the messengerhood of Mohammed (ṣ) that augmented and refined the messages that preceded it in that it bore the seal of universality, finality, and inclusivity. However, if the parliament of any society identified something foul, it would have the right to prevent it through legislation but it would not have the right to forbid it. Verse 30 of the Sura The Romans shows indubitably the validity of Islam as a world religion, for it is founded on the curvature [ḥanīfiyya], that is, the principle of change, and this is God’s law for everything in the universe. The principle of curvature emerges clearly in all human legislation, which revolves inside the circle of divine limits and the explanation of the definite [tafṣīl almuḥkam], for the principle is what sustains it, because it, all of it, does not depart from it, since every parliament in the world revolves inside the circle of divine legislation and all of them make laws within the border of the limits and the explanation of the definite [tafṣīl al-muḥkam], not exceeding 15

Islam and Humanity: Consequences of a Contemporary Reading

them, as this verse of the word of God suggests: ‘this is the right religion, though most people do not realize it.’ For it stands behind all the legislations of the parliaments of the world even if they do not know that, because the divine legislation present in Mohammed’s (ṣ) message is a legislation that is consistent with human nature and changes in the circumstances of societies, and any sort of change, in accordance with the principle of the curvature. This is how we understand the meaning of word of God: ‘…This day have I perfected your religion for you, completed My favor upon you, and have chosen for you Islam as your religion….’ (The Table Spread 5:3), that is, that the religion of God is one and it is Islam for every distinct religious community, and He perfected it with [A 24] the Prophet (ṣ) for the true religious community and the revelation that made clear the pillars of Islam and then demanded that we understand it, comprehend it, and then apply it in our lives.

A—The Absolute Taboos Indeed, the ten commandments that the Almighty God entitled the “moral guidance” [furqān] in His definite verses represent the common values among the heaven-sent messages that Moses, Jesus, and Mohammed (ṣ) conveyed, and that the Almighty God enumerates and compiles, in His word: ‘Say: “Come, I will rehearse what Allah has (really) prohibited you from. Join not anything as equal with Him; be good to your parents; kill not your children on a plea of want; We provide sustenance for you and for them; come not near to shameful deeds. Whether open or secret; take not life, which Allah has made sacred, except by way of justice and law: thus does He command you, that you may learn wisdom. And come not near to the orphan’s property, except to improve it, until he attain the age of full strength; give measure and weight with (full) justice; no burden do We place on any soul, but that which it can bear; whenever you speak, speak justly, even if a near relative is concerned; and fulfil the covenant of Allah: thus does He command you, that you may remember. Indeed, this is My way, leading straight: follow it: follow not (other) paths: they will scatter you 16

Chapter One: Who are the Muslims?

about from His (great) path: thus does He command you. that you may be righteous.’ (The Cattle 6:151–153) These taboos appeared originally in the commandments of Moses in the form of prescriptions and proscriptions. They appeared subsequently in the authoritative revelation of Mohammed (ṣ) in the form of taboos since Mohammed’s (ṣ) message is a final message and consequently its prohibitions are inclusive, eternal, and definitive. So that the prohibitions with the greatest force become taboos in the Book, and they are the foul acts mentioned in it, and so that all of them—violating God’s unity (shirk), murder (including suicide), indecent acts, not to be good with parents, false witness—are considered foul acts with the remainder of the taboos: ‘They ask you what is lawful to them (as food). Say: lawful unto you are (all) things good and pure….’ (The Table Spread 5:4) We will enumerate them in what follows, one taboo after the other, in addition to the taboos that the messengerhood of Mohammed (ṣ) added to the Ten Commandments, so that their number will come to fourteen taboos. These are [A 25] the foundations of the righteous deed that is the third of the three pillars of Islam. The human being becomes a good Muslim by undertaking the righteous deed, consequent on his faith in God and the Last Day.

(1) Do not join any partners with God [shirk] We know that the first pillar of Islam is faith assenting to God, the Lord of the Worlds (people throughout history of humanity). This implies the unity of God in His divinity and the absence of partners to Him, that is, the worship of his Almighty Self alone, in the word of God: ‘“Say: “What has come to me by inspiration is that your Allah is One Allah: will you therefore bow to His will (in Islam)?”’ (The Prophets 21:108). Violation of God’s unity is a taboo for Muslims not only because it is a reduction of His greatness and a diminishing of respect for His high status, but because it is also a reduction of the human self. For the Highly-Exalted God, the creator of all things, had bestowed honor on the human being and favored it with the blessing 17

Islam and Humanity: Consequences of a Contemporary Reading

of intellect. How could that human being slight its intellect and refuse to follow the truth, the truth that its intellect could not help but see if it thinks carefully, and to deviate into falsehood in ignorance and damaging itself and its intellect by making a fool of itself and worshipping someone other than God? If the topic of violating God’s unity is related to the theoretical aspect of Islam because it is tied to faith in God, then what concerns us here is its effect on the behavior of the human being, commencing with two issues: the first issue is represented by the effect of violating the unity of God on the conduct of the human being, which is linked to the topic of worship. God has forbidden worship of another beside His Highly-Exalted Self, as the following texts state: —‘Serve Allah, and join not any partners with Him…’ (The Women 4:36) —‘The things that you worship besides Allah have no power to give you sustenance: then seek you sustenance from Allah, serve Him, and be grateful to Him: to Him will be your return.’ (The Spider 29:17) —‘Indeed, those whom you call upon besides Allah are servants like unto you: Call upon them, and let them listen to your prayer, if you are (indeed) truthful!’ (The Heights 7:194) These verses and many others confirm that God has forbidden turning towards others in worship or prayer, whether [A 26] to request a means of living or some other reason, so that the human being who undertakes that becomes a follower of whom he entreats in worship and, consequently, loses his human freedom, especially, if whom he entreats is another human being. This represents the apogee of danger, since humankind has outgrown the worship of idols made of stone but has not yet outgrown the worship of people to gain a means of living or something else. This has led some, some of the time, to renounce their human dignity to please these people and bow entirely to their power even at the cost of their human values. This is the danger of violating God’s unity that humankind suffers from in our era. This gives cause for vigilance since the human being can lose the humanity that God has blessed him with and mutate from the worship of the God who gave him freedom and dignity to an enslavement to men that costs it its values and humanity. 18

Chapter One: Who are the Muslims?

The second issue is related to the violation of the immutable domination of God that we glimpse from the expression “the command is for none but Allah” in verse 40 of the Sura Joseph, where the Exalted God says: ‘“If not Him, you worship nothing but names which you have named, you and your fathers, for which Allah has sent down no authority: the command is for none but Allah: He has commanded that you worship none but Him: that is the right religion, but most men understand not….’ ( Joseph, 12:40) That command belongs to God is manifest in His taboos, for no one has the right to add to them or permit any or all of them, since the immutable domination of God appears in them and their supersession is absolutely prevented. Consequently, no one has the right, as individual or group, whether at the level of personal or group reasoning [ijtihād], to forbid or permit. In other words, judges and councils of judges and parliaments and councils of muftis have no right to forbid or permit since this is considered a violation of the immutable domination of God and a usurping of His Almighty Command. God has the sole right of forbidding and permitting. To confirm the danger of violating His Almighty Unity, whether in the aspect of His divinity or His dominion, the Almighty God said in His definite verses: ‘Allah forgives not (The sin of ) joining other gods with Him; but He forgives whom He pleases other sins than this: one who joins other gods with Allah, has strayed far, far away (from the right).’ (The Women 4:116) Thus the violation of God’s unity [A 27] leads the violator to stray and it is a migration from human nature, that is, it removes him from human values. To avoid this straying, the human being must avoid violating God’s unity in His divinity by directing worship, prayer, and requests for the means of living only to God, just as he avoids the violation of God’s unity in His immutable domination by not adding or subtracting to what God forbid in the Book, and thus giving no credence to “those who spread rumors about God” and then go beyond the evidence of the Book of God to make legal judgments about what is permitted and forbidden. For this is the violating of God’s unity and doubt in the oneness of God and it thwarts the other deeds of the human being, as in the word of God: ‘This is the guidance of Allah: 19

Islam and Humanity: Consequences of a Contemporary Reading

He gives that guidance to whom He pleases, of His worshippers. If they were to join other gods with Him, all that they did would be vain for them.’ (The Cattle 6:88) Thus the Muslim must be careful lest his deeds be vain because he joined other gods to the worship of God.

(2) Do good to parents Respect for parents is a deeply-rooted value in human nature, and it is the nature of a human being to revere his parents in appreciation, gratitude, and thankfulness for the exertions they made in raising and caring for him. The exceptions manifest in some societies are a departure and deviation from the human nature that God created for us and wants for us. Therefore, the Exalted forbid in His authoritative revelation disobedience to them to restore human nature to its sound origins. He even draws His satisfaction from their satisfaction to show the importance of respect for parents in the Islamic religion, where the authoritative revelation shows in detail how to show respect for parents by doing good to them, as the words show: —‘Serve Allah, and join not any partners with Him; and do good to parents….’ (The Women 4:36) —‘Thy Lord has decreed that you worship none but Him, and that you be kind to parents. Whether one or both of them attain old age in your life, say not to them a word of contempt, nor repel them, but address them in terms of honor. And, out of kindness, lower to them the wing of humility, and say: “My Lord! bestow on them your Mercy even as they cherished me in childhood.”’ (The Night Journey 17:23–24) [A 28] —And We have enjoined on man (to be good) to his parents: in travail upon travail did his mother bear him, and in two years was his weaning: (hear the command), “Show gratitude to Me and to your parents: to Me is (thy final) Goal. But if they strive to make you join in worship with Me things of which you hast no knowledge, obey them not; yet bear them company in this life with justice (and consideration), and follow the way of those who turn to me (in love): in the end the return of you all is to Me, and I will tell you the truth (and meaning) of all that you did.”’ (Luqman 31:14–15) 20

Chapter One: Who are the Muslims?

These texts demonstrate that we must avoid repelling them and must lower the wing of humility to them out of kindness when they are advanced in years. We are obligated to thank them and pray for them with compassion because of their efforts and sacrifices in raising us. The authoritative remembrance adds the command to obey their wills with love and honor and without force or compulsion unless they request that we violate the oneness of God, because of the enormity of that for God. Even if they do, according to the authoritative remembrance, we must still bear them company in this life with justice and consideration, that is, we are not to break with them even if they demand the violating of God’s oneness. This shows how much the Almighty God appreciates parents, for He still urges us to bear them good company even if they were somehow to encourage what displeases Almighty God, for each human being is judged according to its acts alone. Therefore, the relationship of the human being with its parents within the bounds of the family must be built on love and good human relations, for if the family, the foundation of human society, advances, human conduct as a whole advances, and, therefore, respect for parents is one of the foundations of the righteous deed, which in turn is the one of the pillars of Islam.

(3) Come not near to the orphan’s property, except to improve it The orphan is an inseparable part of society and thus he has a special status in Islam, for it commands that he is cared for, treated well, and the object of good deeds, in these words of God: ‘And come not near to the orphan’s property, except to improve it….’ (The Cattle, 6:152) Because of his youth, the orphan is weak until he reaches the age of full strength, that is, the age of maturity, and becomes capable of caring for himself and conducting himself with responsibility for what he owns, whether that [A 29] is in an inheritance, bequest, or something else. Therefore, Islam calls for only approaching the property of an orphan in a friendly manner and this implies that one is not allowed to become the guardian of an orphan with the intention of wasting or squandering his property but only with the intention of managing it with wisdom and economy to preserve it from loss. 21

Islam and Humanity: Consequences of a Contemporary Reading

In the explanation of how to approach the property of an orphan, the Almighty God makes it clear that if the guardian is careful with money, he can approach the property of the orphan under his care and spend on him and care for him if he conducts himself with responsibility and fiscal restraint. He must preserve it as he preserves his own property, and more so since he is a trustee. If the guardian is wealthy, it is best for him to renounce remuneration for the sake of doing good since the Almighty God orders him to renounce remuneration, that is, to abstain from approaching the property of the orphan, if he is able to pay his expenses and buy his clothing and take care of him as he cares for his sons from his own money, without having to spend from the property of the orphan for whom he is responsible: ‘…If the guardian is well-off, let him claim no remuneration…’ (The Women, 4:6). If the trustee believes he can manage the orphan’s property to preserve it or increase it so that it does not lose its buying power as the years pass, then he must manage it with wisdom and prudence without speculation and with the least risk possible to preserve it from loss or reduction, if he can truly behave with the spirit of responsibility. It is worth noting that the guardian of the orphan must be the trustee of the orphan before he can be the trustee over his property. Thus, according to Islam, he must raise him, and take care of him, and manage his social relationships fairly because of his weakness and his material and moral needs, especially from the aspect of love, affection, and care. Not every orphan possesses property, and thus the Islamic principle is for the guardian to spend on the orphan, buy his clothes, and cover all his needs according to his capacity and ability. Indeed, the forbidding of approaching the property of the orphan prevents the [A 30] confusion of the trustee. For even if you raised him, cared for him, and came to consider the orphan one of your children, you would not be so confused as to combine his property with your property. We draw this conclusion from the word of God Almighty: ‘To orphans restore their property (when they reach their age), nor substitute (your) worthless things for (their) good ones; and devour not their substance (by mixing it up) with your own. For this is indeed a great sin.’ (The Women, 4:2) 22

Chapter One: Who are the Muslims?

(4) Give measure and weight with (full) justice The human soul of sound nature yearns for fulfillment in every matter, and since the Islamic religion is a religion that is based on human values, and thus a religion of human nature, fidelity and equity in all matters, including fidelity in measures and weights, are among the foundations of the righteous deed. To achieve social justice, the individuals of the society must show fidelity in all their deeds, that is, finishing and completing them in the best way, and thus equity in weighing in the sense of giving to each his right. The verse of fidelity in measure: ‘…give measure and weight with (full) justice…’ (The Cattle, 6:152) makes fidelity a foundation for all human transactions, for example, perceptible ones like fulfilling a pledge in contracts and performing a condition, or, in other words, contractors must fulfill the obligations that have arisen from the contracts to which they have agreed. A Muslim, then, is someone who fulfills his pledges, including material transactions like fidelity and equity in measures and weights. The Almighty God asserts that He does not burden any soul beyond what it can bear, from which we understand that a Muslim must take into consideration his capacity and ability to fulfill the obligations that will emerge from his pledge and contract, and thus not commit or obligate himself at all to something he is not capable of fulfilling. For the Exalted God has given us minds with which to recognize and distinguish what we can do from what we cannot do so that we do not delude ourselves and take on more than we can do. If we scrutinize the verses related to human transactions we find that they connect fidelity [A 31] and equity with the righteousness of societies. Therefore, the Almighty God forbid excess and falling short in measure, in His words—‘In order that you may not transgress (due) balance. So establish weight with justice and fall not short in the balance’ (The Most Gracious, 55:8–9) —so that such callous acts do not lead to corruption in societies. This can be seen very clearly in the daily dealings of people where the lack of fidelity in rights expressed in exceeding or falling short of the correct measure for the sake of selfish interests contrary to human values leads to 23

Islam and Humanity: Consequences of a Contemporary Reading

a lack of trust and loss of rights in society. Thus, if the relationships among individuals become corrupt, the society becomes corrupt and instable.

(5) Do not bear false witness Justice in all things is one of the foundations of the righteous deed in Islam. One of those things is speech: the Muslim is characterized by truthfulness, that is, if he says something, he is truthful in what he says, even about himself. Therefore, false witness is considered unacceptable among Muslims, for it is incompatible with human nature: ‘…And when you testify, be just, even if [it concerns] a near relative….’ (The Cattle, 6:152) However, since each act of speech has a status, the authoritative revelation distinguishes between false speech out of thoughtlessness and false witness, in the words of God: ‘And those who bear not false witness and, when they pass by idle talk, pass by with dignity’ (The Criterion, 25:72, AA). This distinction is a result of the difference in the status of the saying and the consequences of its utterance. False speech out of thoughtlessness is proscribed, and false witness is absolutely forbidden. The forbidding of false speech appeared in the discussion of testifying in court, where God Almighty commanded the Muslim to testify in truth even if this witness is against oneself, one’s parents, or one’s relatives, in the noble verse: ‘O you who believe! stand out firmly for justice, as witnesses to Allah, even as against yourselves, or your parents, or your kin….’ (The Women 4:135). The extent of the importance that Islam gives to testifying truly in court is clear since if the Muslim ascends to the witness chair, he must say nothing but the truth and not testify [A 32] falsely because of how that testimony might wrong and injure the right of its subject. The Divine Mercy is not limited to the avoiding of false witness by stating the truth, but it also granted the right to refrain from testifying against oneself or one’s relatives, including children, wife or husband, parents, and siblings. Thus, God said: ‘…and if you distort (justice) or decline to do justice, indeed Allah is well-acquainted with all that you do.’ (The Women 4:135) Thus, God’s mercy to His worshippers is great enough that He grants to them the right to abstain from testifying against their relatives to avoid 24

Chapter One: Who are the Muslims?

plunging them into distress. This exemption is part of every constitution in the world, where all courts grant to the human being the right to refuse to testify against himself or his relatives. God expands on the topic by forbidding false testimony in the case of both relatives and enemies in His words: ‘O you who believe! stand out firmly for Allah, as witnesses to fair dealing, and let not the hatred of others to you make you swerve to wrong and depart from justice. Be just: that is next to piety: and fear Allah. For Allah is wellacquainted with all that you do.’ (The Table Spread 5:8) This verse demands testifying truly even for enemies and it prevents false witness against them on the grounds of revenge because divine justice urges the Muslim to respect all people, even his enemies, and to refrain from treachery against them when testifying because they are the worshippers of God. The Exalted God does not permit injustice, false witness, or slander against any of His worshippers.

(6) Take not life, which God has made sacred God forbid the killing of the human soul in verse 151 of the Sura Cattle, which was dedicated to the absolute taboos. He stressed its forbidden character twice, as a preface within the verse—‘Say: “Come, I will rehearse what Allah has (really) prohibited you from”’—and again in the description of the act—‘take not life, which God has made sacred, [A 33] except by way of justice and law.’ The repetition emphasizes the classification of killing the human soul as forbidden, and the intensity of the taboo explains why so much careful detail is expended on the analysis of killing in the Book, in the following words of God, for example: —‘Nor take life—which Allah has made sacred—except for just cause. And if anyone is slain wrongfully, we have given his heir authority (to demand qisas or to forgive): but let him not exceed bounds in the matter of taking life; for he is helped (by the Law).’ (The Night Journey 17:33) —‘Never should a believer kill a believer; but (if it so happens) by mistake, (compensation is due): If one (so) kills a believer, it is ordained that he should free a believing slave, and pay compensation to the deceased’s family, unless they remit it freely. If the deceased belonged to a people at war with you, and 25

Islam and Humanity: Consequences of a Contemporary Reading

he was a believer, the freeing of a believing slave (is enough). If he belonged to a people with whom you have treaty of mutual alliance, compensation should be paid to his family, and a believing slave be freed. For those who find this beyond their means, (is prescribed) a fast for two months running: by way of repentance to Allah: for Allah has all knowledge and all wisdom. If a man kills a believer intentionally, his recompense is Hell, to abide therein (forever): And the wrath and the curse of Allah are upon him, and a dreadful penalty is prepared for him.’ (The Women 4:92–93) Verse 33 of the Sura The Night Journey explains that killing is murder when it is committed intentionally, with resolve beforehand and premeditation. The murderer deserves to be murdered because of his aggression on the wronged murder victim, but the legal claim of the heir of the murder victim does not extend to excess in killing because excess, as we mentioned, itself is forbidden. Avoiding excess means the legal claim of the murder victim applies against the murderer alone, not also his acquaintances. For Islam sets an upper limit to the punishment of murder, and it is killing without excess. For excess is forbidden because it punishes with killing someone other than the murderer or the murderer out of revenge, as He says in the authoritative revelation: ‘and the transgressors will be companions of the Fire!’ (The Forgiver God 40:43) Verses 92 and 93 from the Sura The Women explain a second kind of killing, and it is unintentional homicide. In this case, the legal punishment is not the killing of the killer, but the killer must compensate by freeing a slave or performing a fast of atonement. This demonstrates the liberality of the Islamic religion, [A 34] which came to combat every kind of discord between people, and to end what is known as taking revenge and the spilled blood it reaps, even in the case where the killing is unintentional. For the heir of the victim should not kill his unintentional killer because he did not undertake the killing intentionally and consequently he is without sin. This point is very sensitive because it shows the holiness of the human soul and magnitude of its sanctity for the Almighty God because the unintentional killer, although he killed, he did not kill intentionally, and consequently the revelation forbid that he is killed. For this reason, verse 93 in with these 26

Chapter One: Who are the Muslims?

words: ‘If a man kills a believer intentionally, his recompense is Hell, to abide therein (forever): And the wrath and the curse of Allah are upon him, and a dreadful penalty is prepared for him.’ (The Women 4:93) This makes clear that if the heir of the victim of an accidental killing takes revenge on the unintentional killer, he will receive his penalty from God for the ugliness of his behavior and his violation of the taboo.

(7) Do not come near shameful deeds, whether open or secret The term “shameful deeds” [fawāḥish] is the plural of the term “prostitute” [fāḥisha] and it means what the soul despises, that is, what sound human nature, which is not aroused by disorder, disdains. There are open and secret shameful deeds. The secret are sexual relationships on an unsound basis, even if the society does not know them, whether between a man and a woman, when there is a relationship between a married woman and a man who is not her husband, or a sexual relationship between two people of the same sex, such as a homosexual relationship between two men or two women. However, if these shameful deeds are practiced publicly, the first shameful deed is called adultery (for the relationship between a man and a woman), in the word of God: —‘Nor come near to adultery: for it is a shameful (deed) and an evil, opening the road (to other evils).’ (The Night Journey 17:32) —‘The woman and the man guilty of adultery or fornication, flog each of them with a hundred stripes: Let not compassion move you in their case, in a matter prescribed by Allah, if you believe in Allah and the Last Day: and let a party of the believers witness their punishment. Let no man guilty of adultery or fornication marry and but a woman similarly guilty, or an unbeliever: nor let any but such a man or an unbeliever marry such a woman: to the believers such a thing is forbidden. (The Light 24:2–3) [A 35] If the second shameful deed is practiced publicly, it is a public homosexual relationship. In the word of God: —‘If any of your women are guilty of lewdness, Take the evidence of four (reliable) witnesses from amongst you against them; and if they testify, 27

Islam and Humanity: Consequences of a Contemporary Reading

confine them to houses until death do claim them, or God ordain for them some (other) way. If two men among you are guilty of lewdness, punish them both. If they repent and amend, leave them alone; for God is oft-returning, most merciful. Allah accept the repentance of those who do evil in ignorance and repent soon afterwards; to them will Allah turn in mercy: For Allah is full of knowledge and wisdom.’ (The Women 5:15–17) God Almighty forbid in the Book the approaching to shameful deeds, both open and secret. The verbal noun iqtirāb means turning towards with premeditation and resolve. In the Book, The Almighty God shows us how shameful deeds are a matter of the most importance when He explains how to safeguard ourselves from committing them, for example, when He urges us to guard our private parts in verses 5 and 6 of the Sura The Believers and in verses 29 and 30 from the Sura The Ways of Ascent—“and guard their private parts save from their wives and what their right hands own then not being blameworthy (The Believers 23: 5–6, AA)— and calls us to practice chastity as in verse 33 of the Sura The Light—‘Let those who find not the wherewithal for marriage keep themselves chaste, until Allah gives them means out of His grace.’ (The Light 24:33) The word “the shameful” [fahshāʿ] appears in many verses, including the following words of God: —‘When they do anything that is shameful, they say: “We found our fathers doing so”; and “Allah commanded us thus”: Say: “No, Allah never commands what is shameful [fahshāʿ]: do you say of Allah what you know not?” (The Heights 7:28) —‘And (with passion) did she desire him, and he would have desired her, but that he saw the evidence of his Lord: thus (did We order) that We might turn away from him (all) evil and shameful deeds [fahshāʿ]: for he was one of Our servants, sincere and purified.’ ( Joseph 12:24) The two verses show that “the shameful” [fahshāʿ] is the genus term for the “shameful deed” [fāḥisha]. Verse 24 of the Sura Joseph shows how God turned the shameful away from Joseph when he was at the point of desiring the wife of ‘Aziz, that is, when he was about to submit to her. He turned evil away from him [A 36] because submitting to her would have injured ‘Aziz, 28

Chapter One: Who are the Muslims?

who raised him and gave him shelter. This verse contains a direct statement that the shameful is the genus of shameful deed, that is, the genus of all the shameful deeds that we enumerate here.

(8) Fulfill the covenant of God All the prophets and messengers brought the commissioned covenant: ‘…and fulfil the covenant of God: thus does He command you, that you may remember.’ (The Cattle 6:152) And this covenant is embodied in one common article in all the successive divine messengerhoods: the unity of God, not setting up equals to God, and the righteous deed. This covenant is fulfilled when the human being obeys God, refrains from violating His unity, and follows His straight path, that is, the righteous deed: ‘No. Those that keep their plighted faith and act aright, indeed, Allah loves those who act aright. As for those who sell the faith they owe to Allah and their own plighted word for a small price, they shall have no portion in the Hereafter….’ (The Family of Imran 3:76–77) The human being is obligated to fulfill the covenant of God, he has no right to deviate from it. It is based on the covenant which preceded the covenant of God, which we now call a professional, military, or political oath, depending on the subject of the oath. If the human being commits publicly and swears an oath that commits him to some code— the medical code, for example—then an intentional violation of this code is forbidden because he breaks a covenant which he made with himself before God to adhere to that code and then fails to keep it, in the word of God: ‘Those who break God’s Covenant after it is ratified, and who sunder what God has ordered to be joined, and do mischief on earth: These cause loss (only) to themselves.’ (The Cow 2:27)

(9) Forbidden marriage partners The building of an ethically sound society requires clarifying relationships and classifying them. [A 37] In the Book God has forbidden relations with a list of women, which the word of God enumerates: ‘Prohibited to you 29

Islam and Humanity: Consequences of a Contemporary Reading

(for marriage) are: Your mothers, daughters, sisters; father’s sisters, mother’s sisters; brother’s daughters, sister’s daughters; foster-mothers (who gave you suck), foster-sisters; your wives’ mothers; your step-daughters under your guardianship, born of your wives to whom you have gone in, no prohibition if you have not gone in; (Those who have been) wives of your sons proceeding from your loins; and two sisters in wedlock at one and the same time, except for what is past; for Allah is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful; Also (prohibited are) women already married, except those whom your right hands possess: Thus has Allah ordained (prohibitions) against you: except for these, all others are lawful, provided you seek (them in marriage) with gifts from your property, desiring chastity, not lust, seeing that you derive benefit from them, give them their dowers (at least) as prescribed; but if, after a dower is prescribed, agree mutually (to vary it), there is no blame on you, and Allah is All-knowing, All-wise.’ (The Women 4:23–24). The list of prohibitions makes a very important point, that not only are birth mothers taboo, but also other mothers, since while the human being has only one birth mother he may have several mothers, for example, the woman who raised him or nursed him. The following verses expound on additional conditions that make a relationship with a woman forbidden: —‘And marry not women whom your fathers married, except what is past: It was shameful and odious, an abominable custom indeed.’ (The Women 4:22) —‘Also (prohibited are) women already married, except those whom your right hands possess: Thus has Allah ordained (prohibitions) against you: Except for these, all others are lawful, provided you seek (them in marriage) with gifts from your property, desiring chastity, not lust, seeing that you derive benefit from them, give them their dowers (at least) as prescribed; but if, after a dower is prescribed, agree mutually (to vary it), there is no blame on you, and Allah is All-knowing, All-wise. If any of you have not the means wherewith to wed free believing women, they may wed believing girls from among those whom your right hands possess: And Allah has full knowledge about your faith. You are one from another: wed them with the leave of their owners, and give them their dowers, according to what is reasonable: they should be chaste, not lustful, nor taking paramours: when they are taken 30

Chapter One: Who are the Muslims?

in wedlock, if they fall into shame, their punishment is half that for free women. This (permission) is for those among you who fear [A 38] sin; but it is better for you that you practice self-restraint. And Allah is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful. (The Women 4:24–25) —‘This day are (all) things good and pure made lawful unto you. The food of the People of the Book is lawful unto you and yours is lawful unto them. (Lawful unto you in marriage) are (not only) chaste women who are believers, but chaste women among the People of the Book, revealed before your time, when you give them their due dowers, and desire chastity, not lewdness, nor secret intrigues if any one rejects faith, fruitless is his work, and in the Hereafter he will be in the ranks of those who have lost (all spiritual good).’ (The Table Spread 5:5) —‘Let no man guilty of adultery or fornication marry and but a woman similarly guilty, or an unbeliever: nor let any but such a man or an unbeliever marry such a woman: to the believers such a thing is forbidden.’ (The Light 24:3) —‘Marry those among you who are single, or the virtuous ones among yourselves, male or female: if they are in poverty, God will give them means out of His grace: for God encompasses all, and He knows all things. Let those who find not the wherewithal for marriage keep themselves chaste, until God gives them means out of His grace. And if any of your slaves ask for a deed in writing (to enable them to earn their freedom for a certain sum), give them such a deed if you know any good in them: yes, give them something yourselves out of the means which God has given to you. But force not your maids to prostitution when they desire chastity, in order that you may make a gain in the goods of this life. But if anyone compels them, yet, after such compulsion, is God, Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful (to them). (The Light 24: 32–33) The verses examine this additional list of forbidden relationships with women, and they are the following: women whom your fathers married (The Women 4:22); women already married (The Women 4:24); women guilty of adultery (The Light 24:3)—the adulterer being one who practices shameful act publicly, as we explained previously, since that is behavior in violation of human values in every country in the world. 31

Islam and Humanity: Consequences of a Contemporary Reading

(10) Forbidden to you (for food) are: dead animal, blood, the flesh of swine… The word of God lists the forbidden foods: ‘Forbidden to you (for food) are: dead animals, blood, the flesh of swine, and that on which has been invoked the name of other than Allah; that which has been killed by strangling, or by a violent blow, or by a headlong fall, or by being gored to death; that which has been (partly) eaten by a wild animal; unless you are able to slaughter it (in due form); that which is sacrificed on stone (altars)…’ (The Table Spread 5:3, revised). Later verses explain which foods are permitted and which are forbidden. [A 39] Verse 168 of the Sura The Cow makes clear what on the earth is permissible to eat: ‘O you people! Eat of what is on earth, lawful and good; and do not follow the footsteps of the evil one, for he is to you an avowed enemy.’ (The Cow 2:168) Add to that cattle, which God made lawful in verse 142 of the Sura Cattle: ‘Of the cattle are some for burden and some for meat: eat what Allah has provided for you, and follow not the footsteps of Satan: for he is to you and avowed enemy.’ (The Cattle 6:142) He also makes them lawful in verse 30 of the Sura The Pilgrimage, verse 21 of the Sura The Believers, and verse 79 of the Sura The Forgiver God. God also made lawful the food of the People of the Book: ‘They ask you what is lawful to them (as food). Say: lawful unto you are (all) things good and pure: and what you have taught your trained hunting animals (to catch) in the manner directed to you by Allah: eat what they catch for you, but pronounce the name of Allah over it: and fear Allah; for Allah is swift in taking account. This day are (all) things good and pure made lawful unto you. The food of the People of the Book is lawful unto you and yours is lawful unto them….’ (The Table Spread 5:4–5) And God also allowed that which His name has been pronounced upon: ‘So eat of (meats) on which Allah’s name has been pronounced, if you have faith in His signs. Why should you not eat of (meats) on which Allah’s name has been pronounced, when He has explained to you in detail what is forbidden to you, except under compulsion of necessity? But many do mislead (men) by their appetites unchecked by knowledge. your Lord knows best those who transgress.’ (The Cattle 6:118–119) 32

Chapter One: Who are the Muslims?

The Almighty God made clear what is forbidden to eat: blood, carrion, and the flesh of the swine, and that on which has been invoked the name of other than God; that which has been killed by strangling, or by violent blow, or by a headlong fall, or by being gored to death; that which has been (partly) eaten by a wild animal, unless you are able to slaughter it (in due form); that which is sacrificed on stone (altars), as the following verses demonstrate: —‘O you who believe! Eat of the good things that We have provided for you, and be grateful to Allah, if it is Him you worship. He has only forbidden you dead meat, and blood, and the flesh of swine, and that on which any other name has been invoked besides that of Allah. But if one is forced by necessity, without willful disobedience, nor transgressing due limits, then is he guiltless. For Allah is Oft-forgiving Most Merciful.’ (The Cow 2:172–173) —Say: “I find not in the message received by me by inspiration any (meat) forbidden to be eaten by one who wishes to eat it, unless it be dead meat, or blood poured forth, or the flesh of swine, for it is an abomination or, what is impious, (meat) on which a name has been invoked, other than Allah’s”. But (even so), if a person is forced [A 40] by necessity, without willful disobedience, nor transgressing due limits, your Lord is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful.’ (The Cattle 6:145) —‘He has only forbidden you dead meat, and blood, and the flesh of swine, and any (food) over which the name of other than Allah has been invoked. But if one is forced by necessity, without willful disobedience, nor transgressing due limits, then Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful.’ (The Bees 16:115) Likewise, God added to all these forbidden foods two additional items, in God’s word: ‘…that which is sacrificed on stone (altars); (forbidden) also is the division (of meat) by raffling with arrows…’ (The Table Spread 5:3) These two additional items are abominations. The abomination of the stone altars lies in sacrificing upon them. The abomination of the arrows lies in divination with them, as in the words: ‘O you who believe! Intoxicants and gambling, (dedication of ) stones, and (divination by) arrows, are an abomination, of Satan’s handwork: eschew such (abomination), that you may prosper.’ (The Table Spread 5:90) The foregoing demonstrates that the taboos 33

Islam and Humanity: Consequences of a Contemporary Reading

in the authoritative revelation are forbidden in a concrete manner, one having a connection to different human behaviors. Keeping these taboos remains a choice for the human being, without a connection to state authority. They are not to be imposed by law or prohibited by law unless they cause reliable medical harm. Then the state authority may intervene with a prohibition. No parliament in the world discusses the topic of taboos, and impositions and prohibitions, except in this case.

(11) ‘…kill not your infants on a plea of want; We provide sustenance for you and for them…’ The discussion here revolves around killing infants after birth out of fear of poverty, which means “to be deprived of resources.” The Arabs, before the mission of Mohammed (ṣ), killed infants born into poverty because of the lack of food. This is different from abortion, for with abortion, the fetus is killed before birth. The topic of abortion deserves its own detailed study, for sometimes it is permissible, for example, if the pregnancy threatens the life of the woman, or if a deformity of the fetus in the belly of the mother is identified and threatens her life, or other circumstances that might require [A 41] the killing of the fetus. The topic of the taboo is killing infants after birth out of fear of being unable to provide for them. The Almighty God forbid the killing of infants out of fear of poverty in verse 151 of the Sura The Cattle: ‘…kill not your children on a plea of want; We provide sustenance for you and for them…’ (The Cattle 6:151) And it explains this taboo, in the words of God: ‘Kill not your children for fear of want: We shall provide sustenance for them as well as for you. Indeed, the killing of them is a great sin.’ (The Night Journey 17:31) This topic is connected to the taboo of violating God’s unity, since just as God forbid us to set up partners to God, demanding that we are devoted in our worship of Him and direct our prayers to Him, so He commanded us to ask for the means of sustenance from Him alone—no one else—for He alone is the Provider. Thus, we are forbidden to kill infants out of fear of need and poverty. He is the one who sustains us all from His bounty, and on this 34

Chapter One: Who are the Muslims?

basis every country in the world punishes the killing of infants out of fear of famine as a crime.

(12) God makes trade lawful and makes usury unlawful The Almighty God forbid usury and makes clear that He deprives usury [ribā]of all blessing and gives increase for deeds of general charity [ṣadaqāt], in the word of God: ‘Allah will deprive usury of all blessing, but will give increase for deeds of charity: For He loves not creatures ungrateful and wicked.’ (The Cow 2:276) Since the alms tax [zakāh] is one of the deeds of general charity, it will increase with God, as in the word of God: ‘That which you lay out for increase through the property of (other) people, will have no increase with Allah: but that which you lay out for charity, seeking the countenance of Allah, (will increase): it is these who will get a recompense multiplied.’ (The Romans 30:39) Although usury offers a faster return to the creditor, there is no increase with God, because of how it harms the debtor and pushes him into financial difficulty, as in the word of God: ‘O you who believe! Fear Allah, and give up what remains of your demand for usury, if you are indeed believers. If you do it not, take notice of war from Allah and His Messenger: But if you turn back, you shall have your capital sums: Deal not unjustly, and you shall not be dealt with unjustly. If the debtor is in a difficulty, grant him time until it is easy for him to repay. But if you remit it by way of charity, that is best for you if you only knew. (The Cow 2:278–280) We should not confuse usury with interest on loans because they are very different. The Book forbids [A 42] usury because it draws an enormous profit from the original asset. Sometimes it is unreasonable and the loan doubles or triples, so that the troubled debtor is unable to pay it back entirely. On the other hand, interest on loans is considered part of a business transaction and it is governed by special laws in every country. It is a very reasonable return and its rate is set carefully so that it matches the capacity of the borrower. However, the interest on loans can sometimes become usury when it is multiplied so that the borrower falls into trouble and is unable to pay the debt entirely for some reason. In this case, the bank must cease charging interest 35

Islam and Humanity: Consequences of a Contemporary Reading

and adding it to the loan and must give the debtor time until his material situation eases and he can again pay his debts. For devotion to God precludes pushing the debtor into an ever-deeper crisis. As the authoritative revelation states: ‘O you who believe! Devour not usury, doubled and multiplied; but fear Allah; that you may (really) prosper.’ (The Family of Imran 3:130)

(13) Sin and trespass against truth or reason God forbid in the Book sin [ithm] and trespass [baghya] against truth or reason. However, we must examine each of the terms separately to understand what was forbidden in each case. Trespass means “infringing of the rights of others,” and it is what is meant in the word of God: ‘(David) said: “He has undoubtedly wronged you in demanding your (single) ewe to be added to his (flock of ) ewes: truly many are the partners (in business) who wrong each other: Not so do those who believe and work deeds of righteousness, and how few are they?”... (Ṣaad 38:24) The term trespass covers many actions, some of them forbidden and some of them proscribed. We will leave proscribed for later, and first examine forbidden trespasses, as described in the word of God: ‘Say: the things that my Lord has indeed forbidden are: shameful deeds, whether open or secret; sins and trespasses against truth or reason; assigning of partners to Allah, for which He has given no authority; and saying things about Allah of which you have no knowledge.’ (The Heights 7:33) This verse suggests that what is meant by trespass against reason or truth is the violation of the rights of others and their interests unjustly and with hostility, and that it is forbidden. There are many types of trespass against truth or reason, for example, theft, as cited in the word of God: [A 43] ‘As to the thief, male or female, cut off his or her hands: a punishment by way of example, from Allah, for their crime: and Allah is Exalted in power. But if the thief repents after his crime, and amends his conduct, Allah turns to him in forgiveness; for Allah is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful.’ (The Table Spread 5:38–39) While theft is not explicitly forbidden in the Book, it lands within the orbit of trespasses against truth or reason because it infringes on the rights and interests of others with hostility. Thus, it is forbidden and 36

Chapter One: Who are the Muslims?

the words of God apply to it: ‘The blame is only against those who oppress men and wrong-doing and insolently transgress beyond bounds [yabghūna] through the land, defying right and justice: for such there will be a penalty grievous.’ (The Consultation 42:42) Every type of theft falls under this category, including highway robbery, actions of mafia gangs, and others. Sin is “a holding back in doing good.” This meaning emerges clearly in the word of God: ‘And if one of you deposits a thing on trust with another, let the trustee (faithfully) discharge his trust, and let him fear his Lord. Conceal not evidence; for whoever conceals it, His heart is tainted with sin.’ (The Cow 2:283) For the concealing of evidence in this case is a specifically a delay in doing good. Just as the term trespass covers many actions, so the term sin covers many actions, some of them forbidden and some of them proscribed. We will examine the proscribed sins after we examine sins that are forbidden, which appear in the following verses: —‘Allah forgives not that partners should be set up with Him; but He forgives anything else, to whom He pleases; to set up partners with Allah is to devise a sin most heinous indeed.’ (The Women 4:48) —‘Behold! how they invent a lie against Allah! but that by itself is a manifest sin!’ (The Women 4:50) The two verses offer to us the essence of those sins that are forbidden. The first verse defines violating God’s unity as a forbidden sin—it is one of the first taboos that we examined earlier. The second verse shows us that lying about God is a forbidden sin. It is the fourteenth taboo and we will examine it next.

(14) Saying things about Allah of which you have no knowledge The word of God forbids speaking in God’s place: ‘Say: the things that my Lord has indeed forbidden are: shameful deeds, whether open or secret; [A 44] sins and trespasses against truth or reason; assigning of partners to Allah, for which He has given no authority; and saying things about Allah of which you have no knowledge.’ (The Heights 7:33) Speaking in God’s place is a usurpation of the immutable domination of God by forbidding or 37

Islam and Humanity: Consequences of a Contemporary Reading

permitting something in His place, by adding or subtracting from the taboos, as the word of God states: ‘But say not, for any false thing that your tongues may put forth, “This is lawful, and this is forbidden,” so as to ascribe false things to Allah. For those who ascribe false things to Allah, will never prosper.’ (The Bees 16:116) Forbidding and making lawful are the sole jurisdiction of the Lord of both worlds. He is the sole holder of this right and He has not delegated this right to anyone, whether Prophet or jurisprudent. Forbidding falls within the scope of the immutable domination of God, in which no one else shares, and which manifests itself in the fourteen taboos whose exhaustive content appear in the Book. He enumerated them, made them concrete, and then concluded the list with the last entry—the forbidding of speaking in God’s place. For the forbidden is concrete and cannot be made the basis of analogies: no new taboo may be added or old one subtracted from the fourteen enumerated taboos in the Book. For God has not granted the right to forbid to anyone, individual or group, prophet, messenger, or jurisprudent. The taboos are simply what God has forbidden, and thus, in the following verse, a coordinating conjunction is employed—‘…which has been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger…’ (The Repentance 9:29)— for the scope of this conjunction makes clear that God forbids and His Prophet transmits. If God did allow the Prophet to initiate forbidding, then his forbidding would be mentioned distinctly from the forbidding of God, like this: “What has been forbidden by God and what has been forbidden by His Prophet,” giving the Prophet a similar right to forbid. However, the Almighty God linked the forbidding of the Prophet to His forbidding as an indubitable proof that no one has the right to forbid without God. The Prophet did nothing more than transmit what God forbid: he adds nothing to the taboos. Since the messengerhood of Mohammed is final and valid in all times and places, the determination and enumeration of the taboos share that finality and validity. What follows is their elaboration, for forbidding is a divine right exclusive to the rank of divinity and, consequently, God explained these taboos exclusively in his Book so that He would inform the human being and he would be conscious of them [A 45] from a purely divine 38

Chapter One: Who are the Muslims?

source, and thus maintain their avoidance to achieve emotional harmony in his relationship to his Lord. In accordance with God’s promise of mercy to His worshippers, and so that the human being does not feel distress and strain in obeying his Lord in avoiding the taboos and not falling into them, and because the Almighty God knows the weakness of the human soul and how the circumstances of life vary, the Almighty God has defined the case where the human being is allowed to fall into a taboo without feeling distress or harming the harmonious relationship between the human being and his Lord. This case takes two forms: The first is related to circumstances that push or compel the human being to eat something forbidden, as in the following verses: — ‘He has only forbidden you dead meat, and blood, and the flesh of swine, and that on which any other name has been invoked besides that of Allah. But if one is forced by necessity, without willful disobedience, nor transgressing due limits, then is he guiltless. For Allah is Oft-forgiving Most Merciful.’ (The Cow 2:173) —‘…He has explained to you in detail what is forbidden to you, except under compulsion of necessity?’ (The Cattle 6:119) — ‘Forbidden to you (for food) are: dead meat, blood, the flesh of swine, and that on which has been invoked the name of other than Allah; that which has been killed by strangling, or by a violent blow, or by a headlong fall, or by being gored to death; that which has been (partly) eaten by a wild animal; unless you are able to slaughter it (in due form); that which is sacrificed on stone (altars); (forbidden) also is the division (of meat) by raffling with arrows: that is impiety. This day have those who reject faith given up all hope of your religion: yet fear them not but fear Me. This day have I perfected your religion for you, completed My favor upon you, and have chosen for you Islam as your religion. But if any is forced by hunger, with no inclination to transgression, Allah is indeed Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful.’ (The Table Spread 5:3) —‘Why should you not eat of (meats) on which Allah’s name has been pronounced, when He has explained to you in detail what is forbidden to 39

Islam and Humanity: Consequences of a Contemporary Reading

you, except under compulsion of necessity? But many do mislead (men) by their appetites unchecked by knowledge. your Lord knows best those who transgress.’ (The Cattle 6:119) —‘Say: “I find not in the message received by me by inspiration any (meat) forbidden to be eaten by one who wishes to eat it, unless it be dead meat, [A 46] or blood poured forth, or the flesh of swine, for it is an abomination or, what is impious, (meat) on which a name has been invoked, other than Allah’s”. But (even so), if a person is forced by necessity, without willful disobedience, nor transgressing due limits, your Lord is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful.’ (The Cattle 6:145) —‘He has only forbidden you dead meat, and blood, and the flesh of swine, and any (food) over which the name of other than Allah has been invoked. But if one is forced by necessity, without willful disobedience, nor transgressing due limits, then Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful.’ (The Bees 16:115) These verses concern food not any of the other taboos. The compulsion emerges out of circumstances, not relationships with people. For when the source is people, we call it force (ikrāh), and this is a second type of case where committing taboos or falling into them is allowed. The second is the falling into the taboos because of force, where the source of the power is other people, not circumstances. In the case of force, the human being is in a weak position and is unable to choose freely but rather is forced to carry out what is demanded of him. For his will has been stolen and the freedom to choose that his Lord has given him has been lost. He is forced to commit a particular act to which he is compelled to submit. In this case, the human being is only guilty from his right, to preserve his life and soul, violating a taboo under force. This can be the case regarding violating the unity of God publicly. For this is permitted under the pressure of force, without it entailing his renouncing the unity of God, as in the word of God: ‘Anyone who, after accepting faith in Allah, utters unbelief, except under compulsion, his heart remaining firm in Faith, but such as open their breast to unbelief, on them is wrath from Allah, and theirs will be a dreadful penalty.’ (The Bees 16:106) In other words, when the human being pushed against his will by others for one reason or another, and his yielding to it to 40

Chapter One: Who are the Muslims?

save his soul, is the opposite of compulsion by circumstances, which pushes the human being to approach forbidden foods by a personal decision to save his soul without the mediation of other people. In summary, in the Book God defined fourteen taboos and forbid them concretely. No one has the right to tinker or alter the list, for they are [A 47] part of the scope of the immutable domination of God. They are His alone and no one has the right to share in them.

B—Divine Prescriptions and Proscriptions The enumerated taboos in the Book are material and comprehensive and present the most important part of the righteous deed, whose undertaking is a constitutive part of the assent of the Muslim. However, it is not the only part, for there is a second part represented in the divine prescriptions and proscriptions that appear in the Book. They differ from the taboos and God commands us to approach Him by means of them. He has explained the distinction between them and the taboos in the Book so that the prescriptions and proscriptions clearly amount to human phenomena present in all societies and at every time. They have two aspects: The divine aspect: The Book of God introduces these proscriptions in a general way, for example, slander, bribery, and suicide. They are considered proscriptions rather than taboos because there are conditions in which they can be permitted and conditions in which they must be prevented. The human aspect: The Book of God mentions divine prescriptions and proscriptions in a general way but it leaves the task of determining the ranges of their application and the ranges of their prevention to the legislative authority that composes laws that harmonize with the circumstances of each society and its requirements. The prescriptions and proscriptions appeared clearly in the Book of the Almighty God in the following way:

41

Islam and Humanity: Consequences of a Contemporary Reading

(1) Uphold the trust and strive for justice A trust is a great responsibility for those who carry it. Because of its value, [A 48] the Almighty God in the Book ordered that they are upheld: —‘Allah does command you to render back your trusts to those to whom they are due; And when you judge between man and man, that you judge with justice: Indeed, how excellent is the teaching which He gives you! For Allah is He Who hears and sees all things.’ (The Women, 4:58) —‘O you that believe! betray not the trust of Allah and the Messenger, nor misappropriate knowingly things entrusted to you.’ (The Spoils of War 8:27) —And those who respect their trusts and covenants’ (The Ways of Ascent 70:32) All Muslims ought to aim to uphold their trusts. Trusts have a wide scope: Every blessing bestowed by God on the human being—intellect, health, freedom, dignity, and human values in general—is a trust that he must protect and uphold. If renounces it, he loses his humanity and takes on the condition of a beast. Similarly, there are other kinds of trust, like the trusts that the human being assumes in his society. They are exemplified by the spirit of the citizen necessary to ward off threats to the security or stability of the society and the people, and the ethic of a professional who carries out his profession with honesty and sincerity in the service of his society and for the sake of its development, and other kinds of trust like legal claims that must be returned to their owners. All these fall within the scope of the concept of the trust, and because the importance of trusts, the Almighty God ordered them upheld so they would benefit the human being and his society. In verse 58 of the Sura The Women, God Almighty connected the upholding of a trust to justice because they are inseparable. Whoever upholds a trust cannot help but be just, for in the realm of human values, one requires the other: a betrayer cannot be just as the trustworthy person cannot be unjust. God loves all human values including justice, as appears in the word of God: ‘Allah commands justice, the doing of good, and liberality to kith and kin, [A 49] and He forbids all shameful deeds, and injustice and rebellion: He instructs you, that you may receive admonition.’ (The Bees 42

Chapter One: Who are the Muslims?

16:90) Justice like trustworthiness achieves stability for the society, for the just human being respects the rights of others in his society. He does not transgress them and he is just in carrying out the obligations that are placed upon him. This provides an equal chance for all in the society, which, in turn, guarantees the development and flourishing of the society.

(2) Spying and Slander The proscription on spying and slander and a tendency to suspicion appeared in the word of God: ‘O you who believe! Avoid suspicion as much (as possible): for suspicion in some cases is a sin: And spy not on each other behind their backs. Would any of you like to eat the flesh of his dead brother? No, you would abhor it...But fear Allah: For Allah is Oft-Returning, Most Merciful.’ (The Dwellings 49:12) a—Spying is a phenomenon present in all societies and at all times. However, the task of reasoning [ijtihād] as to whether to prevent or allow it belongs to the legislative authority present in parliaments and legislative congresses that compose laws concerning it according to the circumstances of society. Spying is allowed in some circumstances and prohibited in other circumstances. If a country did not spy on its enemies during a war, it would be considered negligence and might plunge it into a big crisis that would expose it to attack or the element of surprise. Domestically, spying is permitted on suspected criminals, for example, those who are part of gangs that sell drugs, to guard against their evil and to be able follow their movements and seize them to restore safety and peace of mind in the country. In these two cases, spying is considered indispensable to achieve stability in the country. Spying on neighbors or acquaintances is entirely different. Although both are considered spying, in the first cases, spying is allowed, but in the second cases, it is not allowed because it corrupts the society and invades the privacy of others. b—Slander is similar, for it is up to societies to define what is acceptable [A 50] and unacceptable. Thus, most countries have articles in the law that call to account those who defame others or smear their reputations, while 43

Islam and Humanity: Consequences of a Contemporary Reading

allowing slander when testifying before a judge or to reveal the truth in the press or media. Therefore, composing laws for slander is a task that belongs to the legislative authority that demonstrates how to implement it.

(3) Devouring the property of people in vanities We mentioned previously in the discussion of the taboos that there are forbidden trespasses and proscribed trespasses. The forbidden trespass is a trespass against truth or reason and includes every type of theft. The proscribed trespass is a trespass with reason and it falls within the scope of proscriptions because it is a phenomenon present in all societies and at all times. However, how it is practiced differs according to the circumstances and demands of societies, and, thus, the task of legal reasoning [ijtihād] in determining what is allowed and not allowed belongs to the legislative authority. What is permitted is represented by the eating of the wealth of the people according to right, which includes such things as paying taxes, social security, and insurance. What is not permitted is devouring the wealth of people in vanities such as bribery. The authoritative revelation proscribes it in these words: —‘O you who believe! Eat not up your property among yourselves in vanities: But let there be amongst you traffic and trade by mutual good-will….’ (The Women 4:29) —‘And do not eat up your property among yourselves for vanities, nor use it as bait for the judges, with intent that you may eat up wrongfully and knowingly a little of (other) people’s property.’ (The Cow 2:188) Verse 29 of the Sura The Women indicates that what is proscribed concerns the devouring of the property of people in vanities, and that is what is called bribery. It is up to human legislation to make a clear distinction between bribery and paying a commission, for they require clarification and laws to govern them so that commissions are allowed but bribery is condemned and punished. Verse 188 of the Sura The Cow proscribes eating the property of men in vanities by using it as bait [A 51] for judges, and this matter differs entirely 44

Chapter One: Who are the Muslims?

from bribery and commissions, because it concerns offers that are passed on to someone who introduces himself as an agent of those with power and authority, and with taking the property of people who show favor to him with offers for the sake of ensuring their interests with those inpower, as if you say “Ziyad is the key to Amr, for if you want something from Amr, go to Ziyad” in exchange for services or property which you give to Amr. This kind of offer, which falls under the category of eating the property of people in vanities, is the basis of corruption in all organizations.

(4) Suicide We find in verse 29 of the Sura The Women the words of God: ‘…Nor kill (or destroy) yourselves: for indeed Allah has been to you Most Merciful!’ (The Women 4:29). This requires a full clarification, for it is a sensitive topic and is related to the issue of “killing the human soul.” God underscored that the latter was a taboo in two places, and this is in relation with a human being killing another human being (soul by soul), with a clarity of expression that does not allow doubt or confusion, as we pointed out previously. However, in the case of suicide, the human being kills himself, and there are two possible cases: a—Suicide as a consequence of an untreatable chronic disease accompanied by unbearable pain: it is called “mercy killing.” b—Killing others while killing yourself: this is called a “suicide operation.” Human legislation in ancient times did not permit mercy killing because it fell within the scope of killing another human in general. However, in the twentieth century and since, law-givers in different countries in the world began to pay attention to the difference between killing another and suicide. They have defined the circumstances of mercy killing as when the sick person, who has an incurable illness and is in great torment, requests from the doctor to end his pains by putting an end to his life. This kind of killing results from the request of the sufferer, [A 52] or his family. If the sufferer is irreversibly unconscious, then his guardian requests that the doctor relieve him from this situation by ending his life. Some countries allow this mercy killing of the sick, some others are still studying the possibility of introducing it, and some 45

Islam and Humanity: Consequences of a Contemporary Reading

reject it entirely. The human legislation that allows mercy killing is correct since this kind of killing falls under the category of “killing within right,” for if the pain is unbearable and neither drugs nor treatment can ameliorate it, then the human being has the right to choose to end his life. For in this case, the life of the sufferer amounts to a hell whose afflictions he endures every day. God shows mercy to His worshippers and has imposed on us no difficulties in religion. Consequently, this kind of killing, “mercy killing,” falls under the category of “killing within right” to relieve the human being from the torments that he suffers. On the other hand, committing suicide because of a psychological condition falls under a category of “killing the human soul” that God forbid, but this can only be judged by God, Who knows his condition and whose justice can never be doubted, since He alone knows if someone is so sick that he is unable to distinguish between right and wrong and what is allowed and forbidden. We, therefore, do not have the right to pronounce any judgement against him. Someone who kills himself and others at the same time in a suicide operation, such as those undertaken by members of terrorist groups, will have violated two taboos. The first is killing another against justice and reason and the second is killing oneself with resolve beforehand and premeditation. In other words, he commits the deed with full awareness, and in this case his torments will be multiplied by the Exalted God, for as He says: ‘If any do that in rancor and injustice, soon shall We cast them into the Fire: And easy it is for Allah.’ (The Women 4:30) For what he undertook showed malice and injustice against the innocent, who are the victims of this kind of criminal deed, and the fate of the perpetrator is Hell and misery no matter what his motives, for God Almighty forbids killing the human soul against justice and reason. [A 53]

(5) Wine and gambling God Almighty had this to say about wine and gambling: —‘They ask you concerning wine and gambling. Say: “In them is great sin, and some profit, for men; but the sin is greater than the profit.” They ask 46

Chapter One: Who are the Muslims?

you how much they are to spend; Say: “What is beyond your needs.” Thus does Allah make clear to you His signs: In order that you may consider’ (The Cow 2:219) — ‘O you who believe! Approach not prayers with a mind befogged, until you can understand all that you say…’ (The Women 4:43) — ‘O you who believe! Intoxicants and gambling, (dedication of ) stones, and (divination by) arrows, are an abomination, of Satan’s handwork: eschew such (abomination), that you may prosper.’ (The Table Spread 5:90) —‘Satan’s plan is (but) to excite enmity and hatred between you, with intoxicants and gambling, and hinder you from the remembrance of Allah, and from prayer: will you not then abstain?’ (The Table Spread 5:91) In verse 219 of the Sura The Cow, wine and gambling are described as both containing great sin and some profit for people. We explained previously in the taboos that there are two kinds of sin. The first kind is a taboo and it is violating the unity of God. The second type is a proscription and it is represented in wine and gambling, for since they combine sin and benefit, they are not forbidden but just proscribed. If they were forbidden because of the sin in them, then their benefits would disappear, and those who need them would be deprived of them. Thus, because they have benefits, the Almighty God left the task of composing laws for wine and gambling to human reasoning [ijtihād] to determine how to retain their benefits while preventing them from damaging society. Verse 90 of the Sura The Table Spread brings up four items: wine, gambling, dedication of stones, and divinations of arrows—the dedication of stones and divination of arrows are two of the taboos, as we saw previously. It brings all four together under the term rajas (confusion), and demands that we avoid the rajas they contain but not necessarily them in general. For rajas (confusion) means a disorder and here it means a disorder and lack of clarity in the thoughts of a human being. When we apply the meaning [A 54] of disorder to the four items, we get the following: a—Disorder of the dedication of stones (confusion of the dedication of stones) --------> sacrificing on them ‘that you sacrifice on stones’ (cited in Sura The Table Spread 5:3). 47

Islam and Humanity: Consequences of a Contemporary Reading

b—Disorder of the divination by arrows (confusion of the divination by arrows) --------> that you divine with arrows (whose forbidding is cited in Sura The Table Spread 5:3). Wine and gambling are among the divine proscriptions and the term confusion is applied to them in the following manner: c—the disorder of wine (confusion of wine) --------> to intoxicate (since the term wine covers both alcoholic drinks and narcotics): because of the disorder of thoughts, the person praying does not know what he is saying at prayers and, according to the word of God, he is drunk ‘until you can understand all that you say…’ (The Women 4:43) d—the disorder of gambling (confusion of gambling) --------> the delusion of gains (since the sole winner is the owner of the casino). Upon close examination, the term “to eschew” [ijtnabū] that appears in verse 90 of the Sura The Table Spread does not forbid wine but exhorts us to avoid the sin in it. It does not forbid wine because of its strong presence in human life. For example, the use of anesthetic and narcotic materials during medical operations, or more generally within the field of medicine, is free of the taint of confusion but offers large benefits to the human being, as verse 67 of the Sura The Bees explains. However, using these materials solely for the sake of achieving the intoxication of drunkenness is the confusion that we must avoid because of the damage it does to the relationship of the human being to his Lord, as the word of God states in its proscription of praying while drunk—‘Until you can understand all that you say’ (The Women 4:43)—and for his relationship to others, as in the word of God—‘Satan’s plan is (but) to excite enmity and hatred between you, with intoxicants and gambling….’ (The Table Spread 5:91) These things and other kinds of crimes occur in every country in the world because of drunkenness and gambling. [A 55] As we stated earlier, verse 3 of the Sura The Table Spread forbid sacrificing on stones and divination by arrows. In accordance with that, there are two kinds of avoidance. The first is the avoiding of the forbidden, and it applies to stones and arrows. For although they do not excite enmity and hatred between people, they do not provide any benefit to people. The second is avoiding the proscribed, and it applies to wine and gambling because they 48

Chapter One: Who are the Muslims?

do have some benefits: ‘…will you not then abstain?’ (The Table Spread 5:91). They are placed in the class of the proscribed, not the forbidden, although they excite enmity and hatred between people, for they do bear many benefits. Because wine and gambling have many benefits but cause even more injury at the same time—the sin is greater than the profit’ (The Cow 2:219)—the Almighty God has left the task of rational enquiry in them to the human being to determine when their use should be allowed and when they should be proscribed by legislative powers creating laws that punish their proscribed use. Examples of the former are the use of anesthetics for operations or in medical practice. In this case, intoxication is transformed from the proscribed to the allowed because of its great benefit. For anesthesia in the performing of an operation has a great benefit for humankind and every people in the earth needs it. The same is the case with playing lotteries and competitions, for there are benefits to people in these cases too. Thus, human legislation allows it and writes laws to govern the practice. Gambling is a great harm because of how it causes enmity and hatred between people and therefore every country in the world prevents its practice, most of the time entirely. However, there are times and places where it is allowed, but under strict supervision and stringent laws, such as in the United States, which only allows it in Las Vegas and with careful oversight.

(6) Avoiding the confusion of the pagans Paganism is an ancient historical phenomenon that accompanied the human being since his beginnings in his march towards monotheism. There are many kinds of paganism, but they all share some features, like the worship of the sun, the moon, the planets, [A 56] the stars, natural phenomena like volcanoes and rain, and the worship of graven images. As the level of consciousness in the human being advances, he gains the ability to recognize the difference between a purely divine self in its unity, sovereignty, and divinity, and the planets, natural phenomena, and idols. Thus, he recognizes that the planets and natural phenomena contribute to the total formation 49

Islam and Humanity: Consequences of a Contemporary Reading

of the universe, and he studies them to gain a deep understanding of them, using the scientific knowledge that he has attained. In so doing, he also wants to gain more and more control over nature to improve his standard of living and achieve progress and prosperity. Similarly, his increasing level of knowledge enables him to recognize that the idols that were worshipped by ancient civilizations such as the Babylonian and those preceding it, like the civilization contemporaneous with Abraham (peace upon him), which were carved in the form of animals, men, or hybrids of the two, are nothing but stones that the human being carved a long time ago for the sake of drawing close to God. What remain of these objects today are merely artistic curiosities scattered in nature that have some interest for scholars and tourists alone, and lack any religious or ideological purpose. As for the statues that are sculpted to represent particular political symbols in some country, for example, the statue of Saad Zaghloul, among others, everyone knows that these statues are considered to be no more than symbols shaped to exhibit its historical values. Thus, it is bizarre how extremist Islamic groups, like the Taliban in Afghanistan and Daesh in Iraq, destroy artistic curiosities and symbolic statues. Abraham (peace upon him) and the Prophet Mohammed (ṣ) destroyed the idols in Kaaba in two different historical periods, for the idols in those periods caused confusion in the people, that is, they disordered their thoughts and beliefs, since they presented a symbol of paganism that each of them battled, advocating instead monotheism. Therefore, destroying the idols was defensible and acceptable. However, in the 21st century, this behavior is pointless. Thus, we ask ourselves in wonder and derision: If we must destroy artistic curiosities and political symbols today to guard against them, what must we do with the planets [A 57] and natural phenomena that we cannot ever remove? The truth is that these planets and phenomena in nature, and likewise the artistic curiosities and symbols, are present in every step of our lives, since it is impossible to remove the first and destroy the second entirely. Thus, the Almighty God demands in His authoritative revelation that we avoid them, “avoid them” rather than “do not approach them.” For they are everywhere and we cannot rid ourselves of all of them. We live with and through all the 50

Chapter One: Who are the Muslims?

phenomena that were once worshipped like fire and phenomena of nature in general. Thus, Almighty God demands that we avoid the confusion and disorder in idols but He does not demand that we avoid idols. It is impossible that the likes of a statue of Saad Zaghloul can confuse us so that we offer sacrifices to it, or that we offer sacrifices to the sun, because we know that the first is a political symbol and the second is one of the phenomena of nature and nothing more.

(7) Sarcasm and Mockery The Almighty God said in the Book: ‘O you who believe! Let not some men [qaum] among you laugh at others [qaum]: It may be that the (latter) are better than the (former): Nor let some women [nisāʿ] laugh at others [nisāʿ]: It may be that the (latter) are better than the (former): Nor defame nor be sarcastic to each other, nor call each other by (offensive) nicknames: Ill-seeming is a name connoting wickedness, (to be used of one) after he has believed: And those who do not desist are (indeed) doing wrong.’ (The Dwellings 49:11) The verse distinguishes between the two terms qaum and nisāʿ: the first is used as the plural of the term man [imraʿ] and the second as the plural of the term woman [imraʿa]. The males and females are cited separately: perhaps female sarcasm differs from male sarcasm. However, in the authoritative revelation the term qaum appears in some places covering both females and males, as in the word of God: ‘And Allah will not mislead a people [qaum] after He has guided them, in order that He may make clear to them what to fear (and avoid), for Allah has knowledge of all things.’ (The Repentance 9:115) Verse 11 of the Sura The Dwellings proscribes laughing at someone’s expense, defamation, sarcasm, and name-calling because they can cause psychological injuries and the smearing of reputation. Since these phenomena are present [A 58] in every society and at every time, the Exalted proscribes them in the Book but leaves it to the legislative authority to perform the task of reasoning (ijtihād) to distinguish the settings in which 51

Islam and Humanity: Consequences of a Contemporary Reading

they are allowed from the settings in which they are not allowed, according the circumstances and demands of each society, along with determining the kind and degree of punishment for doing what is not allowed. As for the mockery, critical sarcasm, and judicious ridicule that we find in the works of caricaturists and in the theater or cinema, in which artists and journalists use laughter and scorn to criticize politicians for their policies and to prod them to improve their performance in the tasks for which they are responsible, it is permitted and it falls on the legislative authority to draw up the laws that govern that activity.

(8) Entering Houses Almighty God said in the Book: —‘They ask you concerning the new moons. Say: They are but signs to mark fixed periods of time in (the affairs of ) men, and for pilgrimage. It is no virtue if you enter your houses from the back: It is virtue if you fear Allah. Enter houses through the proper doors: And fear Allah: That you may prosper.’ (The Cow 2:189) —‘O you who believe! enter not houses other than your own, until you have asked permission and saluted those in them: that is best for you, in order that you may heed (what is seemly).’ (The Light 24:27) —‘If you find no one in the house, enter not until permission is given to you: if you are asked to go back, go back: that makes for greater purity for yourselves: and Allah knows well all that you do.’ (The Light 24:28) —‘There is no harm for you to enter uninhabited houses where you have some goods. God knows whatever you reveal or hide.’ (The Light 24:29, MS) That each of these verses contains a detailed prohibition on entering houses shows its importance. The principle is only to enter with the permission of the occupants: we must ask permission and they must convey that permission before we enter lest we put them in an awkward position by surprising them, or perhaps vexing them. As verses 27 and 28 of the Sura The Light make clear, if the occupants apologize [A 59] for being unable to receive us, they are without fault, and we must accept that decision without 52

Chapter One: Who are the Muslims?

grumbling. Verse 189 of the Sura The Cow urges us to request permission before entering a house, contrasting the prescription “enter houses through the proper doors” with the proscription of “entering your houses from the back” to indicate the obligation to ask for permission before entering. The latter conduct falls under the category of snooping on others. Verse 29 of the Sura The Light permits us to enter unoccupied houses with permission or even without permission, but only if we have some goods in the house. However, we are not allowed to use that clause as an excuse undermine the sanctity of other people’s houses: it is only allowed in the special cases that the legislative authority defines for a society, like the occurrence of a crime that forces the police to enter the house to search it or conduct an investigation. Human legislation supervises such activities by writing laws that determine the conditions for obtaining a warrant from a judge or the chief of police for the sake of entering houses from the back or from the front without asking permission of its occupants.

(9) The proscription on breaking oaths and false words God Almighty said in the Book: —‘…break not your oaths after you have confirmed them; indeed, you have made Allah your surety….’ (The Bees 16:91) —And be not like a woman who breaks into untwisted strands the yarn which she has spun, after it has become strong. Nor take your oaths to practice deception between yourselves, lest one party should be more numerous than another: for Allah will test you by this….’ (The Bees 16:92) —‘And take not your oaths, to practice deception between yourselves, with the result that someone’s foot may slip after it was firmly planted.…’ (The Bees 16:94) The Almighty God was satisfied in the Book to proscribe breaking an oath after confirming it, whether from the motive of desire or to generate confusion and anarchy in society, [A 60] as the first and second verses demonstrate. On the other hand, He does not prohibit it entirely because while swearing an oath is a phenomenon always present in human societies, the practice differs 53

Islam and Humanity: Consequences of a Contemporary Reading

from one society to another and from one situation to another. Thus, it is possible that the person who swears some oath realizes subsequently that he was mistaken or finds out that he swore about a matter that he thought was right but later discovers was false. In these cases, it is right for him to break his oath because it is best not to persist in error or falsity after knowing the truth. For going back on an oath without a good reason is proscribed just as keeping an oath after its error or falsity emerges is not rationally acceptable. Verse 94 of the Sura The Bees proscribed breaking an oath, comparing it to someone’s foot slipping after it was firmly planted. However, breaking an oath for a good reason is allowed. The legislative authority in a society has the task of determining the circumstances in which it is allowed and not allowed and to write the laws that govern those circumstances. As for errors in oaths, Almighty God called them “false words” in the Book, and He proscribed them and prescribed that we avoid them, in His words: ‘…shun the word that is false’ (The Pilgrimage 22:30). To avoid them the human being must take care not to fall into them. An example would be when the human being finds himself in a situation that forces him to praise some goods to promote them or to praise some person, and this occurs frequently out of self-interest or for reasons of decorum. If the result of this conduct brings harm to others, then it is proscribed. However, if it does not result in any harm, then there is nothing to it. It is up to the legislative authority in any society to mark the difference between the former and the latter, where the former is proscribed and punishment is imposed on the perpetrator because the purpose is to deceive others and mislead them, but the latter cases, where no harm arises, are not punished.

(10) General Ethics Just as Almighty God invoked definite prescriptions and proscriptions in the Book and demanded from [A 61] Muslims to behave in accordance with them, as we saw, He invoked other prescriptions and proscriptions that present general ethical principles to assist the human being in building society and in strengthening the social solidarity resting on reciprocal respect 54

Chapter One: Who are the Muslims?

between the individuals to achieve its security and stability and create an atmosphere of accord for everyone in it. The following are examples of the ethical principles invoked in the Book of God Almighty: —courteous greetings: ‘When a (courteous) greeting is offered you, meet it with a greeting still more courteous, or (at least) of equal courtesy. Allah takes careful account of all things.’ (The Women 4:86) —pardoning evil: ‘Whether you publish a good deed or conceal it or cover evil with pardon, indeed, Allah does blot out (sins) and has power (in the judgment of values).’ (The Women 4:149) —forgiving others: ‘We created not the heavens, the earth, and all between them, but for just ends. And the Hour is surely coming (when this will be manifest). So overlook (any human faults) with gracious forgiveness.’ (The Rocky Tract 15:85) —not speaking evil of others: ‘Allah loves not that evil should be noised abroad in public speech, except where injustice has been done; for Allah is He who hears and knows all things.’ (The Women 4:148) —not wasting resources: ‘O Children of Adam! wear your beautiful apparel at every time and place of prayer: eat and drink: But waste not by excess, for Allah loves not the wasters.’ (The Heights 7:31) —not being stingy: ‘Make not your hand tied (like a niggard’s) to your neck, nor stretch it forth to its utmost reach, so that you become blameworthy and destitute.’ (The Night Journey 17:29) —not being insolent: ‘Nor walk on the earth with insolence: for you cannot rend the earth asunder, nor reach the mountains in height.’ (The Night Journey 17:37) There are also other divine prescriptions and proscriptions that represent general rules of conduct in any society and are appropriate in all societies since they spur the strengthening of social relationships full of reciprocal affection and respect between members of one society. For human values are subject to accumulation, in other words, they are subject to increases in wisdom; they do not require revelation and they never cease from the mouths of the wise. For wisdom is the cumulative experience of nations [A 62] during their historical journey since history is the greatest wise 55

Islam and Humanity: Consequences of a Contemporary Reading

sage who exhibits the result of the experience of nations. Wisdom is what combines knowledge and instruction, as the word of God indicates: ‘“Our Lord! send amongst them a Messenger of their own, who shall rehearse your signs to them and instruct them in scripture and wisdom, and sanctify them: For You are the Exalted in might, the Wise.”’ (The Cow 2:129) Likewise, God says: ‘A similar (favor have you already received) in that We have sent among you a Messenger of your own, rehearsing to you Our signs, and sanctifying you, and instructing you in scripture and wisdom, and in new knowledge.’ (The Cow 2:151) Wisdom is the product of advanced human mental activity which accumulates until, thanks to it, the human being reaches the status of a sage who puts things in the right place, at the right time, and in the right way. Contemplation, reflection, taking advice, and considering are advanced human mental activities that can only be pursued by those with understanding, as God says: ‘He grants wisdom to whom He pleases; and He to whom wisdom is granted receives indeed a benefit overflowing; but none will grasp the message but men of understanding.’ (The Cow 2:269) In other words, it can only be pursued those who possess intellects that burn brightly in the work they do to advance their societies. However, we are only able to understand how to observe the divine prescriptions and proscriptions in societies if we can distinguish between human values and traditions. Human values represent social spiritual laws that bind individual human beings to each other as human not animal groups, abstracting from their religious communities, intellectual orientations, and economic structures. For human values are universal, global, and inclusive. Accordingly, they were revealed by the Almighty God and they are represented in fourteen definite taboos exclusive to the Book, and in the prescriptions and proscriptions that appeared in the Book. If the definite taboos are in the authoritative revelation, the prescriptions and proscription are an expression of enduring social phenomena and persist across different times and places, and thus their observance is subject to the circumstances and customs of a society. Custom is what people first know, then recognize, and then finally becomes familiar to taste and social acceptance, in this way acquiring a positive meaning. [A 63] The wrong [munkar] is what people first 56

Chapter One: Who are the Muslims?

reject, then disapprove of socially, that is, it becomes unfamiliar to the social taste. The principle (of the right and the wrong) is one of the most important bases of general Islamic conduct, and thus the Almighty God ordered His Prophet (ṣ) to adopt it, in His words: ‘Hold to forgiveness; command what is right; but turn away from the ignorant.’ (The Heights 7:199) In other words, observe the custom that is prevailing in any society as long as it does not contradict the taboos in the Book. This includes the customs that are borne of social relationships and environmental conditions in the society. These depend on time and place, so that the customs of Bedouins in the desert differ from the customs of those who live in the forests and high mountains in respect to food, drink, clothing, hospitality, feasts, and funerals. For example, clothes are subject to a society’s customs and lack any relation to the permitted and the prohibited. Therefore, one must observe the divine proscriptions and prescriptions by taking into consideration a society’s customs to be in harmony with them rather than colliding with them, for the society will reject that. The righteous deed that God wants as the third pillar of Islam is represented in the taboos that the human being must not violate but rather be alert not to fall into to protect the individual and the society together. The Muslim must concern himself with the proscriptions and prescriptions, distinguishing between the conditions in which their practice is allowed from those in which their practices is not allowed, and guiding the activity of applying them or denying them in accordance with what harmonizes with the interest of the individual and society, and in accordance with what the customs of each society requires. For the highest goal of religion is protecting the interest of the individual and the society together, and because the human individual is considered the basic nucleus, that nucleus must be suitable for building a major human structure represented in the nation that represents society and then a larger structure that represents human society as a whole and covers a diversity of nations. In accordance with that measure, every individual from these diverse nations, if he believes in God and the Last Day and does what is righteous, while keeping entirely clear of the taboos and practicing prudence in the observation of the proscriptions, is a Muslim 57

Islam and Humanity: Consequences of a Contemporary Reading

no matter to what religious community or people he [A 64] belongs. This is deep divine wisdom because it is the Almighty who desires diversity for us— ‘O mankind! We created you from a single (pair) of a male and a female, and made you into nations and tribes, that you may know each other (not that you may despise (each other). Indeed, the most honored of you in the sight of Allah is (he who is) the most righteous of you. And Allah has full knowledge and is well acquainted (with all things)’ (The Dwellings 49:13)—and the widest ranges of human diversity—‘And among His signs is the creation of the heavens and the earth, and the variations in your languages and your colors: indeed, in that are signs for those who know.’ (The Romans 30:22). This includes differences in ethnicity and in language, and the differences in culture and beliefs that flow from them. However, God Almighty ordained one common denominator for us and that is the Islamic religion as the single measure for the righteousness or corruption of an individual, in abstraction from different religious beliefs and cultures. Thanks to that measure, every individual can know if he is a Muslim by his adherence to the three pillars of Islam as they appear in the Book: Faith in God and the Last Day and the righteous deed, with what that implies of staying far from the taboos and observing the proscriptions. Therefore, all other measures that people create to divide themselves recede before this just divine measure, for most of the time those other measures lack justice because people have a limited grasp of matters in contrast to the absolute knowledge of God. If, then, the general meaning of Islam embraces every believer in God, the Last Day, and doing what is righteous, we have the right to wonder the following: if the religion “Islam” that God approves for His worshippers and orders them to adhere to comes with this inclusive meaning for every religious community in all their diversity on earth— ‘Those who believe (in the Qur’an), and those who follow the Jewish (scriptures), and the Christians and the Sabians, any who believe in Allah and the Last Day, and work righteousness, shall have their reward with their Lord; on them shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve.’ (The Cow 2:62)—so that a Muslim is anyone who adheres to the three pillars of Islam no matter their religious community, then who is not a Muslim, what makes someone out to be a 58

Chapter One: Who are the Muslims?

non-Muslim, and how does God name this condition in the Authoritative Book? [A 65]

3—Dissent is the Meaning of Opposition to Islam in the Book When we dig more deeply into the texts of the Book, we discover that the contrary term to islām is ijrām (dissenting, in this case from God), and the contrary term to muslimūn is mujrimūn (those who dissent from God), as cited in the word of God: ‘Shall We then treat the muslimūn like the mujrimūn? What is the matter with you? How do you judge?’ (The Pen 68:35–36) The term jurm and terms derived from it appeared 67 times in the Book. Its meaning is “cutting off ” and thus the celestial bodies [alajrām al-samāwiyya] are called ajrām because they are isolated, that is, cut off from each other. And therefore, the word of God: ‘Without doubt [la jarama], in the Hereafter they will perish.’ (The Bees 16:109), that is, their losses in the Hereafter are a matter decided and clear-cut, without any need for discussion. If the popular legal term today in all societies for naming thieves, killers, and rapists is criminals [mujrimūn], its origin is in the linguistic meaning of the term mujrim (he who cuts off ), since, in general, he is someone who cuts his connection to society and its laws and follows his impulses without any consideration for laws or human values. We find the same linguistic meaning in the Book since it uses the term mujrim (criminal) for someone who cuts off his relations with God and denies His Exalted existence, does not believe in the Last Day, and denies the Day of Judgement and Resurrection of the Dead. In addition to that, he severs his connection to human values since he does not acknowledge, respect, or apply them in his life or to society. Thus, he is severing his relationship to God on two planes: His lack of faith in Him and in the Day of the Resurrection, and his lack of respect for the human values that constitute his nature. What we name by the contemporary term mulhid (atheist), God called in the Book mujrim since the term ijrām is more precise than the term ilhād, 59

Islam and Humanity: Consequences of a Contemporary Reading

for a mulhid in our contemporary understanding may not be a believer in God but he may still respect human values, whereas the mujrim not only does not believe in God but he [A 66] does not respect or apply human values. The two terms were mentioned in the Book, and we can locate three texts that deal with the term ilhād alone. —‘And to Allah belong the best names, so invoke Him by them. And leave [the company of ] those who practice deviation [yulhidūna] concerning His names. They will be recompensed for what they have been doing.’ (The Heights 7:180, SI) —‘ We know indeed that they say, “It is a man that teaches him.” The tongue of him they wickedly point to [yulhidūna] is notably foreign, while this is Arabic, pure and clear.’ (The Bees 16:103) —‘Those who deviate from [yulhidūna] Our revelations are not hidden from Us. Is the one who will be thrown into hell fire better than the one who will be brought safely into the presence of God on the Day of Judgment? Act as you wish; God is Well-Aware of whatever you do.’ (Explained in Detail 41:40, MS) The meaning of ilhād is the deviation from the straight. We find this meaning manifest in a conspicuous way in verse 103 of the Sura The Bees: ‘The tongue of him they wickedly point to [yulhidūna] is notably foreign,’ that is, they deviate to it, with the meaning that they deviate from the Arabic (the straight) tongue towards the foreign tongue. Likewise, verse 180 of the Sura The Heights and verse 40 of the Sura Explained in Detail both mention deviating from one thing to another, in verse 180, ‘such men as practice deviation [yulhidūna] in his names’ on the topic of praying, and in verse 40, ‘Those who deviate from [yulhidūna] Our revelations,’ that is deviate from it to something else. As for ijrām, it is a cutting-off from something, and the mujrim is one who cuts off his relationship with something without a need for a substitute, as the word of the Almighty makes clear in the following texts: —‘On the Day that the Hour will be established, the guilty [mujrimūn] will be struck dumb with despair.’ (The Romans 30:12) —‘…the wicked [mujrimūn] are not called (immediately) to account for their sins.’ (The Stories 28:78) 60

Chapter One: Who are the Muslims?

—‘(For) the sinners [mujrimūn] will be known by their marks: and they will be seized by their forelocks and their feet. Then which of the favors of your Lord will you deny? This is the Hell which the sinful ones [mujrimūn] deny:’ (The Most Gracious 55:41–43) [A 67] —‘Thus do We deal with men of sin [mujrimūn]. Ah woe, that Day, to the rejecters of truth!’ (Those Sent Forth 77:18–19) These texts present to us a picture that describes the state of the mujrimūn when they rise from their tombs on the Day of the Resurrection after the second blast of the trumpet, and then see with their own eyes what they had been denying, and then they are astounded and what appears on their faces requires no question or answer, for they will be seized because of the evidence written on their faces and delivered to the fire that they had denied. For they cut themselves off from God and severed their connection to the human values they had exceeded and with that injured others, and they do not possess any open account with God. Once we grasp that ijrām is severing your relationship with God, we can understand the word of God: ‘Except the Companions of the Right Hand. (They will be) in gardens (of delight): they will question each other, and (ask) of the sinners [mujrimūn]: “What led you into hellfire?” They will say: “We were not of those who prayed [muṣallūn]; Nor were we of those who fed the indigent; But we used to talk vanities with vain talkers; And we used to deny the Day of Judgment until there came to us (the hour) that is certain.” Then will no intercession of (any) intercessors profit them.’ (The One Enveloped 74:39–48) For the picture here conjures the Companions of the Right Hand in the garden conjecturing aloud about why the mujrimūn (sinners) had entered hellfire. The mujrimūn answered that they had not embraced Islam theoretically or practically, that is, they had not assented to the existence of God and had severed their relationship to Him— ‘“We were not of those who prayed”’ —and had not assented to the Last Day— ‘“And we used to deny the Day of Judgment”’ —and had not done works that benefited mankind— ‘“Nor were we of those who fed the indigent”’ —but did evil, and caused harm, and refused to do the righteous deed— ‘“But we used to talk vanities with vain talkers.”’ These texts from the Book show that 61

Islam and Humanity: Consequences of a Contemporary Reading

severing the relation with God and human values is what qualifies someone as mujrim—it has nothing to do with the subject of prayer understood as a ritual. The word of God confirms that: ‘Do you see one who denies the judgment (to come)? Then such is the (man) who repulses the orphan (with harshness), And encourages not the feeding of the indigent. So woe to the worshippers who are neglectful of their prayers [muṣallūn], those who (want but) to be seen (of men) but refuse (to supply) (even) neighborly needs. (Small Kindnesses 107:1–7) There is a great similarity between the Sura The One Enveloped and the Sura Small Kindnesses, for denying the Day of Judgement, not believing in the existence of God, refusing to do what is righteous, [A 68] lack of consideration for human values, indifference to the needs of neighbors, and failing to assist others expel the human being from the circle of Islam and into the circle of dissent (ijrām). Therefore, we see that what was meant in the two Suras by muṣallūn is derived from ṣila (a relation with God) not ṣalawa (prayer as ritual). It is necessary to maintain the distinction in the Book between the meaning of ṣalāh (connection) and ṣalawa (prayer) in the Book of God because the understanding the Book requires that level of precision. If we want to distinguish between those two meanings, we must only look to the word of God: ‘By men whom neither traffic nor merchandise can divert from the Remembrance of Allah, nor from regular prayer [ṣalawa], nor from the practice of regular charity: Their (only) fear is for the day when hearts and eyes will be transformed (in a world wholly new).’ (The Light 24:37) The term here is ṣalawa (prayer as ritual). However, in a different verse: ‘Don’t you see that it is Allah Whose praises all beings in the heavens and on earth do celebrate, and the birds (of the air) with wings outspread? Each one knows its own ṣalātahu and praise. And Allah knows well all that they do.’ (The Light 24:41, revised) The term here is from ṣalāh (connection, here connection with God). In the first verse, the term derived from ṣalawa followed a term meaning “to undertake,” and thus it has the meaning of undertaking a ritual (bowing and prostration). In the second verse, the term ṣalāh occurs in the context of birds, and since we know that birds cannot ṣalawa in the sense of a ritual determined by bowing and prostrations, it must have the meaning 62

Chapter One: Who are the Muslims?

of a connection to God. It is a connection of praise and prayer that the bird knows but that we do not know. However, God informs us of it and its existence. The Almighty God in His Wise Book, then, introduced both ṣalawa (ritual) and ṣalāh (connection with God) to indicate the necessity of distinguishing between the meanings of the two. Accordingly, a Muslim establishes his connection to God through faith in Him and in the Last Day and doing what is righteous. The mujrim severs his connection to God, denying Him and the Last Day and refusing to do what is righteous. Then, Islam requires the establishing of a connection with God and strengthening it with faith in Him and in the Last Day and undertaking the righteous deed. We can read this in the word of God: ‘Say: “Truly, my prayer [ṣalātī] [A 69] and my service of sacrifice, my life and my death, are (all) for Allah, the Cherisher of the Worlds: No partner has He: this am I commanded, and I am the first of those who bow to his will [muslimīn].’ (The Cattle 6:162–163) In the first verse, ṣalāh is derived from ṣila, and in the second verse muslimīn is mentioned. In other words, a connection to God has an immediate relation to Islam. The phrase ‘I am the first who bow to his will [muslimīn]’ refers to that Islam which began with Noah and led to the Prophet (ṣ) because “al-awal” in Arabic refers to two opposite meanings: the first and the last. In other word, the religion of Islam that began with Noah in his messengerhood ended with Mohammed (ṣ) in his closing messengerhood, as confirmed in the word of God: —‘….This day have I perfected your religion for you, completed My favor upon you, and have chosen for you Islam as your religion….” (The Table Spread 5:3) —‘….but (he is) the Messenger of Allah, and the Seal of the Prophets.…’ (Combined Forces 33:40) Therefore, the Islam that the prophets and messengers brought to us, beginning with Noah and ending with Mohammed (ṣ), focuses on faith in God and the Last Day, and is crowned with the righteous deed, which represents the human values that have the following characteristics: a—They represent the self-restraint of the human being (conscience) and adherence to them is accomplished through education. 63

Islam and Humanity: Consequences of a Contemporary Reading

b—They are values of the self that lack existence outside human consciousness, and it is easy to breach them since they are weak in themselves. Thus, they must be converted into stable social values, so that those who violate or break them are exposed to social rejection and isolation. c—The appeal to do them does not require proof, since they are natural and acceptable in themselves and for themselves. That sincerity and honesty are virtues, and that cheating and lying are vices, is in no need of proof. d—They are not subject to voting or to the play of opinions. In other words, it is not possible for a Muslim who believes in God and the Last Day to embrace the lie and disobedience to parents, [A 70] just to be different from someone else who believes in true speech and reverence for parents. Therefore, every society must labor to embed these values and entrench them in the soul of its members because they have a global inclusive character so that the other conducts himself by these values, no matter his religious community. For the principle in relationships between nations is reciprocal friendship. Wars are exceptional and so they do not provide the framework for understanding international relations, despite national differences in religious community and intellectual orientations.

4—God’s Approval Applies to All Muslims Some of the verses of the Book established that the Companions are those whom God chose to accompany the Prophet (ṣ), following him and helping him in his call, as in the word of God: —‘The vanguard (of Islam), the first of those who forsook (their homes) and of those who gave them aid, and (also) those who follow them in (all) good deeds, well-pleased is Allah with them, as are they with Him: for them has He prepared gardens under which rivers flow, to dwell therein forever: that is the supreme felicity.’ (The Repentance 9:100) —‘Thou will not find any people who believe in Allah and the Last Day, loving those who resist Allah and His Messenger, even though they were their fathers or their sons, or their brothers, or their kindred. For such He 64

Chapter One: Who are the Muslims?

has written faith in their hearts, and strengthened them with a spirit from Himself. And He will admit them to gardens beneath which rivers flow, to dwell therein (forever). Allah will be well pleased with them, and they with Him. They are the Party of Allah. Truly it is the Party of Allah that will achieve felicity.’ (She That Disputes 58:22) The first verse mentions those with whom God is well-pleased. We know that the pleasure of God is one of the noblest goals that every Muslim seeks, and we know those mentioned deserve this approval of their worthiness, for they had faith in the Prophet and sustained him and supported the messengerhood that he brought, and they sacrificed much for the sake of it so that it prevails. Nevertheless, we must ask ourselves, on the other hand, if [A 71] it is possible that God’s approval applies exclusively to those mentioned, or can those who live in a subsequent period also gain the approval of God? The truth that we find in the Book, our most truthful and reliable source, shows that God does not single out those people alone for His approval, but rather other verses show that the approval of God is not exclusive to those people but salvation is also possible to those who lived subsequently, as in the word of God: —‘Allah will say: “This is a day on which the truthful will profit from their truth: theirs are gardens, with rivers flowing beneath, their eternal home: Allah well-pleased with them, and they with Allah: that is the great salvation, (the fulfilment of all desires).’ (The Table Spread 5:119) —‘Those who have faith and do righteous deeds, they are the best of creatures. Their reward is with Allah: gardens of eternity, beneath which rivers flow; they will dwell therein forever; Allah well pleased with them, and they with Him: all this for such as fear their Lord and Cherisher.’ (The Clear Evidence 98:7–8) Verse 119 of the Sura The Table Spread appears in the context of a discussion between God and Jesus on the Day of the Resurrection, and in it God explains that Christians who have faith in Jesus as a human prophet and messenger and do not violate God’s unity gain a share of His approval. Verses 7 and 8 of the Sura The Clear Evidence make clear that the ‘best of creatures’ are those who believe in God and the Last Day and do what is 65

Islam and Humanity: Consequences of a Contemporary Reading

righteous, and that this will be the case until the Day of Judgment. Therefore, the approval of God applies to everyone who believes in God and does what is righteous in all eras and places, and it is not reserved for the generation of the Companions. For God is pleased with everyone who believes in Him and does what is righteous, whatever his religious community and time or place. For the foundation of Islam is faith in God and doing what is righteous which is how the “best of creatures” are identified because faith in God is manifested in the love of the human being for God and his desire to approach Him and win His approval by doing works of righteousness in obedience to Him, the Exalted. [A 72] The human being, due to his human nature, has an inclination to both the positive and negative, that is, to do both good and evil. In his internal struggle between good and evil, sometimes the good within him wins, and other times the evil inside him wins. With that struggle as the starting point, the Companions interacted with the divine revelation, just as those who lived before them and were followers of Jesus interacted with it, and just as those who lived after them interacted and will interact with it as time progresses. We established that God had been well-pleased with the Companions as He was well-pleased with those who preceded them and as He was and will be well-pleased with those who follow them, despite all their sins and errors, each according to his time, on the condition that they incline to the good as much as they can and exercise diligence in triumphing over evil. For the approval of God is connected to faith in him and the righteous deed and this confirms that history always marches forward, not in reverse, for as the level of human consciousness progresses, so human values take root. And these values have much longer roots that they did fourteen centuries ago. [A 73]

66

Sabians: Muslim Sabians are all those who believe in God and the Last Day and do what is righteous from the followers of other religious communities. Christians: Christian Muslims are those who follow Jesus

God-dissenters: They deny God and the Last Day and sever their relationship with God by renouncing acting according to human values and appealing to thoughts and acts that are not worthy of humans (criminal)

People

Jews: Muslims who practice Judaism and they are followers of Moses.

Those who believe: The Muslim believers are those who are followers of Mohammed (ṣ) and they perform the ritual prayers

The Muslims: Those who believe in God and the Last Day and do righteous deeds. God-connected people: They preserve their connection with God

Chapter One: Who are the Muslims?

67

Chapter Two Who are the Believers?

When an individual belonging to the community of Mohammed (ṣ) becomes conscious of the life around him, he finds himself in a town in which the call to prayer is raised five times a day and festivals take place celebrating the coming of the month of Ramadan with its fasting and evening prayers, just as he witnesses many feasts prepared for the reception of pilgrims arriving from holy spots after they performed the rituals of the pilgrimage. He also sees the widespread practice of giving regular charity or the alms tax to the poor and underprivileged. As he matures, there is this beautiful image of the religious life of his society deep inside him that makes him love performing the rituals because he feels that they represent a part of his identity and culture planted in him when he was young. Nevertheless, this forces us to raise a very important question: If Islam, as it appears, includes every religious community in all their diversity, that is, everyone who believes in God and the Last Day and does what is righteous is considered a Muslim, no matter what his religious community, how do we classify these rituals that we perform and take pride in within our societies? To answer this question, we must search the texts of the Book for the meaning of īmān, just as we searched previously for islām, so that we can use them to explain the difference between islām and īmān, and then use the understanding we gain of īmān through the Book to understand the status of the rituals we perform as followers of the religious community of Mohammed (ṣ). [A 76]

69

Islam and Humanity: Consequences of a Contemporary Reading

1—The Meaning of Īmān (Faith) in the Book of God We begin our search for the meaning of īmān by examining the Book: —‘O you who believe [āmanū]! Believe [āmanū] in Allah and His Messenger, and the scripture which He has sent to His Messenger and the scripture which He sent to those before (him)’ (The Women 4:136). —‘O you that believe [āmanū]! Fear Allah, and believe [āmanū] in His Messenger, and He will bestow on you a double portion of His mercy: He will provide for you a light by which you shall walk (straight in your path), and He will forgive you (your past): for Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful.’ (The Iron 57:28) —‘But those who believe [āmanū] and work deeds of righteousness, and believe [āmanū] in the (revelation) sent down to Mohammed for it is the truth from their Lord, He will remove from them their ills and improve their condition.’ (Mohammed 47:2) We observe in this verse that the Arabic verb associated with the noun īmān, āmanū, occurs twice in each verse. Why the repetition? Why does God command those who already believe to believe in God and His Messenger? The order cannot be merely a repetition for that would be redundant, and thus the explanation must be that the first set of believers mentioned are not yet believers in the Messenger (ṣ) and thus God demands that faith from them in the second call for belief. The only way to explain why He orders those who already believe and do what is righteous to then believe in what was sent down to Mohammed (ṣ), as in verse 2 of the Sura Mohammed, is to assume that they do not yet believe in the messengerhood of Mohammed (ṣ). In reality, we do not need to make a lengthy examination to connect the meaning of these verses to our earlier conclusions about the meaning of Islam and Muslims. That Islam is faith in God and the Last Day and doing what is righteous suggests that the first group of believers in the three verses are believers in God and the Last Day and doing what is righteous, and then that God demands from them with the second mention of “believe” that they also have faith in His Messenger Mohammed and what was sent down to him (ṣ). Thus, we understand that the Muslim is necessarily someone who 70

Chapter Two: Who are the Believers?

believes in God and the Last Day and does what is righteous, but that he need not be a follower [A 77] of Mohammed’s religious community. He may be from a different religious community, and since a religious community consists in a way of performing religious rituals, every religious community has its own way of performing the religious rituals of fasting and prayer and pilgrimage and alms. Thus, the first group of believers in the three verses refers to all Muslims, no matter what religious community they belong to, if they assent to the existence of God, believing in Him. The second group of believers refers to the muʾminūn, the followers of Mohammed. In other words, the followers of Mohammed are Muslims because they believe in God and the Last Day and do righteous deeds, and they are muʾminūn because, in addition, they believe in the Prophet (ṣ) and follow the rituals of his religious community. Thus, they are called the muslimūn muʾminūn, that is, the Muslim believers. Hence the difference between islām and īmān is clear, as it is clear in this word of God: ‘The desert Arabs say, “We believe [āmannā].” Say, “You have no faith [lam tuʾminū]; but you (only) say, ‘We have submitted [aslamnā] our wills to Allah,’ For not yet has Faith [īmān] entered your hearts…’ (The Dwellings 49:14) The verses show with clarity that there is a difference between islām and īmān, and that islām marks the lower limit demanded of people, as the word of God confirms: ‘Again and again will those who disbelieve, wish that they had bowed (to Allah’s will) in Islam [lau kānū muslimīn].’ (The Rocky Tract 15:2) Hence, we know that the pillars of Islam, which include assenting to faith in the existence of God and the Last Day and doing what is righteous, must be fulfilled in the human being in order that he is included within the circle of Islam, as the word of God confirms: ‘We have advised the human being to be kind to his parents; his mother bore him with hardship and delivered him while suffering a great deal of pain. The period in which his mother bore and weaned him lasted for thirty months. When he grew up to manhood and became forty years old, he then said, “Lord, inspire me to give You thanks for the bounties you have granted to me and my parents, and to act righteously to please You. Lord, make my offspring virtuous. Lord I turn to you in repentance; I am a Muslim.”’ (The Curved Sand Hills 46:15, 71

Islam and Humanity: Consequences of a Contemporary Reading

MS) Note how this verse connects doing what is righteous as exemplified in reverence for one’s parents to Islam in that it concludes “I am a Muslim.” It does not say “I am of the muʾminūn” because doing what is righteous is one of the pillars of Islam, not īmān, as the word of God confirms: ‘Those who believe and do [A 78] deeds of righteousness, and those who establish regular prayers and regular charity [zakāh], will have their reward with their Lord: on them shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve.’ (The Cow 2: 277 Revised) This verse distinguish between doing what is righteous and establishing regular prayers and regular charity or alms tax [zakāh], that is, between doing what is righteous and religious rituals, so that we learn from this verse that the muʾminūn, the followers of the Prophet (ṣ), if they do what is righteous, which is part of Islam, then perform the rituals, as a part of īmān, then they will be rewarded by their Lord for their Islam and for their īmān, for the two together. Thus, īmān is built around two axes: The first is īmān or faith in Mohammed (ṣ) and what is derived from it of duties of obedience to the Messenger in his messengerhood, and the second is the performing of religious rituals. In light of that meaning of īmān and muʾminūn, we try to understand the word of God: ‘The Messenger believes in what has been revealed to him from his Lord, as do the men of faith [muʾminūn]. Each one (of them) believes in Allah, His angels, His books, and His messengers. “We make no distinction (they say) between one and another of His messengers.” And they say: “We hear, and we obey: (We seek) Your forgiveness, our Lord, and to You is the end of all journeys.”’ (The Cow 2:285). Notice that the term muʾminūn follows the mention of the Messenger, and since the followers of Mohammed are the muʾminūn, the phrase reads “…and the muʾminūn…” Consequently, they are muslimūn muʾminūn. For they are Muslims, since according to the verse, “All of them believe in Allah, His angels,” since faith in God and His angels is part of Islam. And they are muʾminūn since they believe in the Prophet Mohammed (ṣ) and what he brought. Moreover, since the messengerhood of Mohammed is the last of the messengerhoods and the Prophet believed in those messengers and messengerhoods that preceded him, along with the books they brought, so those who believe in Mohammed must also believe in those messengers and messengerhoods and the divine 72

Chapter Two: Who are the Believers?

books they brought. And since obedience is due to the messengers and their messengerhoods, as in the word of God—‘We sent not a messenger, but to be obeyed, in accordance with the will of Allah’ (The Women 4:64)—and since the name muʾminūn is derived exclusively from those who believe in the Prophet, Almighty God commanded them to obey him as messenger, as in the word of God: ‘And obey Allah and the Messenger; that you may obtain mercy.’ (The Family of Imran 3:132) All this implies that the followers of Mohammed (s) must obey his messengerhood, including its religious obligations, and, first of all, its religious rituals. [A 79] We find faith in Mohammed (ṣ) as prophet and messenger in the word of God: ‘O you that believe! Fear Allah, and believe in His Messenger, and He will bestow on you a double portion of His Mercy: He will provide for you a light by which you shall walk (straight in your path), and He will forgive you (your past): for Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful.’ (The Iron 57:28). As for the duties of his followers in religious rituals considered as religious obligations on the muʾminūn, we find them in the word of God: —Performing Prayers: ‘…For such prayers are enjoined on believers at stated times.’ (The Women 4:103) —Giving regular charity or the alms tax [zakāh]: ‘The believers must (eventually) win through, those who humble themselves in their prayers; who avoid vain talk; who are active in deeds of charity [zakāh].’ (The Believers 23:1–4) —Fasting for Ramadan: ‘O you who believe! Fasting is prescribed to you as it was prescribed to those before you, that you may (learn) self-restraint.’ (The Cow 2:183) —Pilgrimage: ‘…. Pilgrimage thereto is a duty men owe to Allah, those who can afford the journey ….’ (The Family of Imran 3:97) The rituals are equivalent to religious obligations, which are not consistent with nature. Therefore, the word of God states: ‘On no soul does Allah place a burden greater than it can bear’ (The Cow 2:286). For religious obligations must be proportional with the capacity and ability of the human being. However, since ability differs from one human being to another, God shows us that piety also differs from one human being to another, in 73

Islam and Humanity: Consequences of a Contemporary Reading

the word of God: ‘So fear Allah as much as you can; listen and obey and spend….’ (Mutual Loss and Gain 64:16) The obedience mentioned in this verse is demanded from the muʾminūn in Mohammed’s community and consequently the verse demands obedience in religious obligations, that is, religious rituals, and for this reason the verse reads: ‘So fear Allah as much as you can…’ This verse appears to be inconsistent with another verse—‘O you who believe! Fear Allah as He should be feared, and die not except in a state of Islam’ (The Family of Imran 3:102)— since this verse orders the believers to fear God as He should be feared, that is, it disregards capacity and ability. However, that this verse concludes with the words “die not except in a state of Islam” suggests that it is directed to Muslims, [A 80] that is, believers in God and the Last Day and doing what is righteous, while verse 16 of the Sura Mutual Loss and Gain is directed to muʾminūn in Mohammed (ṣ). The difference, then, between the piety of īmān and the piety of Islam lies in that the teachings of Islam must be applied strictly: a—we are not excused for believing in God as much as we can b—we are not excused because we made our best effort to believe in the Last Day c—we are not excused for avoiding false witness or cheating in prescriptions as much as we can, as if someone were to come to us and say that he exerted great efforts in order not to commit adultery but was not able, or that he gave his all not to kill but was not able, and then we would just say to him “never mind for God does not place a burden on a soul greater than it can bear.” Hence when we are in the realm of moral natural law (the pillars of Islam), we must fear God as He should be feared, and thus word of God concludes in this way: ‘O you who believe! Fear Allah as He should be feared….’ When we are in the realm of the pillars of īmān as represented in the religious rituals, we fear God as much as we can because ‘On no soul does Allah place a burden greater than it can bear…’ A sick person, for example, is excused from fasting if he is not able but he is not excused from being committed to values. Similarly, the duty of the pilgrimage is tied to financial ability— ‘those who can afford the journey’—not moral capacity. The duty 74

Chapter Two: Who are the Believers?

of giving alms does not apply to those without property, but morality does apply to those without property. The difference is clear here between human values that are in accord with human nature and the pillars of īmān, which are considered religious obligations that are not consistent with human nature, and thus whose performance depends on ability and capacity. The apparent contradiction between the texts of the Book, therefore, dissipates when we examine them with a scientific methodology, for God Almighty forbids that He, the Exalted and Blessed, issues a contradiction. Given all of this, we may conclude that Islam is wider in scope than īmān, for Islam is the universal human religion for all peoples on the earth, thus it is called the religion of Islam not the religion of īmān. Therefore, [A 81] God also says: ‘The religion before Allah is Islam (submission to His will)…’ (Family of Imran 3:19), and He says: ‘If anyone desires a religion other than Islam (submission to Allah), never will it be accepted of him; and in the Hereafter He will be in the ranks of those who have lost (all spiritual good).’ (Family of Imran 3: 85). Īmān is exclusive to the followers of Mohammed (ṣ), and thus the Almighty God calls them in the Book the muʾminūn, and thus ʿUmar b. al-Khattāb is called the Caliph of the muʾminūn, not the Caliph of the Muslims, and the wives of the Messenger are called the mothers of the muʾminūn not the mothers of the Muslims. For this reason, God informed His Messenger (ṣ) in the authoritative revelation that all the peoples of the earth will not be muʾminūn, that is, his followers, nor should they be forced to be so, as the word of God says: ‘If it had been your Lord’s will, they would all have believed, all who are on earth! will you then compel mankind, against their will, to be believers [to be muʾminūn]!’ ( Jonah 10:99, revised) Note the precision of the Book of the Almighty, since He says ‘to be muʾminūn’ not ‘to be Muslims.’ Since the followers of Mohammed (ṣ) are muʾminūn in him and are obligated to obey him, as the Book says, they have the right that the Book explains to them how to follow His Prophet (ṣ) whom they believe in so that they believe in him and follow his teachings. For this reason, God Almighty draws the difference for them between the messengerhood and the prophethood and how the Prophet is obeyed and the scope of that obedience, including religious rituals. 75

Islam and Humanity: Consequences of a Contemporary Reading

2—The Difference between the Messengerhood and the Prophethood The following word of God appears in the Book: ‘Mohammed is not the father of any of your men, but (he is) the Messenger of Allah, and the Seal of the Prophets: and Allah has full knowledge of all things.’ (The Combined Forces, 33:40) This verse attributes Mohammed (ṣ) these three different statuses: —Mohammed as man —Mohammed as prophet (the prophethood) —Mohammed as messenger (the messengerhood) [A 82]

A—The Status of Mohammed as Man In the Book, the Almighty God denied that the Prophet was born impeccable, which suggests that he was born like any other man, and this is the status specific to his personal life as a human being. Thus, when God, in verse 40 of the Sura The Combined Forces, as cited above, denies that Mohammed is the father of any of their men, He implies that since he is not the father of any of their men, he must be a man like all other men, as the word of God confirms: ‘Say: “I am but a man like yourselves, (but) the inspiration has come to me, that your Allah is one Allah’ (The Cave 18:110). For like every man, the Messenger has his natural human behaviors that have no relation to religion or inspiration but are rather part of his private natural constitution as a human being and are connected to the traditions and customs of his society at that time.

B—The Status of Mohammed as Prophet (The Prophethood) The Almighty God praises the status of prophethood, in His word—‘Allah and His angels send blessings on the Prophet: O you that believe! Send you blessings on him, and salute him with all respect’ (The Combined Forces 33:56)—because of the importance of this status, which revolves around the following two fixed points: 76

Chapter Two: Who are the Believers?

—the task of prophethood present in the unseen events contained in the Book of God, and this position is necessary for his mission as prophet: ‘O Prophet! Truly We have sent you as a Witness, a Bearer of Glad Tidings, and Warner (The Combined Forces 33:45). —The task of legal reasoning [ijtihād] in the position of authority, along with the implementation of that reasoning, military leadership, and organizing the matters of society.

(1) Task of Prophethood It is the task of conveying the prophethood, and it is faced with acceptance or disapproval, where the Prophet (ṣ) conveys [A 83] the unseen news (cosmic and historical) that he was inspired by but lacks the ability to explain to the people of his time. This is great and difficult task, since how can his contemporaries be convinced of something that they are not able to grasp like the science of genetics, as in the word of God: ‘Then We made the sperm into a clot of congealed blood; then of that clot We made a (fetus) lump; then we made out of that lump bones and clothed the bones with flesh; then we developed out of it another creature. So blessed be Allah, the best to create!’ (The Believers 23:14) For the unseen news cited in the first line is beyond the ability of the Prophet to explain to those with him. It was only many epochs after he originally conveyed this account that the development of modern science could render that line comprehensible. It required a vast new science called “genetics,” a science that, during the period the text was revealed, was unknown to everyone, including the Prophet and his companions, except for the Almighty God. The questions that must be raised revolves around some extraordinary descriptions that were attributed to him as a Prophet (ṣ), and the extent of their truth or error: Did the Prophet (ṣ) know the unknown? Were there concrete miracles? Is his intercession a true fact?

77

Islam and Humanity: Consequences of a Contemporary Reading

(a) The Prophet (ṣ) did not know the unknown The unknown is everything that is hidden to the senses of the human being, and from his knowledge and scientific foundations. The unknown has three temporal divisions: the unknown past, the unknown present, and the unknown future. The unknown past is the unknown news that occurred in past nations and previous times. The best example is the Qur’anic stories, as the word of God indicates: —‘We do relate unto you the most beautiful of stories, in that We reveal to you this (portion of the) Qur’an: before this, you too was among those who knew it not.’ ( Joseph 12:3) —‘This is part of the tidings of the things unseen, which We reveal unto you (O Messenger!) by inspiration: You were not with them when they cast lots with arrows, as to which of them should be charged with the care of Mary: Nor were you with them when they disputed (the point).’ (The Family of Imran 3:44) The unknown present is unknown despite its presence because of the failure of the senses, [A 84] lack of scientific achievement, or obstacles like a scarcity of relevant information. As an example, the word of God says: ‘When the Prophet disclosed a matter in confidence to one of his consorts, and she then divulged it (to another), and Allah made it known to him, he confirmed part thereof and repudiated a part….’ (The Prohibition 66:3) Another example is the theory that the earth is flat and fixed and the sun rotates around it, whose prevalence made the spherical character of the earth unknown in the time of the Prophet. The unknown future is what is unknown about what will occur on the Day of Resurrection, including the resurrection, the congregating, and the judgment. This is the unknown meant in the word of God: ‘Say: “I know not whether the (punishment) which you are promised is near, or whether my Lord will appoint for it a distant term. He (alone) knows the unseen, nor does He make any one acquainted with His mysteries except a messenger whom He has chosen: and then He makes a band of watchers march before him and behind him, that He may know that they have (truly) brought and 78

Chapter Two: Who are the Believers?

delivered the Messages of their Lord: and He surrounds (all the mysteries) that are with them, and takes account of every single thing.”’ (The Jinn 72:25–28) These verses contain two matters of the greatest importance. The first: God as the knower of the unknown establishes a basic general rule, that He does not make anyone acquainted with His mysteries. The second: God makes an exception to this general rule for a messenger He has chosen, not, it should be noted, “a prophet He has chosen.” The verse suggests that if we want knowledge of the unknown we must examine what is in the Book of God and nowhere else. We need only cast a brief glance at the texts of authoritative book to find that it is full of news of the unknown of the future, as in the word of God: ‘The Roman Empire has been defeated in a land close by; but they, (even) after (this) defeat of theirs, will soon be victorious within a few years. With Allah is the decision, in the past and in the future….’ (The Romans 30:2–4) On the other hand, God denies that the Prophet (ṣ) knows the unknown of the future and its events on the Day of Resurrection, in the word of God: —‘Say: “I tell you not that with me are the treasures of Allah, nor do I know what is hidden, nor do I tell you I am an angel. I but follow what is revealed to me.” Say: “can the blind be held equal to the seeing? Will you then consider not?”’ (The Cattle 6:50) —‘Say: “I have no power over any good or harm to myself except as Allah wills. If I had knowledge of the unseen, [A 85] I should have multiplied all good, and no evil should have touched me: I am but a warner, and a bringer of glad tidings to those who have faith.”’ (The Heights 7:188) —‘“I tell you not that with me are the treasures of Allah, nor do I know what is hidden, nor claim I to be an angel. Nor yet do I say, of those whom your eyes do despise that Allah will not grant them (all) that is good: Allah knows best what is in their souls: I should, if I did, indeed be a wrong-doer.”’ (Hud 11:31) —‘Say: “I am no bringer of new-fangled doctrine among the messengers, nor do I know what will be done with me or with you. I follow but that which is revealed to me by inspiration; I am but a warner open and clear.”’ (The Curved Sand-Hills 46:9) 79

Islam and Humanity: Consequences of a Contemporary Reading

These verses deny to the Prophet any knowledge of the unknown and show that he only followed inspiration and the unknowns that he conveyed are just what was mentioned in the Book of God. For the Almighty God has not told anyone of His mysteries except for the messengers He has approved. Those messengers gave what they were told a concrete form in the miracles they performed, witnessed by the people of the time, and vanishing along with those who witnessed them. As for the unknown that the Messenger brought, it is an abstract unknown revealed in the form of unknown news that the Messenger articulated without being apprised of its miraculous content. For the Qurʾan is the sole and sufficient miracle brought by the Messenger. The miraculous nature of the Qurʾan manifests itself with time and the progress of the sciences and knowledge, in contrast to the miracles performed by the other prophets and messengers, which fall into oblivion and disappear as time passes. If God had not informed him of them, the Messenger would not have known them because they would have disappeared: ‘Such are some of the stories of the unseen, which We have revealed unto you: before this, neither you nor your people knew them. So persevere patiently: for the end is for those who are righteous.’ (Hud 11:49) God taught him them by transferring them to him as an articulated revelation which the Book contains from the first to its last page. The Prophet performed his task in the most complete way: he conveyed all the unknowns revealed to him and exhaustively present in the Book. For he was no more than the conveyer of the unknown which he did not know in the sense of being capable of explaining them. The task of thinking over and seeking the meaning of them was left to the people, as in the word of God: ‘Do they not then earnestly seek to understand the Qur’an, [A 86] or are their hearts locked up by them?’ (Mohammed 47:24) It was sufficient for Mohammed to present it without explanation to establish his prophethood which addresses the people until the Day of Judgement. The unseen events that God revealed to Mohammed (ṣ) made him a prophet, and thus he was called a prophet in relation to the unseen events. This prophethood has its limit in the passing of eras and epochs, and thus the development of human knowledge has a relation to the prophethood, in 80

Chapter Two: Who are the Believers?

word of God: ‘For every message is a limit of time, and soon shall you know it.”’ (The Cattle 6:67) For example, in the year 2011 this news reached its limit of time—‘(He is) Lord of the two Easts and Lord of the two Wests’ (The Most Gracious 55:17)—when planets were discovered that orbit two suns. This discovery was a consequence of human activity, and thus it shows the relation of our knowledge with the prophethood, that is, our knowledgeseeking is connected to the prophethood, in the word of God: ‘Allah and His angels send blessings [ṣallū] on the Prophet: O you that believe! Send you blessings on him, and salute him with all respect.’ (The Combined Forces 33:56) For the blessings on the Prophet here have the meaning of ṣalāh (connection) and not ṣalawa (ritual prayer). This is one aspect, but the other aspect confirms to us that the Prophet (ṣ) did not explain the consequences of the unknowns in the Book, or else what is the meaning of the word of God, ‘For every message is a limit of time.’ The prophethood is concerned with unknowns, whether cosmic or historic, and then how could he explain them? Who can explain them? Would it have been one of his contemporaries or someone who was born one or two thousand years later? Here we need to make clear that the text is fixed while the hearer or reader is changing, and understand consequently the saying of the Prophet (ṣ): “Convey from me, even if it is one verse, for often the listener comprehends more than the conveyer.” For the listener in the 21st century comprehends much more than he who heard the Qurʾan in the age of the Prophet. (b) The Prophet did not perform concrete miracles Everyone agrees that miracles are evidence of prophethoods, and everyone agrees that prophets perform miracles during a specific time of their people, and even if those miracles appear before they can be comprehended, they have a relation to the culture and living reality of their time, including what the people excel in and master [A 87] in their daily lives. For example, the people of Noah were people of the sea and land, and the building of the ark induced their mockery more than their surprise or admiration. However, they 81

Islam and Humanity: Consequences of a Contemporary Reading

certainly knew that the water barriers of the seas and rivers were tremendous and knew the impossibility of crossing them. Interpreting dreams was not strange to the people of Joseph. The people of Moses were a people of sorcery and tricks but knew how to transform ropes into serpents in the eyes of onlookers. However, they knew with certainty that they were, in fact, nothing but ropes. The people of Jesus excelled in treating the sick, allaying plagues, and preparing drugs. However, they knew that reviving the dead and restoring sight to those born blind was impossible. The people of Saleh were a people of sculpture and statues and could carve a she-camel from stone. However, they knew that breathing life into it was far beyond their abilities. Indeed, he who ponders the stories of the prophets cited in the Book notes two matters: The first is that the miracles performed by the prophets that preceded the Prophet (ṣ) were observable and concrete. The second is that some prophets were performed one miracle, like Noah, Joseph, or Saleh, and some performed two miracles, like Jesus, the son of Mary1, and some performed a greater number of miracles, like Moses, who had nine miracles to his credit. And we have not read or heard that any of those coming before or after found fault with Noah, Saleh, or Joseph because they only performed one miracle each, just as we have not heard that any had raised the rank of Moses over the ranks of other prophets because he performed nine miracles. And even if we acknowledge that the Prophet (ṣ) had an exalted standard of character, as attested by the word of God— ‘And you (stand) on an exalted standard of character.’ (The Pen 68:4)—the fact is that the Book never mentioned anywhere that Mohammed (ṣ) performed concrete miracles. The proof of this is the story it told of how his contemporaries exasperated him (ṣ) with questions about why he did not perform concrete miracles, and his inability to do so, and he received the revelation confirming this in the word of God: [A 88]

1 We are alluding here to the reviving of the dead and to the curing of the blind, lepers,

and physically handicapped. One might ask the following: Isn’t being born without a father also miracle? Absolutely, but it is a divine miracle, not one that can be credited to Jesus. We are discussing here the miracles of the prophethood.

82

Chapter Two: Who are the Believers?

—‘If their spurning is hard on your mind, yet if you were able to seek a tunnel in the ground or a ladder to the skies and bring them a sign (what good?). If it were Allah’s will, He could gather them together unto true guidance: so be not you among those who are swayed by ignorance (and impatience)!’ (The Cattle 6:35) —‘If you were in doubt as to what We have revealed unto you, then ask those who have been reading the Book from before you: the Truth has indeed come to you from your Lord: so be in no wise of those in doubt. Nor be of those who reject the signs of Allah, or you shall be of those who perish’ ( Jonah 10:95). —‘Perhaps you may (feel the inclination) to give up a part of what is revealed unto you, and your heart feels straitened lest they say, “Why is not a treasure sent down unto him, or why does not an angel come down with him?” But you are there only to warn! It is Allah that arranges all affairs!’ (Hud 11:12) God Almighty did not confirm in the Book that the Prophet (ṣ) performed any visible concrete miracles in his life. His contemporaries— especially among the people of the book—found this strange, as cited in the word of God: —‘If you bring them not a revelation, they say: “Why have you not got it together?” Say: “I but follow what is revealed to me from my Lord: this is (nothing but) lights from your Lord, and guidance, and mercy, for any who have faith.”’ (The Heights 7:203) —‘They say: “Why is not a sign sent down to him from his Lord?” Say: “The unseen is only for Allah (to know), then wait you: I too will wait with you.”’ ( Jonah 10:20) —‘You they say: “Why are not signs sent down to him from his Lord?” Say: “The signs are indeed with Allah: and I am indeed a clear warner.” And is it not enough for them that we have sent down to you the Book which is rehearsed to them? Indeed, in it is mercy and a reminder to those who believe.’ (The Spider 29:50–51) —‘They say: “Why does he not bring us a sign from his Lord?” Has not a clear sign come to them of all that was in the former books of revelation?’ (Ta-Ha 20:133) 83

Islam and Humanity: Consequences of a Contemporary Reading

—‘“No,” they say, “(these are) medleys of dream! No, he forged it! No, he is (but) a poet! Let him then bring us a sign like the ones that were sent to (prophets) of old!”’ (The Prophets 21:5) These verses are sufficient proof that the Prophet (ṣ) did not perform concrete miracles. [A 89] God Almighty in the Book denied completely that the Prophet (ṣ) performed any visible concrete miracles, and His authoritative book is our infallible source.

(2) The Task of Legal Reasoning [Ijtihād] in a Position of Authority2 Mohammed (ṣ) was granted the reigns of rule and power, and the related tasks of directing the matters of society and the judiciary and leading the military, along with the freedom of ijtihād in pursuing these tasks from the realm of the prophethood. Performing these roles was not something new for messengers, for all the kings of the sons of Israel were prophets, and they ruled their people from the realm of prophethood. None of them were, however, messengers except for Moses whom, along with his brother Aaron, God directed to perform a political task, commanding the two of them to go to Pharaoh and negotiate with him diplomatically— ‘but speak to him mildly….’ (Ta-Ha 20:44)—about lifting his oppression from the sons of Israel. However, this task lacked a connection to messengerhood, that is, it had no connection to legislation, and legislation is the heart of messengerhood. Their task was to demand from Pharaoh that he lift his oppression from the sons of Israel, in the word of God: ‘“So go you both to him, and say, ‘Indeed, we are messengers sent by your Lord: Send forth, therefore, the Children of Israel with us, and afflict them not: with a sign, indeed, have 2 [translator note] It is impossible to do justice to the concept of ijtihād in a footnote. In the most general sense, it is an exercise of reason. In a more precise but incomplete sense, it is individual interpretation of a sacred text in order to reach a solution to a legal question. For a complete sense, one must dive further into a voluminous literature that goes back as far almost as far as the Qur’an itself. Because it cannot be defined without taking sides in theological disputes, the translator has chosen to use the transliterated term rather than attempt a gloss. 84

Chapter Two: Who are the Believers?

we come from your Lord! and peace to all who follow guidance!’ (Ta-Ha 20:47) Unlike the previous messengers, the Messenger (ṣ) both ruled from the realm of prophethood and conveyed the messengerhood from the realm of the messengerhood, as we will see. It is not possible for Mohammed’s ijtihāds in ruling, which concern organizing the matters of society and the judiciary and leading the army, to possess an eternal character. For the ijtihāds he performs as leader and ruler, that is, as man in charge, have no connection to divine messengerhood. The divine messsengerhood is universal and eternal, and although Mohammed was exercising ijtihād under the guidance of the messengerhood, the results of the ijtihād remain human, provisional, and circumstantial, no matter the source of ijtihad, and even if it were the Prophet (ṣ) himself. The instructions that came from God afterwards to correct the errors that the Prophet had made while exercising ijtihād in some cases are clear evidence of this. Obedience to him in his ijtihāds, including those connected to prescriptions and proscriptions was a duty only for his contemporaries since he was considered to be the man in charge of their interests in all the decisions that he made by means of ijtihād to organize his [A 90] society, but it does not oblige those of later ages to obey him in them (just as we will explain subsequently). For example, in the judiciary realm, the Prophet (ṣ) was a judge within the realm of prophethood, and this in the word of God: ‘But no, by the Lord, they can have no (real) faith, until they make you judge in all disputes between them, and find in their souls no resistance against your decisions, but accept them with the fullest conviction.’ (The Women 4:65) However, it is entirely mistaken to claim that when he made judgements he lay down eternal laws. For when he was exercising ijtihād in the judiciary realm, he constructed his legal judgements through analysis and examination of signs, evidence, and testimonies to assist him in issuing his judgements to help reveal the truth between two disputants, as al-Bukhari relates in the hadith in the book of testimonies under the number 2534 from Umm Salamah, where the Prophet of God (ṣ) said: ‘I am only human, and you bring your disputes to me, and some perhaps are more eloquent in their pleas than others, so, he whom I, 85

Islam and Humanity: Consequences of a Contemporary Reading

by my judgement, give the undue share out of the right of a Muslim, I, in fact, give him a portion of hellfire, and he should not take it.’ Transmitters of hadiths agree on this hadith, and it contains unequivocal declarations of both the humanity of the Prophet when he engages in ijtihād and that his judging does not rely on revelation but rather on ijtihād based on evidence and indications which might be convincing but, nevertheless, false. For he did not know the unknown in his ijtihāds by their truth or falsity but judged based on indications. Thus, he warned his contemporaries from advancing arguments to him that are convincing but false because they might cause a judgement that harms one of the two disputants. The hadith gives the strongest possible evidence that Mohammed’s (ṣ) judging is not inspired, and, consequently, his judgments are nothing more than circumstantial, prophetic ijtihāds, and thus considering them eternal slanders God and His Prophet. To understand how this slanders God and His Prophet we need to understand the word of God: ‘Allah and His angels send blessings on the Prophet: O you that believe! Send you blessings on him, and salute him with all respect. Those who harm Allah and His Messenger, Allah has cursed them in this World and in the Hereafter, and has prepared for them a humiliating punishment.’ (The Combined Forces 33:56–57, revised) Even if [A 91] we observe something in the two verses that induces confusion at first, since how can the Almighty God praise the status of the prophethood, this demonstrates the greatness of this status so that it demands that we also send blessings (from ṣila) just as the Exalted and His angels send blessings. However, the second verse mentions those who harm God and His Prophet, which raises the question: Is it possible to harm God and His Prophet? How is it possible? Remember the word of God: ‘If you did well, you did well for yourselves; if you did evil, (you did it) against yourselves…’ (The Night Journey 17:7) We are certain that God cannot be helped or hindered, and thus how can God or the Prophet be harmed as verse 57 of the Sura The Combined Forces suggests? The harm to God and His Prophet arises from the false attribution of doctrines to them. If we state something true about someone, that may be a scandal. If we say something untrue, that may be slander. We harm God 86

Chapter Two: Who are the Believers?

and His Prophet by slandering them, for example, if we take what are called the sacred statements and attribute them to Almighty God, claiming that He revealed them to His Prophet (ṣ), or we introduce new taboos to those in the Book, such as the forbidding of music, drawing, sculpting, or singing. This harms God by slandering him. We slander the Prophet (ṣ) when we claim that God has revealed it to him. On the basis of the foregoing, we understand that the status of prophethood has these characteristics: 1—it is a status necessary for his mission as a messenger because only prophets can become messengers, while you can be a prophet without having been a messenger: ‘O Prophet! Truly We have sent you as a witness, a bearer of glad tidings, and warner….’ (The Combined Forces 33:45) 2—it is a status necessary for the leadership of state and power: ‘We have sent down to you the Book in truth, that you might judge between men, as guided by Allah: so be not (used) as an advocate by those who betray their trust’ (The Women 4:105). 3—it is a status necessary for the leading of society: ‘O Prophet! Why do you hold to be forbidden that which Allah has made lawful to you? You seek to please your consorts. But Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful’ (The Prohibition 66:1). [A 92] 4—it is a status necessary for the leading of the military: ‘O Prophet! rouse the believers to the fight…’ (The Spoils of War 8:65) 5—it is a status necessary for the practice of judging: ‘But no, by the Lord, they can have no (real) faith, until they make you judge in all disputes between them, and find in their souls no resistance against your decisions, but accept them with the fullest conviction.’ (The Women 4:65) Each of these activities took place during his life and ended with his death. For the ijtihāds and decisions that he issued during his life while pursuing these activities were neither revealed to him nor religious in character. Thus, they must be considered merely as the decisions taken by the man in charge, ruler, judge, and highest leader of the country to organize the matters of his society. It is an error to consider these decisions as revealed because obedience to Mohammed is not due to him as a prophet, since that status only concerns ijtihāds and human decisions. We owe Mohammed 87

Islam and Humanity: Consequences of a Contemporary Reading

(ṣ) obedience as a messenger because messengerhood is from the Almighty God while Mohammed’s ijtihāds reflect the status of prophethood though relying on what appears in the revealed divine messengerhood. Obedience to Mohammed (ṣ) in the ijtihāds he issued in his life as the man in charge and highest ruler was only incumbent on the individuals of his society, for his decisions are part of the civil law that he composed to organize his society and, consequently, they only applied to members of his society during his life, not others, as we will explain later.

C—The Status of Mohammed the Messenger (the Messengerhood) The role of Mohammed (ṣ) was represented in the uttering of the remembrance to disclose it to the people, that is, by informing those around him of it, not concealing it from them. For the disclosure is only an announcement and a notification not an explanation. In the word of God: —“Those who conceal the clear (signs) We have sent down, and the guidance, after We have made it clear for the people in the Book, on them shall be Allah’s curse, and the curse of those entitled to curse’ (The Cow 2:159) [A 93] —‘O people of the Book! There has come to you our Messenger, revealing to you much that you used to hide in the Book, and passing over much (that is now unnecessary): There has come to you from Allah a (new) light and a perspicuous Book’ (The Table Spread 5:15). The two verses make clear that the disclosure is an announcement and it is the opposite of concealing and hiding, and we understand with that the word of God: ‘And remember Allah took a covenant from the People of the Book, to make it known and clear to mankind, and not to hide it; but they threw it away.…’ (The Family of Imran 3:187) In other words, the disclosure is not an explanation. The divine prescription to disclose revelation and the proscription on hiding and concealing is a proscription that extends to all the messengers who bestowed the book, from Noah to Mohammed (the blessings of God on all of them), and it is a role that the Prophet performed in the most complete way, fulfilling the order of his Lord, in the words of 88

Chapter Two: Who are the Believers?

God: ‘O Messenger! proclaim the (message) which has been sent to you from your Lord. If you did not, you would not have fulfilled and proclaimed His mission. And Allah will defend you from men (who mean mischief ).…’ (The Table Spread 5:67) In other words, the openness is the performance of notification. Since the performance of notification with full fidelity calls for impeccability, Mohammed (ṣ) was impeccable in conveying the revelation that was revealed to him from his Lord, from the first Sura, the Opening, to the last Sura, Mankind. On the other hand, he (ṣ) was not impeccable by nature: he is not impeccable in all things. To understand this topic, we need to pause and explain the meaning of impeccability and remove the muddle surrounding it. The first step in understanding the meaning of “impeccability by nature” is to explain the word ʿiṣma (impeccability) which in Arabic refers to preserving, protecting, and preventing. One or another form of this word occurs thirteen times in the authoritative revelation: it suffices to cite four of them: —‘O Messenger! proclaim the (message) which has been sent to you from your Lord. If you did not, you would not have fulfilled and proclaimed His mission. And Allah will defend you from men (who mean mischief ). For Allah guides not those who reject faith.’ (The Table Spread 5:67, italics from translator) —‘The son replied: “I will betake myself to some mountain: it will save me from the water.” Noah said: “This day nothing can save, from the command of Allah, any but those on whom He has mercy…’ (Hud 11:43, italics from translator) —‘Whoever holds firmly to Allah will be shown a way that is straight.’ (The Family of Imran 3:101, italics from translator) [A 94] —‘She said: “There before you is the man about whom you did blame me! I did seek to seduce him from his (true self ) but he did firmly save himself guiltless…’ ( Joseph 12:32, italics from translator) As for the meaning of takwīniyya (by nature), it is derived from the root takwīn (creation) and kaun (the universe, or the created). Thus, the presence of something by nature is the presence of something from birth, in the sense that the blonde-haired person is born blonde and the black-haired 89

Islam and Humanity: Consequences of a Contemporary Reading

person was created with black hair. Were the prophets and messengers born impeccable by nature or by creation? The authoritative revelation rejects claims that the prophets and messengers were impeccable by nature, and it relates news and situations which are incompatible with their alleged impeccability: —In the news of Adam and his wife, God says: ‘We said: “O Adam! dwell you and your wife in the Garden; and eat of the bountiful things therein as (where and when) you will; but approach not this tree, or you run into harm and transgression.” Then did Satan make them slip from the (garden), and get them out of the state (of felicity) in which they had been. We said: “Get you down, all (you people), with enmity between yourselves. On earth will be your dwelling-place and your means of livelihood for a time.” Then learnt Adam from his Lord words of inspiration, and his Lord turned towards him; for He is Oft-Returning, Most Merciful.’ (The Cow 2:35–37) When we look past the legend-like details that we find in all cultures concerning the story of Adam, Eve, the serpent, and the cursed tree, the verses make entirely clear that Adam and his wife were the victims of Satan, and thus were not among the impeccable. —In the news of Noah, we read the word of God: ‘“But construct an ark under Our eyes and Our inspiration, and address Me no (further) on behalf of those who are in sin: for they are about to be overwhelmed (in the Flood).”’ (Hud 11:37) Another word of God reads: ‘So We inspired him (with this message): “Construct the ark within Our sight and under Our guidance: then when comes Our command, and the fountains of the earth gush forth, take you on board pairs of every species, male and female, and your family, except those of them against whom the Word has already gone forth: And address Me not in favor of the wrong-doers; for they shall be drowned (in the Flood).’ (The Believers 23:27) According to another word of God: ‘He said: “O Noah! He is not of your family: For his conduct is unrighteous. So ask not of Me that of which you have no knowledge! I give you counsel, lest you act like the ignorant!” Noah said: “O my Lord! I do seek refuge with You, lest I ask You for that of which I have no knowledge. And unless you forgive me and have mercy on me, I should indeed be lost!”’ (Hud 11:46–47). 90

Chapter Two: Who are the Believers?

Someone examining the verses does not [A 95] need to expend great efforts to recognize that Noah disobeyed the command of his Lord twice and then, when he realized that he had fallen victim to a scheme of Satan, sought the protection of God, repentant and imploring his forgiveness. Such a story undermines the claim that Noah was impeccable. —In the news of Jonah, in the word of God: ‘And remember Zun-nun [ Jonah], when he departed in wrath: He imagined that We had no power over him! But he cried through the depths of darkness, “There is no god but you: glory to you: I was indeed wrong!” So We listened to him: and delivered him from distress: and thus do We deliver those who have faith.’ (The Prophets 21: 87–88) Another word of God reads: ‘So also was Jonah among those sent (by Us). When he ran away (like a slave from captivity) to the ship (fully) laden, He (agreed to) cast lots, and he was condemned: Then the big fish did swallow him, and he had done acts worthy of blame. Had it not been that he (repented and) glorified Allah, He would certainly have remained inside the fish till the Day of Resurrection.’ (Those Ranges in Ranks 37:139–144) These verses show us an angry messenger whom Satan led from anger to doubt in the power of God, Who entrusted him to a whale that swallowed him. He then repented, praised God, admitted his guilt and called to his Lord from the material darkness, that is, the darkness of the belly of the whale and the depths of the sea, and from the spiritual darkness that the repenting sinner feels. If he had been impeccable, he would not have sinned and needed to repent. —In the news of Moses, in the words of God: ‘…Now the man of his own religion appealed to him against his foe, and Moses struck him with his fist and made an end of him. He said: “This is a work of Evil (Satan): for he is an enemy that manifestly misleads!” He prayed: “O my Lord! I have indeed wronged my soul! Do You then forgive me!” So (Allah) forgave him: for He is the Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful.’ (The Stories 28:15–16) These two verses describe how Moses confessed that he killed a man out of odious tribalism, having fallen victim to the cursed Satan, and then that he implored forgiveness from his Lord. None of this is consistent—one more time—with impeccability by nature. 91

Islam and Humanity: Consequences of a Contemporary Reading

—In the news about David, the Almighty concluded the story of the two brothers who sought a decision from him about the ewes with these words: ‘…and David gathered that We had tried him: he asked forgiveness of his Lord, fell down, bowing (in prostration), and turned (to Allah in repentance). So We forgave him this (lapse): he enjoyed, indeed, a near approach to Us, and a beautiful place of (final) return. O David! We did indeed make you a vicegerent on earth: so judge you between men in truth (and justice): Nor follow you the lusts (of your heart), for they will mislead you from the Path of Allah…’ (Saad 38: 24–25) An impeccable David would not have needed this [A 96] correction, rebuke, and admonition from his Lord. How strange that some claim that these stories were carefully created to give instruction to the people. This is impossible, for the Almighty God is too great to stoop to composing such idle scenarios. As He says in the Book: ‘Allah commands justice, the doing of good, and liberality to kith and kin, and He forbids all shameful deeds, and injustice and rebellion: He instructs you, that you may receive admonition.’ (The Bees 16:90) Are we to believe that God sometimes commands His prophets and messengers to kill to provide lessons that killing is not permitted, to commit disobediences to provide lessons that disobedience is forbidden, and to make biased judgments to teach that impartial justice is required? Impeccability by nature is a special characteristic that makes the impeccable an extraordinary creature. As the Almighty God said about the Prophet (ṣ): ‘Say: “I am but a man like yourselves, (but) the inspiration has come to me…’ (The Cave 18:110) The meaning of this is that he had a nature like all other men, that is, a normal human nature, and consequently, he was not impeccable in everything. He was only impeccable when he conveyed the revelation that came to him. The Prophet (ṣ), as we saw, had three statuses: The status of man was the status of a normal human being who was pursuing his life in a normal way: he was not impeccable in this status because the status does not require impeccability. The same is the case with the status of prophethood. While he was the top leader and the judge of his society, he was not impeccable in his ijtihāds, and the Book shows that he received instruction to correct his ijtihāds, all of which entirely undermine the claim that he was 92

Chapter Two: Who are the Believers?

impeccable in the status of prophethood. He could not be impeccable in this status because the status concerned ijtihād and implementing opinion in accordance with what is consistent with the circumstances of the society. He was impeccable in the status of messengerhood only when he (ṣ) undertook the task of conveying the Book in its entirety to the people from this status with the spoken linguistic and ritual formulations that God preserved with full fidelity, since he conveyed the inspiration revealed to him without omission or addition. And if the prophets, including he (ṣ) who sealed the line of prophets and messengers, were only impeccable when they conveyed revelation, then it is [A 97] impossible that other men were impeccable, including the descendants of the prophets and messengers, as the word of God shows: ‘And We sent Noah and Abraham, and established in their line prophethood and revelation: and some of them were on right guidance. But many of them became rebellious transgressors.’ (The Iron 57:26) The verses make incontrovertibly clear that there are descendants of the prophets and messengers who follow the path of divine guidance and descendants who follow the path of transgression. This refutes the attribution of impeccability to them regardless of their religious and intellectual orientations. For divine guidance and transgression are both connected with the extent of adherence to the straight path, that is, the extent of adherence to human values or straying from them, and the two have no relation with some other matter. For there is no impeccability by nature for human beings as human beings, and impeccability in conveying revelation is reserved for messengers. We must absorb this deeply lest we are fooled by some speech from some source that attributes to itself impeccability under some cover, for absolute impeccability does not exist and impeccability in conveyance is only true of messengers. This renders everything outside of revelation open for discussion and objections no matter its source. If the status of messengerhood is the sole status of impeccability, the messenger who bears revelation must convey it to the people without deviating from these two basic conditions: 1—Not to add or subtract a letter and not to advance or delay a letter from the inspired text, and not to add anything that is not already in it, under the penalty of the word of God: ‘And if the messenger were to invent 93

Islam and Humanity: Consequences of a Contemporary Reading

any sayings in Our name, We should certainly seize him by his right hand, And We should certainly then cut off the artery of his heart: nor could any of you withhold him (from Our wrath).’ (The Inevitable 69:44–47). In other words, the impeccability of a messenger in conveying from his Lord is earned not natural. 2—His task as a messenger is completed with his conveying his messengerhood to the people, according to the word of God: ‘Say: “I am no bringer of new-fangled doctrine among the messengers, nor do I know what will be done with me or with you. I follow but that which is revealed to me by inspiration; I am but a warner open and clear.”’ (The Curved Sand Hills 46:9) The messenger lacks the authority to compel people towards faith, worship, and doing what is righteous, as the word of God shows: ‘If it had been your Lord’s will, they would all have believed, [A 98] all who are on earth! will you then compel mankind, against their will, to believe!’ ( Jonah 10:99) Another word of God reads: ‘Therefore do you give admonition, for you are one to admonish. You are not one to manage (men’s) affairs.’ (The Overwhelming 88:21–22) This is what the Messenger(ṣ) undertook without addition or decrease. For he upheld his trust and conveyed the revelation as it came to him and his performance of the task gained the approval of God Almighty because he completed the task that God had entrusted to him, so that God Almighty said: ‘…This day I have perfected for you your religion and completed My favor upon you and have approved for you Islam as religion….’ (The Table Spread 5:3) If the task of conveying the news is faced with acceptance or disapproval, the task of conveying the messengerhood is faced with obedience of disobedience. A hearer receives the notification directed to him with the choice of accepting it if he wants or rejecting it if he wants, without obligating the Prophet in any way. Thus, we must understand the difference between the Sunna of the Messenger and the Sunna of the Prophet so that we can comprehend the true way with which we obey the Prophet (ṣ) as muʾminūn (believers) and in which he is our model.

94

Chapter Two: Who are the Believers?

3—The Sunna of the Messenger and the Sunna of the Prophet The word sunna is derived from the verb sanna, which means “to ease” or to “to flow with ease,” as we might say that water eases or that it flows with ease. It also has the meaning of way or pattern. These two definitions make the meaning of sunna entirely clear, since they together refer to the phenomena where a way or pattern is inscribed into a way of living, and where this way or pattern flows in the society and comes to prevail in it with all ease and effortlessness. An example is any law that is enacted and subsequently becomes generally accepted and practiced in the society. The upshot of a sunna, or a custom, is change and alteration, for God in His Almighty Book never declared any one custom to be perpetual, but entirely to the contrary, he disclosed to us every time its impermanence and that its upshot was always cessation or modification, as proved by the multiplicity of customs and the succession of one after the other, as in the word of God: [A 99] —‘ Say to the unbelievers, if they give over He will forgive them what is past; but if they return, the wont of the ancients is already gone! (The Spoils of War 8:38, AA, italics from translator) —‘ That they should not believe in the (Message); but the ways of the ancients have passed away.’ (The Rocky Tract 15:13, italics from translator) —‘ And what is there to keep back men from believing, now that guidance has come to them, nor from praying for forgiveness from their Lord, but that (they ask that) the ways of the ancients be repeated with them, or the wrath be brought to them face to face?’ (The Cave 18:55, italics from translator) —‘…It was the practice (approved) of Allah among those of old that have passed away. And the command of Allah is a decree determined.’ (Combined Forces 33:38, italics from translator) —‘Many were the ways of life that have passed away before you: travel through the earth, and see what was the end of those who rejected Truth.’ (The Family of Imran 3:137, italics from translator) —‘Allah does wish to make clear to you and to show you the ordinances of those before you…’ (The Women 4:26, italics from translator) 95

Islam and Humanity: Consequences of a Contemporary Reading

These verses declare that the wonts, ways, practices, and ordinances, that is, the sunna or customs, of the ancients have vanished and passed. This refutes the claim of permanence, because the most important characteristic of customs is to show signs of age [tasannah], as in the word of God: ‘…but look at your food and your drink; they show no signs of age [lam yatasannah]….’ (The Cow 2:259) For food shows signs of age in that it is struck by change, and customs change according to the circumstances of societies and their demands and the development of their levels of consciousness. Consequently, the customs that are established in a historical phase are overtaken by change and cessation with the passing of time, just as food with the passage of time becomes inedible. The same was true of customs of the past, which became unsuitable beginning from the eras before the mission of Mohammed, then the era of society of the Prophet, and then the subsequent eras, finally reaching to our current era. All these customs vanished with the vanishing of their eras and the loss of suitability. Our current customs are only current for us and suitable for our times, and after the vanishing of our time, they will become unsuitable for those who come after us and so on. The Almighty God in the Book was keen to disclose the change in human customs and their vanishing to emphasize their relativity and dependence on the circumstances of their society. On the other hand, God was also keen to disclose to us that the only permanent, eternal sunna were His sunna, [A 100] the axis around which all human customs orbit. Therefore, the customs of the ancients appeared in the context of plurality and change while the sunna of God appeared in the context of singularity and eternity, just as in the word of God: —‘ (This was Our) way with the messengers We sent before you: you will find no change in Our ways.’ (The Night Journey 17:77) —‘ (Such was) the practice (approved) of Allah among those who lived aforetime: No change will you find in the practice (approved) of Allah.’ (The Combined Forces 33:62) —‘ (Such has been) the practice (approved) of Allah already in the past: no change will you find in the practice (approved) of Allah.’ (The Victory 48:23) The sunna of God is subject to neither change [tabadul] not transformation [taḥawal]: ‘Now are they but looking for the way the ancients were dealt with? 96

Chapter Two: Who are the Believers?

But no change [tabdīl] will you find in Allah’s way (of dealing): no turning off [taḥwīl] will you find in Allah’s way (of dealing).’ (The Originator 35:43) So that these two terms, change and transformation, characterize human customs in the transformation of a custom from the suitable to unsuitable with the passage of time, and the substitute of another custom suitable to the circumstances of each society. One human custom follows another. This is the case with all the laws that human societies chose and which they hoped would be a means to a practical solution that helps to guide issues in the lives of their individuals, without having paid attention to whether they were consistent with human values. As a result, some human customs were inconsistent with human values like the proscriptions against violating the unity of God, committing shameful deeds, and giving false measure. God Almighty sent the prophets and messengers to guide them to the sunna of God, which rests on the highest true values to push them onto the path of moral and scientific advancement. The messengerhoods of the messengers preceding Mohammed was suitable for the levels of consciousness in previous societies in which the concrete was predominant. The messengerhood of Mohammed was abstract and eternal because it was the culminating messengerhood. Accordingly, the messengerhood of God present in the Book [A 101] is the one abstract, eternal sunna. It is fixed in itself but its applications are open to change. This makes change and alteration the essential design of its differing applications in differing societies, for although the messengerhood of God is the one eternal sunna until the last day, it is expressed in the world as the sunna of change and alteration. Since the messengerhood of Mohammed (ṣ) was the final formulation of the divine, eternal sunna, it was expressed in the Book in an abstract and theoretical style. For the Prophet (ṣ) is the last of those sent and his era marks the beginning of the post-messengerhood stage in human history. It appeared in this formulation so that the people can devise their customs in the light of the eternal sunna of God, a devising that employs ijtihād and is concerned with application relative to circumstances. The sunna of God is absolute because God does not practice ijtihād but possesses absolute, eternal knowledge while the people are learners and mujtahid (those who 97

Islam and Humanity: Consequences of a Contemporary Reading

undertake ijtihād) with relative, circumstantial knowledge that matches their human natures. What the Prophet (ṣ) undertook in the seventh century in the Arabian Peninsula was the first interaction between this abstract messengerhood and the world of reality, but it was neither the only nor the last, but rather the first in a series of interactions that harmonized with the demands of societies, none of which are eternal. Thus, the divine eternal sunna that does not undergo change and alteration is the eternal and final divine messengerhood as represented in the Book. It is called the sunna of the messengerhood. The ijtihāds made by the Prophet from the status of prophethood as the highest leader of the society and as its judge, as we saw previously, are called the sunna of the prophethood. It is not the product of divine revelation but emerges from his ijtihāds and reflects the circumstances of his society, the standard of living of its individuals, and their level of consciousness. Thus, it is composed of circumstantial ijtihāds that are not suitable for all times and places, and obedience to Mohammed in them was only obligatory for his contemporaries in that society. Obedience to Mohammed in the sunna of the messengerhood, on the contrary, is obligatory for his followers in every age since his (ṣ) own. [A 102]

4—Necessary Obedience in the Realm of Messengerhood The meaning of obedience [ṭāʿa] is to bow and surrender, and thus compliance. Obedience means following a path with free choice—never from force or compulsion. It is a standpoint the human being chooses himself. The contrary to obedience is force, as the word of God shows: ‘Moreover He comprehended in His design the sky, and it had been (as) smoke: He said to it and to the earth: “Come you together, out of obedience or under force.” They said: “We do come (together), in willing obedience.”’ (Explained in Detail 41:11, revised) The authoritative revelation strove to urge obedience to the Messenger in the realm of messengerhood in everything that appeared in the divine messengerhood revealed to Mohammed, as the word of God shows: 98

Chapter Two: Who are the Believers?

—‘ The Messenger believes in what has been revealed to him from his Lord, as do the men of faith. Each one (of them) believes in Allah, His angels, His books, and His messengers. “We make no distinction (they say) between one and another of His messengers.” And they say: “We hear, and we obey: (We seek) Your forgiveness, our Lord, and to You is the end of all journeys.”’ (The Cow 2:285) — ‘He who obeys the Messenger, obeys Allah: But if any turn away, we have not sent you to watch over their (evil deeds).’ (The Women 4:80) —‘We sent not a messenger, but to be obeyed, in accordance with the will of Allah….’ (The Women 4:64) The Almighty here makes obedience to Mohammed the completion of faith in God, His angels, His books, and His messengers, as we read in verse 285 of the Sura the Cow, following the belief in the prophethood that His messengers have brought. Accordingly, obedience is only due in the realm of messengerhood, as we can infer from the number of times the phrase “obey the messenger” occurs in the authoritative revelation and the absence of the expression “obey the prophet.” For the nature of the messengerhood requires obedience since it is absolute and divine, as the word of God shows: ‘We sent not a messenger, but to be obeyed, in accordance with the will of Allah….’ (The Women 4:64) The prophethood, on the other hand, only requires belief, because it concerns news, and those who believe in his prophethood (ṣ) will submit in obedience to his messengerhood. Obedience to the Messenger takes two forms, separate obedience and combined obedience: [A 103]

A—Separate Obedience Separate obedience is obedience owed to the Messenger separately from the obedience owed to God, in the word of God: —‘O you who believe! Obey God, and obey the Messenger, and those charged with authority among you [ūli‘l-amr minkum]…’ (The Women 4:59) —‘Obey God, and obey the Messenger, and beware (of evil): if you do turn back, know you that it is our Messenger’s duty to proclaim (the message) in the clearest manner.’ (The Table Spread 5:92) 99

Islam and Humanity: Consequences of a Contemporary Reading

—‘So obey Allah, and obey His Messenger: but if you turn back, the duty of Our Messenger is but to proclaim (the Message) clearly and openly.’ (Mutual Loss & Gain 64:12) While it is separate to the obedience owed to God, it has a connection, in contrast, to the obedience owed to those in charge of legislation [ūli‘l-amr minkum] since their ijtihāds also submit to change and obedience is only due to them while they are alive. Separate obedience to the Messenger is only owed by his followers and it is only owed as long as he is living. It is owed to the Messenger in the realm of prophethood 1) in his directives as supreme leader of the society, which is what we call the stories of Mohammed, and 2) in his ijtihāds, which is what we call the sunna of the prophethood. Mohammed is impeccable in the realm of the messengerhood but a mujtahid, dependent on ijtihāds, in the realm of prophethood. The Almighty made clear to us that the separate obedience revolves around these two axes: (1) The stories of Mohammed are the verses that tell stories of Mohammed in the Book. They are texts that are unrelated to the legal rules (ahkām) of the messengerhood but are embedded in the circumstances of this historical stage and discuss both the internal and external issues (principally war) in Mohammed’s young state. They are among the Qur’anic stories from which we draw lessons but lack any relationship to the messengerhood. Obedience to Mohammed is considered separate because it only applies to the individuals in his society, and since the stories are only directed to that generation of his followers, the Prophet introduces many of the verses with the expression, “O, you who believe.” The Sura The Repentance, for example, even lacks the phrase “in the name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful” since it is a Sura that is mainly about fighting, and consequently it is not considered part of the messengerhood but part of the [A 104] stories of Mohammed. (2) The prophetical sunna are the ijtihāds that Mohammed (ṣ) made at that time and through which those who were with him of his followers among the individuals of his society demonstrate obedience to him. They do not extend beyond that generation. As the man in charge, Mohammed made ijtihāds in the realm of prophethood for the individuals of his society, 100

Chapter Two: Who are the Believers?

as in the word of God: ‘When there comes to them some matter touching (public) safety or fear, they divulge it. If they had only referred it to the Messenger, or to those charged with authority among them, the proper investigators would have tested it from them (direct)….’ (The Women 4:83) This verse teaches us that one of the tasks of the Prophet and men in charge was testing, whose meaning is to generate ijtihāds to address issues in society that are consistent with its circumstances, and thus the meaning of testing is making ijtihāds. The practice of testing brings together obedience to the Messenger and obedience to the men in charge to show that separate obedience was due to the ijtihāds that Mohammed (ṣ) as prophet used to organize his society. As messenger, Mohammed (ṣ) did not make ijtihāds concerning the prohibitions because the fourteen taboos were eternal, material, and restricted to the Book of God, as we saw, but he did make ijtihāds concerning proscriptions and prescriptions and in specifying what was permitted, if only in a limited way. This leads us to infer that what is called the prophetical sunna found in the books of the hadiths—when true—can only justify separate obedience to the Messenger (ṣ), that is, obedience during his life only, for they amount to nothing more than the summary of his ijtihāds as prophet, that is, what he legislated of civil laws for his society only. Thus we must seek to understand the word of God—‘What Allah has bestowed on His Messenger (and taken away) from the people of the townships belongs to Allah, to His Messenger and to kindred and orphans, the needy and the wayfarer; in order that it may not (merely) make a circuit between the wealthy among you. So take what the Messenger gives to you, and deny yourselves that which he withholds from you. And fear Allah; for Allah is strict in punishment’ (The Gathering 59:7, revised)—to remove its opacity about the obligations of later generations to the sayings and doings of Mohammed. Let us start with analyzing this phrase of the verse: ‘So take what the Messenger gives to you [ātākum], and deny yourselves that which he withholds from you.’ The first verb is ātākum, which is [A 105] derived from the verbal noun ītāʾ, and it means iʿṭāʾ, giving or bestowing, for ītāʾ is something that is given or bestowed, and the human being can only give something it already owns, because giving something 101

Islam and Humanity: Consequences of a Contemporary Reading

requires first owning it. Thus, the Almighty says in His definite revelation [muḥkam al-tanzīl]: —‘…and establish regular prayer and give regular charity [zakāh]; and loan to Allah a beautiful loan….’ (The One Wrapped in Garments 73:20) —‘ And give the women (on marriage) their dower as a free gift….’ (The Women 4:4) Someone reading these verses closely will conclude that the first verse contains a divine prescription to give regular charity or the alms tax [zakāh], that is, to remove it from his private property, since someone must first own property to remove it, and accordingly, giving is from what someone has to give. Similarly, the second verse contains a prescription to give women their dowries, where giving does not entail an exchange since a gift means giving without expecting something in return, that is, to give in their honor and not as a wage against the marriage contract, and it is a gift that comes from the property the man possesses. In this way, we understand the phrase “what the Messenger gives to you,” that is, the Messenger gives you a gift from in his possession. If it were a possession of God, the Almighty would say “What the Messenger brings to you.” For giving something means handing something over from within a person’s domain, whether it is a thing, money, knowledge, etc. while the human being brings something from outside the domain of his knowledge, whatever the thing is. This is clear in the word of God: ‘“O my father! to me has been brought knowledge which has not reached you: so follow me: I will guide you to a way that is even and straight.’ (Mary 19:43, revised, italics from translator) In other words, inspired knowledge has been brought to me from beyond what I know—it is not present to me—and this notion is confirmed with certainty in the word of God: ‘And no question do they give to you but we bring to you the truth and the best explanation (thereof ).’ (The Criterion 25:33, revised, italics from translator). For the verse defines the meaning of both the verbs “to bring” and “to give” by showing that giving assumes previous possession while the bringing is from God and outside the domain of our knowledge. 102

Chapter Two: Who are the Believers?

On this basis, all the ijtihāds of the Messenger belong to the realm of prophethood and only the [A 106] individuals of his time and society owe separate obedience in them to him, not those who lived in subsequent eras. Accordingly, the books of the hadith become like historical documents that are profitable to study and analyze but are not a religion and are not holy.

B—Combined Obedience Combined obedience is obedience to the Prophet that is combined with obedience to God directly, just as in the word of God: —‘It is such as obey Allah and His Messenger, and fear Allah and do right, that will win (in the end),’ (The Light 24:52) —‘…He that obeys Allah and His Messenger, has already attained the highest achievement.’ (The Combined Forces 33:71) —‘And obey Allah and the Messenger; that you may obtain mercy.’ (The Family of Imran 3:132) It is eternal obedience to the Messenger both in his life and after his death, that is, it was an obligatory choice for his followers during his life and for those of his community who came after him. It is obedience to him in the sunna of the messsengerhood, that is, in the divine messengerhood appearing exclusively in the Book, including human values and religious rituals and legislation. Obedience to him (ṣ) in it is a combined obedience because his message is eternal, comprehensive, and universal, and it includes obedience to him (ṣ) in the explanation of the two rituals of prayers and regular charity since they are cited separately in the word of God: ‘So establish regular prayer and give regular charity [zakāh]; and obey the Messenger; that you may receive mercy.’ (The Light 24:56)

5—Obedience to Him (ṣ) in the Messengerhood is Combined Obedience When Almighty God said in His Book—‘We sent you not, but as a Mercy for all creatures.’ (The Prophets 21:107)—it meant that God ordered us to 103

Islam and Humanity: Consequences of a Contemporary Reading

obey His Messenger because his messengerhood is equivalent to the mercy dedicated to humanity by God. The Exalted inscribed for himself the rule of mercy, [A 107] in the words of God: ‘When those come to you who believe in Our signs, Say: “Peace be on you: Your Lord has inscribed for Himself (the rule of ) mercy….’ (The Cattle 6:54) God established this mercy, which is mentioned in many locations in the authoritative revelation, in this world and the afterworld. In the afterworld, it is connected to the gaining of paradise and escape from the fire for His worshippers, the believers, as in the word of God: ‘But those whose faces will be (lit with) white, they will be in (the light of ) Allah’s mercy: therein to dwell (forever).’ (The Family of Imran 3:107) The following are those whom the mercy of God extends to in the afterworld: ‘“Those who follow the messenger, the unlettered Prophet, whom they find mentioned in their own (scriptures), in the law and the Gospel; for he commands them what is just and forbids them what is evil; he allows them as lawful what is good (and pure) and prohibits them from what is bad (and impure); He releases them from their heavy burdens and from the yokes that are upon them. So it is those who believe in him, honor him, help him, and follow the light which is sent down with him, it is they who will prosper.”’ (The Heights 7:157) The verse shows that that gaining of this reward results from their following the mercy dedicated to them in this life by entering the straight way [ṣirāṭ mustaqīm], as attested by His word: ‘Then those who believe in Allah, and hold fast to Him, soon will He admit them to mercy and grace from Himself, and guide them to Himself by a straight way [ṣirāṭ mustaqīm].’ (The Women 4:175) It is the mercy dedicated to all humankind in his concluding messengerhood, and one of the perfections of His mercy is that He makes these values a natural disposition of the human being and makes them the third pillar of Islam. In other words, when a Muslim believes in God and the Last Day, he is led to the values naturally if they are not distorted. He loves to undertake the righteous deed that expresses these values whatever his religious community. The believers from the community of Mohammed (ṣ) find them cited in the Book of the Almighty, and their following what they find in the Book is the following of sound human nature free from any 104

Chapter Two: Who are the Believers?

distortions, and it is the nature of most people. Therefore, the universal character of the of the messengerhood of Mohammed manifests itself through the human values which it brings, and the messengerhood expresses universal moral authority because it comprises universal human values that all people agree on since they harmonize with human nature and represent the essence of the Islamic religion and [A 108] its spirit. It is the sunna of the messengerhood that the followers of the Prophet must obey in religious rituals and in legislation.

A—Obedience to Him (ṣ) in Legislation The universality of the divine messsengerhood is manifest in its inclusiveness, in the word of God: ‘Say: “O men! I am sent unto you all, as the Messenger of Allah, to Whom belongs the dominion of the heavens and the earth: there is no god but He: it is He That gives both life and death. So believe in Allah and His Messenger, the Unlettered Prophet, who believes in Allah and His words: follow him that (so) you may be guided.”’ (The Heights 7:158) Its universality is exemplified in its inclusion of all aspects of human legislation by introducing ijtihād in the explanation of the definite [tafṣīl al-muḥkam]. The messengerhood of Mohammed was composed of two parts. One part was fixed in text and content, the definite verses [āyāt muḥkamāt] (Mother of the Book), and they are closed verses that preclude ijtihād (fixed in both text and content), and manifest the immutable domination of the divine. In the authoritative revelation, they number only 19 verses. In the verses of the explanation of the definite (the explanation of the Mother of the Book) the text is fixed but the content moves because they submit to human ijtihād, and by means of this appears the domination of the human guided by the principle of curvature [ḥanīfiyya], which includes the limits of legislation (the theory of limits). The texts that make clear the limits of legislation appear within the explanation of the definite [tafṣīl al-muḥkam], and these limits give us room for the movement of change in human legislation. Because of that, it deserves to be the last of all the messengerhoods since these characteristics make it a messengerhood that can be applied in all times and 105

Islam and Humanity: Consequences of a Contemporary Reading

spaces since it can absorb all human circumstances no matter how numerous and no matter the level of consciousness of the society. Therefore, the task of exercising ijtihād in the explanation of the definite [tafṣīl al-muḥkam] falls to the legislative authority. Because ijtihād is exclusively in the holy text, never outside it, and only in the verses of the explanation of the definite [tafṣīl al-muḥkam], the truth is the outcome of the ijtihād and it is determined by the credibility [A 109] between the text and reality without plunging the people into distress, and in this is the lowest limit of the restriction of their freedom. For the ijtihād is true and acceptable to the degree that it is in harmony with objective reality, or in other words, to the degree the reader of the text understands the objective reality in the moment of the historical reading. And the measure of the credibility of the understanding of the mujtahid (he who exercises ijtihād) of the text is the harmony of his ijtihād with reality, and this is what determines the truth or falsity of the reading, and its degree of right and wrong. This also is what determines the success or failure of any parliament in its legislation, since whenever the legislation corresponds and harmonizes with objective reality, the parliament was successful in its task of understanding the truth of the living reality. Here we find the agreement of the sunna of God in the existing universe with the principle of change in everything and the absence of fixity, and this is human nature confirmed by the word of God: ‘So [Prophet] as a man of pure faith, stand firm and true in your devotion to the religion [liʾl-dīn ḥanīf]. This is the natural disposition [fiṭra] God installed in mankind— there is no altering God’s creation—and this is the right religion [al-dīn al-qayyim], though most people do not realize it.’ (The Romans 30:30, AH) Ḥanīfiyya (curvature) is from the root h-n-f, which means to drift or to bend, and ḥanīfiyya is the drifting or bending in legislation and in human nature, customs, traditions, that is, it is the change/the “changes,” as in the word of God: ‘Say: “Indeed, my Lord has guided me to a way that is straight [ṣirāṭ mustaqīm]—a religion of right—the path (trod) by Abraham the true [ḥanīf] in faith, and he (certainly) joined not gods with God.” (The Cattle 6:161) Human beings need fixed points in their lives, in whose light human 106

Chapter Two: Who are the Believers?

beings can make ijtihāds. These fixed points are the straight path to which verse 161 of the Sura The Cattle refers, and as discussed earlier, they are the human values, including the taboos and proscription in the Book of God, and, in addition, the limits of the divine messengerhood. All these elements are fixed, and it is in their light that the human being applies the principle of ḥanīfiyya in making his decisions and legislation by taking into consideration changes in circumstances and the level of consciousness. This is the divine wisdom that makes his universal and eternal messengerhood flexible of application according to the time and place as a mercy to the people: ‘We sent you not, but as a Mercy for all creatures.’ (The Prophets 21:107) [A 110] We as muʾminūn (believers) in Mohammed (ṣ) take great pride in the universality of the messengerhood of Mohammed and wish to see it realized everywhere, and this is what is actually happening, for it has been realized in every country in the world, even countries that lack a connection to the Book of God. For it is a messengerhood in harmony with human nature thanks to the human ijtihād which marches into the future. Whenever the level of consciousness of a people advances, the human dimension of the messengerhood as it is in the Book of God manifests itself through the different ijtihāds that this messengerhood comprehends. And by means of our understanding of the methodological character of the ijtihād in the messengerhood, which is very clear in the Book of God, now we can say the phrase “Allah Most Great has spoken the truth” and see its credibility in reality. For every people of the earth with its parliament undertakes this and rarely departs from human nature except for some unusual exceptions. Thus, we understand that the sole claimant to demonstrating the truthfulness of the speech of God is the total line of progressing and becoming, from Adam to the Resurrection, in the word of God: ‘Many were the ways of life that have passed away before you: travel through the earth, and see what was the end of those who rejected truth.’ (The Family of Imran 3:137) Another word of God reads: ‘Say: “Travel through the earth and see how Allah did originate creation; so will Allah produce a later creation: for Allah has power over all things.’ (The Spider 29:20) Since religion does not possess the instrument of force, as we will explain in detail later, he 107

Islam and Humanity: Consequences of a Contemporary Reading

who possesses the instrument of force in power does not have the right to legislate. And he who possesses the right to legislate (parliament) lacks the right to possess the instruments of force. This is the true meaning of the principle of the division of powers.

B—Obedience to Him (ṣ) in Religious Rituals Rituals [shaʿāʾir] is the plural of the singular ritual [shaʿīra]. It is mentioned four times in the authoritative revelation: —‘Behold! Safa and Marwa are among the symbols [shaʿā’ir] of Allah. So if those who visit the house in the season or at other times, should compass them round, it is no sin in them. And if any one obeys his own impulse to good, be sure that Allah is He Who recognizes and knows.’ (The Cow 2:158) [A 111] —‘O you who believe! Violate not the sanctity of the symbols [shaʿāʾir] of Allah, nor of the sacred month, nor of the animals brought for sacrifice, nor the garlands that mark out such animals, nor the people resorting to the sacred house, seeking of the bounty and good pleasure of their Lord…’ (The Table Spread 5:2) —‘Such (is his state): and whoever holds in honor the symbols [shaʿāʾir] of Allah, (in the sacrifice of animals), such (honor) should come truly from piety of heart.’ (The Pilgrimage 22:32) —‘The sacrificial camels we have made for you as among the symbols [shaʿāʾir] from Allah: in them is (much) good for you: then pronounce the name of Allah over them as they line up (for sacrifice): when they are down on their sides (after slaughter), eat you thereof, and feed such as (beg not but) live in contentment, and such as beg with due humility…’ (The Pilgrimage 22:36) Shaʿāʾir are clearly defined religious practices whose performance God prescribed in specific times and places, or ritual sites. All the religious communities composing the three Abrahamic religions ( Judaism, Christianity, and Mohammedanism) has its own ritual sites, like the festival assembly of pilgrims on Mount Arafat, the ritual walking between Safa and 108

Chapter Two: Who are the Believers?

Marwa, and the circumambulation of the Kaʿaba in the pilgrimage among the muʾminūn (believers) of the community of Mohammed (ṣ). Thus, the words and deeds that proceeded from the Prophet (ṣ), and which include clarification of the details of the religious rituals that do not conflict with what appears in the Book of God, require the obedience to him of a combined obedience, that is, the obligation to follow and emulate him during his life and after his death. But if those words and deeds conflict with the Book of God, they should not be followed or emulated. The rituals are prayer, regular charity [zakāh], fasting, and pilgrimage: together, these are the common denominator between all the followers of the community of Mohammed from the seventh century Hijri to the last day. However, we need to pause and give deep attention to a significant problem. It is connected to obedience to the Messenger and a detached obedience to the rituals of prayer and regular charity (the alms tax) [zakāh], and it is an obedience cited in the word of God: ‘So establish regular prayer and give regular charity [zakāh]; and obey the Messenger; that you may receive mercy.’ (The Light 24:56) Why would the Exalted One order us to obey the Messenger in isolation in this verse, specifically, without tying that obedience to obeying the Almighty God, like in the verses we cited above that expressed combined obedience. The answer is that when the Exalted One obliged the muʾminūn (believers) from the community of Mohammed (ṣ) with [A 112] performing prayer and giving regular charity [zakāh], He did not explain to them how to carry out these rituals in His Book—how to perform prayer or the minimum level of regular charity was not mentioned in the Book. Thus, He appended to His obliging them a directive that ordered them to obey the Messenger (ṣ) since he had learned from Gabriel how the prayer is performed and when to perform regular charity. Since the religious rituals were crucial to guarantee the continuation of the community of Mohammed (ṣ), the order to perform them in the Book of God was addressed to all the muʾminūn (believers) from his community, both his contemporaries and those who came later, and the obedience to him (ṣ) in it is a combined obedience. 109

Islam and Humanity: Consequences of a Contemporary Reading

(1) In prayer In His authoritative book, God says this concerning prayer as ritual (salawa), not connection (salāh): ‘…For such prayers are enjoined on believers at stated times’ (The Women 4:103). He also says: ‘So establish regular Prayer and give regular Charity; and obey the Messenger; that you may receive mercy’ (The Light 24:56). The second verse commands obedience but it leaves the question of how to pray to the sunna of the Prophet transmitted in an actual uninterrupted manner or with recourse to Hadith to understand how the Prophet (ṣ) prayed.

(2) In regular charity (the alms tax) [zakāh] In the word of God: ‘And be steadfast in prayer; practice regular charity [zakāh]; and bow down your heads with those who bow down (in worship)’ (The Cow 2:43). Another word of God states: ‘And they have been commanded no more than this: To worship Allah, offering Him sincere devotion, being true (in faith); to establish regular prayer; and to practice regular charity [zakāh]….’ (The Clear Evidence 98:5) There are also other places that do not mention explicitly regular charity, but allude to it by mentioning its characteristics, as in the word of God: —‘Who believe in the unseen, are steadfast in prayer, and spend out of what We have provided for them’ (The Cow 2:3). [A 113] —‘…They ask you how much they are to spend; Say: “What is beyond your needs.” Thus does Allah make clear to you His signs: In order that you may consider’ (The Cow 2:219). —‘Alms [ṣadaqāt]are for the poor and the needy, and those employed to administer the (funds); for those whose hearts have been (recently) reconciled (to Truth); for those in bondage and in debt; in the cause of Allah; and for the wayfarer: (thus is it) ordained by Allah, and Allah is full of knowledge and wisdom.’ (The Repentance 9:60) —‘Of their goods, take alms [ṣadaqa] , that so you might purify and sanctify them; and pray on their behalf. Indeed, your prayers are a source 110

Chapter Two: Who are the Believers?

of security for them: And Allah is One Who hears and knows.’ (The Repentance 9:103) —‘And those in whose wealth is a recognized right. For the (needy) who asks and him who is prevented (for some reason from asking)’ (The Ways of Ascent 70:25). Anyone who applies himself to the discussion on regular charity [zakāh] will notice the thread that ties together—in one way or the other— spending, alms, and regular charity. It begins with the expression “…and spend out of what We have provided for them” (The Cow 2:3) and passes to the expression “…They ask you how much they are to spend…” (The Cow 2:219). For it was natural and spontaneous for the muʾminūn (believers) in the Prophet (ṣ) to ask him, upon hearing the word of God on those spending, ‘They are on (true) guidance, from their Lord, and it is these who will prosper’ (The Cow 2:5), what must they spend to be among those who are truly guided and possessors of prosperity? And it was natural that the clarifying answer is that the spending in question is not the buying of necessities—food, drink, clothes, and housing—but what is left after that, what the authoritative revelation sometimes calls the “spending of your substance in the cause of God” (The Cow 2:195 and 2:262, and The Spoils of War 8:60) and other times calls spending “for the sake of God” (The Romans 30:39 and Man 76:9). Then the thread continues to include alms (ṣadaqa) in the expression: ‘…for men [mutaṣadiqīn] and women [mutaṣadaqāt]who give in charity… for them has Allah prepared forgiveness and great reward.’ (The Combined Forces 33:35). Alms are what someone spends for the sake of God and for the cause of God from all that God has provided him, and it unblemished and undamaged and free of any expectation of repayment or benefit. It is the forgiveness that the Exalted One orders His noble Messenger to hold in verse 199 of the Sura The Heights. [A 114]

111

Islam and Humanity: Consequences of a Contemporary Reading

And just as spending comprises alms [ṣadaqāt], so do alms comprise regular charity [zakāh], as in the following diagram: Expenses [nafaqāt]

Alms [ṣadaqāt]

Needs [ḥājāt]

Regular Charity (the lower limit) [zakāh]

Regular charity in Mecca before the Hijra was the surplus allowance of property that the prosperous among the believers carried out voluntarily, and time, place, and ability did not set limits for them. After the Hijra, the Almighty God transformed it into an obligation, as verse 104 of the Sura The Repentance indicates: ‘Know they not that Allah does accept repentance from His votaries and receives their gifts of charity [ṣadaqāt], and that Allah is indeed He, the Oft-Returning, Most Merciful?’ (The Repentance 9:104) Verse 60 of the Sura The Repentance establishes the recipients of the spending: ‘Alms [ṣadaqāt] are for the poor and the needy, and those employed to administer the (funds); for those whose hearts have been (recently) reconciled (to truth); for those in bondage and in debt; in the cause of Allah; and for the wayfarer: (thus is it) ordained by Allah, and Allah is full of knowledge and wisdom.’ (The Repentance 9:60) However, these verses did not mention the rate, amount, or distribution ratio. The Exalted left that to His Prophet according to verse 56 of the Sura The Light: ‘So establish regular prayer and give regular charity [zakāh]; and obey the Messenger; that you may receive mercy.’ (The Light 24:56). The Prophet (ṣ) set the rate, with the agreement of God, as the lowest limit of regular charity, at 2.5 percent. 112

Chapter Two: Who are the Believers?

(3) In fasting God said in His Book: —‘O you who believe! Fasting is prescribed to you as it was prescribed to those before you, [A 115] that you may (learn) self-restraint, (fasting) for a fixed number of days; but if any of you is ill, or on a journey, the prescribed number (should be made up) from days later. For those who can do it (with hardship), is a ransom, the feeding of one that is indigent. But he that will give more, of his own free will, it is better for him. And it is better for you that you fast, if you only knew. Ramadhan is the (month) in which was sent down the Qur’an, as a guide to mankind, also clear (signs) for guidance and judgment (between right and wrong). So every one of you who is present (at his home) during that month should spend it in fasting, but if anyone is ill, or on a journey, the prescribed period (should be made up) by days later. Allah intends every facility for you; He does not want to put to difficulties. (He wants you) to complete the prescribed period, and to glorify Him in that He has guided you; and perchance you shall be grateful.’ (The Cow 2:183–185) —‘Permitted to you, on the night of the fasts, is the approach to your wives. They are your garments and you are their garments. Allah knows what you used to do secretly among yourselves; but He turned to you and forgave you; so now associate with them, and seek what Allah has ordained for you, and eat and drink, until the white thread of dawn appear to you distinct from its black thread; then complete your fast until the night appears; but do not associate with your wives while you are in retreat in the mosques. Those are limits (set by) Allah: Approach not near thereto. Thus does Allah make clear His signs to men: that they may learn self-restraint.’ (The Cow 2:187) Let us pause at the phrase “…Fasting is prescribed to you as it was prescribed to those before you, that you may (learn) self-restraint” from verse 183 of the Sura The Cow. The phrase suggests that fasting is one of those rituals of worship that existed before the revelation of the Book to the Prophet (ṣ), that is, that the renunciation of eating and drinking was known to previous communities. However, we members of the community of Mohammed (ṣ) do not only renounce eating and drinking from sunrise 113

Islam and Humanity: Consequences of a Contemporary Reading

to sunset during the month of Ramadan, but we also renounce sex during that same time. The explanation of fasting for the followers of the Prophet (ṣ) appears in the word of God: ‘(Fasting) for a fixed number of days; but if any of you is ill, or on a journey, the prescribed number (should be made up) from days later. For those who can do it (with hardship), is a ransom, the feeding of one that is indigent. But he that will give more, of his own free will, it is better for him. And it is better for you that you fast, if you only knew.’ (The Cow 2:184) The statement focuses on the condition of those who can fast, and the evidence for that is the verb aṭāqa, which means to be able to bear something, which implies capability. Therefore, this part of the verse addresses those who can bear fasting for Ramadan, that is, those who can perform it but do not want to for one reason or another. God Almighty imposes in His Book a ransom [fidya] for these people against their lack of fasting during Ramadan, which is represented by feeding at least one indigent every day. Then He states with clarity [A 116] that the reward for fasting is greater and better than the reward for the ransom of feeding an indigent. Consequently, the failure to fast does not require an atonement [kaffāra (or gharāma)], but someone who can but does not want to fast, for one reason or another, must pay a ransom. For fasting is a personal and voluntary issue, not a matter for compulsion. There is a wide difference between ransom and atonement, and thus ransom, not atonement, applies to someone who can fast but does not fast for one reason or another. In fact, the Book of God never mentions atonement as a consequence for the failure to fast. To the contrary, the Book considers fasting to be an atonement for other behaviors undertaken by the human being, such as unintentional killing, vain oaths, and killing game in the sacred state [iḥrām]. If we apply that meaning in the current era, we find that it is consistent with what we find presently, so that the spread of the believers of the followers of Mohammed (ṣ) into every part of the world motivates us to perform ijtihād again in the explanation of fasting because they now even live in regions where daylight lasts 20 hours or more. For it is unreasonable to expect even those who can bear fasting, those who are not traveling or 114

Chapter Two: Who are the Believers?

sick, to fast for such a prolonged period. The same goes for those where the sun does not set for six months: who can fast a whole year? Ijtihād in the contemporary way concerning the religious ritual of fasting facilitates everyone: whoever wants to fast can and whoever does not want to fast can pay a ransom, without one faulting the other. Ijtihād within the verses of the explanation of fasting opens the door to comprehend every circumstance in every place in the world.

(4) In the pilgrimage (ḥajj) and minor pilgrimage (ʿumra) God said the following in His authorized Book about the pilgrimage to Mecca and its ceremonies: —‘The first house (of worship) appointed for men was that at Bakka: Full of blessing and of guidance for all kinds of beings: In it are signs [A 117] manifest; (for example), the Station of Abraham; whoever enters it attains security; pilgrimage thereto is a duty men owe to Allah, those who can afford the journey…’ (The Family of Imran 3:96–97) —‘And proclaim the pilgrimage among men: they will come to you on foot and (mounted) on every kind of camel, lean on account of journeys through deep and distant mountain highways; That they may witness the benefits (provided) for them, and celebrate the name of Allah, through the days appointed, over the cattle which He has provided for them (for sacrifice): then eat you thereof and feed the distressed ones in want. Then let them complete the rites prescribed for them, perform their vows, and (again) circumambulate the Ancient House.” (The Pilgrimage 22:27–29) —‘And complete the Hajj or ʿUmra in the service of Allah. But if you are prevented (from completing it), send an offering for sacrifice, such as you may find, and do not shave your heads until the offering reaches the place of sacrifice. And if any of you is ill, or has an ailment in his scalp, (necessitating shaving), (he should) in compensation either fast, or feed the poor, or offer sacrifice; and when you are in peaceful conditions (again), if any one wishes to continue the ʿUmra on to the Hajj, He must make an offering, such as he can afford, but if he cannot afford it, he should fast three days during the 115

Islam and Humanity: Consequences of a Contemporary Reading

Hajj and seven days on his return, making ten days in all. This is for those whose household is not in (the precincts of ) the Sacred Mosque….’ (The Cow 2:196) (You can also read the Cow 2:197–200). The pilgrimage is purely a joint religious ritual, and it entirely precludes individualism. It means coming and going, and its special meaning in the Book of God is going to the House of the Sacred to perform the rite of the pilgrimage in the most sacred months. If it includes the assembly of the pilgrims on Mount Arafat, it is the Hajj. If it does not include the assembly of the pilgrims but does take place during the holy months, it is called the ‘Umrah or minor pilgrimage. And if it takes place outside the holy months it is called just the ‘Umrah. The explanation of how to perform it appears in the word of God: —‘The Hajj are the months well known. If anyone undertakes that duty therein, Let there be no obscenity, nor wickedness, nor wrangling in the Hajj. And whatever good you do, (be sure) Allah knows it. And take a provision (with you) for the journey, but the best of provisions is right conduct. So fear Me, o you that are wise.’ (The Cow 2:197) —‘Celebrate the praises of Allah during the Appointed Days. But if any one hastens to leave in two days, there is no blame on him, and if any one stays on, there is no blame on him, if his aim is to do right. Then fear Allah, and know that you will surely be gathered unto Him.’ (The Cow 2:203) We begin with this phrase in the first verse: ‘The Hajj are the months well known.’ The term [A 118] “well-known” clearly refers to the to the holy months. According to some, the holy months are the following: Rajab, Dhū al-Qaʿdah, Dhū al-Ḥijjah, Muḥarram. This classification widely prevails but there are still those with alternate views. The holy months were mentioned in the word of God: ‘The number of months in the sight of Allah is twelve (in a year), so ordained by Him the day He created the heavens and the earth; of them four are sacred….’ (The Repentance 9:36) The suggestion is clear that these holy months were well-known and widely-recognized among the Arabs before the mission of Mohammed. This leads us to verse 28 of the Sura The Pilgrimage, in the word of God: ‘“That they may witness the benefits (provided) for them, and 116

Chapter Two: Who are the Believers?

celebrate the name of Allah, through the days appointed, over the cattle which He has provided for them (for sacrifice): then eat you thereof and feed the distressed ones in want.’ (The Pilgrimage 22:28) Just as there were wellknown months, the holy months, so there were also well-known and widelyrecognized days, and they were the first nine days of the month of Dhū al-Ḥijjah, and the last day is the day of assembly of the pilgrims on Mount Arafat. That they were not cited in any text in the Book of God does not mean that they were not well-known and widely recognized. For they were the most prominent time of the year for the people of the Arab peninsula before the mission of Mohammed, during which Quraysh played the role of the summer host that supplied provisions and water for the pilgrims, and this since the era of Abraham. Proof of this is the reference to these days in the context of God addressing Abraham: ‘And proclaim the pilgrimage among men: they will come to you on foot and (mounted) on every kind of camel, lean on account of journeys through deep and distant mountain highways; That they may witness the benefits (provided) for them, and celebrate the name of Allah, through the days appointed.…’ (The Pilgrimage 22:27–28) These well-known days, then, began in the era of Abraham. The religious rituals that are the pillars of īmān distinguish the followers of the messengerhood of Mohammed from other religious communities. For religious rituals are subject to the differences between the religious communities in the course of history, and each religious community has its own religious rituals without conflict between them. However, since the religious rituals are equivalent to religious obligations, they differ from worship. Worship is consistent with natural dispositions while religious rituals conflict with natural dispositions since they include inconvenience and adversity. An example of this is [A 119] is the difference between ṣalāh in the sense of ṣila, a connection to God, and ṣalāh in the sense of ṣalawa, the ritual of prayer. Both fall under the personal choice of the human being with a full measure of free will since they concern how the human being approaches God, but the first pertains to invocation and praise and the second is a religious ritual with the meaning of a symbolic relation between the worshipper and his Lord whose preconditions of performance contain a kind of inconvenience since 117

Islam and Humanity: Consequences of a Contemporary Reading

it is an unnatural activity. God Almighty, therefore, referred to worship and religious rites separately in the two following verses: ‘“Indeed, I am Allah: There is no god but I: So serve you Me (only), and establish regular prayer for celebrating My praise.’ (Ta-Ha 20:14) The human being performs prayer inside the mosques but he worships God inside and outside the mosques by adhering to the straight path and avoiding the taboos, that is, by undertaking the righteous deed. The Almighty God is in our hearts inside the mosques and outside of them, He is in our emotional life everywhere when we freely accept His prescriptions and avoid His taboos and proscriptions inside and outside the mosques.

118

Chapter Three There is No Force in Islam

Since Islam, regardless of its religious communities, expresses the human nature exemplified in the values with which people behave among themselves with full freedom and without coercion, it represents the true identity of the human being in this world which he conducts himself by wherever he wants. It is an identity that neither submits nor assents to submitting to oppression and subjugation in any time or place. The human being, in the past, present, and future, is free and conducts himself with his human values in all areas of his life and with full freedom, and he will remain this way until the Last Day. He is only led to these values by choice, assent, and the full desire to express his absolute humanity in achieving the rank of God’s deputy in the world. Where there is force, it cannot ever be from religion, for the Almighty has stated this clearly in his authoritative book, and He demands from us that we do not submit to any kind of force since it strips humanity from the human being.

1—The Difference between Obedience and Force The linguistic root of obedience [ṭāʿa] in Arabic is ṭauʿ, and it means allowing oneself to be led and allowing oneself to submit. Obedience [ṭāʿa] means being led by another in full freedom, since the word comes from ṭauʿiya, which means a [A 122] willing and consensual submission to yield to the decisions of others with total choice and assent. It is the contrary to force 119

Islam and Humanity: Consequences of a Contemporary Reading

[ikrāh], since obedience [ṭāʿa] is related to choice and force is related to coercion, which demonstrates their incompatibility the impossibility of bringing them together in the same position in the same person. Therefore, responsibility is a consequence of obedience since the human being does not obey and does not allow himself to be led by the decisions of others with a full measure of his will unless he is convinced of those decisions. Consequently, the human being becomes responsible for his obedience by applying it to these decisions. Therefore, when the Almighty said the following in His authoritative revelation: —‘Say: “Obey Allah and His Messenger”: But if they turn back, Allah loves not those who reject faith.’ (The Family of Imran 3:32) —‘And obey Allah and the Messenger; that you may obtain mercy.’ (The Family of Imran 3:132) He means with the phrase “Obey Allah” voluntarily allowing oneself to be led by the Almighty God with full choice and freedom, in obedience to his Divine Immutable Domination by willingly adhering to His religion “Islam” and its human values represented in avoiding His taboos and obeying His prescriptions and proscriptions. In verse 32 of the Sura The Family of Imran, God first demands a combined obedience to Himself and His Messenger (ṣ) with a full measure of choice, then adds the phrase “if they turn back,” which shows that the obedience is entirely willing because it mentions that the Messenger (ṣ) will not coerce them to obey Him if they turn back. This is a characteristic of the religion of Islam, which rests on willing submission and the absence of force. For obedience appeared joined with responsibility to connect it with responsible choice or responsible freedom, and this expressed a trust that the heavens and earth were not able to bear but that the human being bears because he is the deputy of God on earth, as cited in the word of God: ‘We did indeed offer the trust to the heavens and the earth and the mountains; but they refused to undertake it, being afraid thereof: but man undertook it; He was indeed unjust and foolish’ (The Combined Forces 33:72). This trust is the freedom of responsible choice, that is, being led by and consciously obedient to God and His Messenger (ṣ), and the evidence for this is that 120

Chapter Three: There is No Force in Islam

this verse directly follows this word of God: ‘O you who believe! Fear Allah, and (always) say a word directed to the right: [A 123] that He may make your conduct whole and sound and forgive you your sins: he that obeys Allah and His Messenger, has already attained the highest achievement.’ (The Combined Forces 33:70–71) The context of the verses makes clear that voluntary obedience is a trust that God assigned to the human being with that breath of spirit that made the human being conscious and aware and, therefore, able to take decisions with full freedom, part of which is responsible obedience to God and the Messenger (ṣ) in the final messengerhood that he brought from his Almighty Lord. We must draw closer to the meaning of force in the Book of God so that we can, by means of it, understand how it differs from obedience. Semantically, force [ikrāh] indicates the contrary of consent and affection, that is, if an act, behavior, or utterance comes suddenly from the human being without his consent or contrary to his desire, then it has issued from him by force of one kind or another. The Arabic word karh means a psychological difficulty, as in the word of God: ‘…And spy not on each other behind their backs. Would any of you like to eat the flesh of his dead brother? No, you would abhor it [karhtumūhu]...But fear Allah: For Allah is Oft-Returning, Most Merciful.’ (The Dwellings 49:12). The Arabic word kurh means bodily hardship, as in the word of God: ‘We have enjoined on man kindness to his parents: In pain [kurhan]did his mother bear him, and in pain [kurhan] did she give him birth. The carrying of the (child) to his weaning is (a period of ) thirty months….’ (The Curved Sand-Hills, 46:15). The following verse combines both meanings: ‘Fighting is prescribed for you, and you dislike [kurh] it. But it is possible that you dislike [takrahū] a thing which is good for you, and that you love a thing which is bad for you. But Allah knows, and you know not.’ (The Cow 2:216) The force that concerns us in this study is the force exerted on one human being by another, for this is the kind of force that makes a human being issue speech or undertake an act without his consent, as in the word of God: 121

Islam and Humanity: Consequences of a Contemporary Reading

—‘Say: “Spend (for the cause) willingly or unwillingly: not from you will it be accepted: for you are indeed a people rebellious and wicked.”’ (The Repentance 9:53) —‘“For us, we have believed in our Lord: may He forgive us our faults, and the magic to which you didst compel us: for Allah is Best and Most Abiding.”’ (Ta-Ha 20:73) [A 124] —‘….except under compulsion, his heart remaining firm in faith….’ (The Bees 16:106) —‘If it had been your Lord’s will, they would all have believed, all who are on earth! will you then compel mankind, against their will, to believe!’ ( Jonah 10:99) —‘Let there be no compulsion in religion: truth stands out clear from error: whoever rejects evil and believes in Allah has grasped the most trustworthy hand-hold that never breaks. And Allah hears and knows all things.’ (The Cow 2:256) These verses show us that the source of the force exerted on a human being can be another human being or an organization. Verse 53 of the Sura The Repentance contrasts how a human being can spend his money with full assent and willingly or unwillingly and under compulsion. Verse 73 of the Sura Ta-Ha describes how the Pharaoh had forced the sorcerers to practice magic and they were reluctant as shown by their turning away from him solely because of their faith in the Lord of Moses. These verses demonstrate that there are both coercions to be rejected and to be permitted, as in the Sura The Repentance, where the hypocrites were forced to donate money to raise an army of Muslims against their will, and they had to submit to the authority of the society that they were considered to be members of despite their lack of any emotional allegiance to it. One of the most notable coercions to be rejected is coercion in the name of religion, as verse 106 of the Sura The Bees shows: ‘…. except under compulsion, his heart remaining firm in Faith….’, because God left all freedom to the human being without forcing him in matters of religion. As evidence, verse 99 of the Sura Jonah describes how the God clearly rebuked the Messenger (ṣ) to teach him that there is no coercion in religion: ‘will you then compel mankind, against their will, to believe!’ 122

Chapter Three: There is No Force in Islam

This verse demonstrates unequivocally that religious freedom is granted to all people regardless of their religious communities, in that God Almighty rebuked the Prophet (ṣ) because he wanted all people to be believers in him, that is, to be followers of his religious community. This, however, is impossible since religious freedom is available to everyone and every human being has the right to join the religious community he wants since all religious communities are part of [A 125] Islam. The Almighty God wants to be worshipped and praised by all religious communities as long as there is faith in Him and the righteous deed that has the goal of drawing close to the Exalted God. This represents the peak of religious tolerance and the awareness of the vastness of the religion of Islam, so that each religious community accepts the other religious communities as they are as long as they believe in God and draw close to Him, as the word of God suggests: ‘…Did not Allah check one set of people by means of another, there would surely have been pulled down monasteries, churches, synagogues, and mosques, in which the name of Allah is commemorated in abundant measure.…’ (The Pilgrimage 22:40) Since the Almighty God is commemorated in the churches, synagogues, mosques, and other houses of God, no religious community has the right to force someone from another religious community to convert: the religion of Islam is vast enough for everyone. As long as force in religion is rejected totally, with no room for discussion, the utterances of forbidding, prescription, and proscription concerned with all the human values are not grounds for coercion at all in the Book of God. The following are some of the proscriptions and prescriptions that appear in the Book: you are ordered, it is prescribed to you, spy not, do not come near, do not speak ill, do not insult, do not commit suicide. In these prescriptions and proscriptions, what is prohibited and what is proscribed, that is, the negative particle [lām] of prohibition, forbidding, and command in the revelation is not an instrument of force. If we took every element of religion in Islam, we would not find force in any of these elements. One gains entry to Islam in regard to creed through faith in God and the Last Day, and faith cannot be forced. One gains entry to Islam in terms of conduct by acting in accordance with human values, and these acts cannot be forced, whether we are talking 123

Islam and Humanity: Consequences of a Contemporary Reading

about refraining from violating the taboos or observing the proscriptions and prescriptions. Even religious rituals are free of every kind of force, since being led to religion, whether in the aspect of creed or conduct (the righteous deed) is voluntary. In verse 256 of the Sura The Cow, Almighty God announced that there is no force in religion. The verse contains God’s direct address to the human being, where He makes clear that he does not exert force on the human being in matters of religion, in words that take the form [A 126] of a divine announcement: ‘Let there be no compulsion in religion: truth stands out clear from error: whoever rejects evil [yakfur biʾl-ṭāghūt] and believes in Allah has grasped the most trustworthy hand-hold….’ The lām appearing in this declaration is the lām of negation negating the genus of force in religion. It is not the lām of proscription since it denies any existence to force in religion, that is, matters of religion absolutely preclude the use of force. The verse shows clearly the equivalence of faith in God and rejecting evil, that is, that whoever rejects evil and believes in God “has grasped the most trustworthy hand-hold.” We already know that faith in God, that is, faith assenting to Him and to the Last Day, and adhering with full willingness to the righteous deed, which includes avoiding the taboos and adhering to the prescriptions and proscriptions, is the content of the religion of Islam regardless of its religious communities. Now we must learn what is the evil opposed to faith assenting to God so that we can comprehend the difference between them. The Arabic term translated as evil in this verse is the noun ṭāghūt, and it is derived from the verb ṭaghā, whose meaning is to transgress the limit in disobedience. Nouns of this form express a prolonged and repeated activity, and so ṭāghūt means to persist in disobedience. However, how does God use this word in this verse? He is referring to those who persist in a lack of respect for the freedoms of the people that He called for in his Book by exerting force against them. A ṭāghūt is someone who goes to extremes in using power to oppress others and force them to submit to his power and will and put them under his command. He can only accomplish this by enslaving people and stealing their freedom. However, why does the Book of God refer 124

Chapter Three: There is No Force in Islam

to freedom with the expression “the most trustworthy hand-hold” rather the straightforward term “freedom”? The verse that includes the phrase “the most trustworthy hand-hold” holds the answer. This symbolism in referring to freedom has its direct reason in the history of humankind, which the verse makes clear when it connects freedom with faith in God and rejecting evil. For the junction of those two is what establishes “the most trustworthy hand-hold” or freedom, to speak more clearly. Tāghūt is a changing state through time and place, and the method of rejecting or rebelling [A 127] against it also changes depending on time and place, and on the beliefs and levels of societies. Therefore, the concept of freedom was defined by its contrary in different eras because freedom also takes different forms depending on time and place. In the authoritative revelation, we find that the term freedom is not mentioned explicitly except in defining the kind of tyranny that is its contrary. For example, when freedom was mentioned as the contrary of slavery, as in the word of God: ‘Allah will not call you to account for what is futile in your oaths, but He will call you to account for your deliberate oaths: for expiation, feed ten indigent persons, on a scale of the average for the food of your families; or clothe them; or give a slave his freedom….’ (The Table Spread 5:89). For slavery [ʿubūdiya or riqq] is built on an unequal relation between two parties, and it is the result of wars, raids, and internal struggles. However, once we become acquainted with it, slavery is entirely like a law of war since each side takes captives from the defeated side to enslave them or possess them like slaves. Therefore, the meanings we give to freedom in the 21st century differs from the meanings it had in ancient times, and similarly the meanings of evil [ṭāghūt] differs from the meanings it had in ancient times. However, there is still a common factor between the ancient and modern which is that in every time and place evil [ṭāghūt] goes to extremes in using its power to oppress others, force them to submit to its power and will, and put them under its command, and it can only do this by stealing their freedom. Thus, rejecting and refusing evil is connected to the faith of the human being in the freedom that is a sign of humanity. For the human being was not created with his will robbed but he was created with the whole of his freedom in the state of nature, and with 125

Islam and Humanity: Consequences of a Contemporary Reading

his free will capable of following the straight path in life and to realizing his humanity whatever his religious community since all religious communities that believe and assent to God are included in the religion of Islam. Therefore, the willingness to be led to the religion of Islam is a purely individual matter, whatever one’s religious community. The question of religion remains a private relation between the human being and his Lord and it is characterized by choice from knowledge, understanding, and personal commitment free of force from any evil [ṭāghūt] whatsoever, and thus the Almighty God says: ‘So set you your face steadily [A 128] and truly to the faith: (establish) Allah’s handiwork according to the pattern on which He has made mankind….’ (The Romans 30:30). In other words, religion is part of the human being’s nature and it enables him to recognize the unity of God and to become convinced of it through pondering the sovereignty of God and himself. He also recognizes the criterion for the human values he was shaped from out of love of the good to build a civilized society, by voluntary obedience to it with full freedom in a spirit of high responsibility. God created people as worshippers to worship Him with their full freedom. Evil [ṭāghūt], on the other hand, wants to render them eternal slaves to it by force. Any authority that takes its legitimacy from religion is considered a tyrannical authority. This is the difference between faith in God in freedom and following evil [ṭāghūt] by force, and thus we need to understand the difference between being worshippers of God and being slaves to evil [ṭāghūt].

2—Freedom is the Foundation of Worship According to the dictionary, the plural of ʿabd is both ʿibād [worshippers] and ʿabīd [slaves]. Therefore, the dictionary classifies the term ʿabd as an auto-antonym because it possesses two opposite meanings, obedience and rejection. The characteristic of opposition in the term ʿabd places us before the first difference between the meaning of ʿabd al-riqq [slave] and the meaning of ʿabd allah [worshipper of God], for ʿabd al-riqq is his coerced 126

Chapter Three: There is No Force in Islam

obedience to his master since he has no right to disobey, and his submission to his master is by force and he has no choice whether to accept or reject obedience. The plural of ʿabd al-riqq is ʿabīd al-riqq. On the other hand, ʿabd allah bears the two opposed meanings together, that is, the freedom of obeying or disobeying God with full choice in responsible freedom. The plural of ʿabd allah is ʿibād allah. Let us look at how these terms are used in some verses from the word of God: —‘“He is the irresistible, (watching) from above over His worshippers [ʿibādihi]; and He is the Wise, acquainted with all things.”’ (The Cattle 6:18) —‘Tell My servants [ʿibādī] that I am indeed the Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful’ (The Rocky Tract 15:49). [A 129] —‘Say: “O my Servants [ʿibādī] who have transgressed against their souls! Despair not of the Mercy of Allah….’ (The Groups 39:53) —‘Speak to my servants [ʿibādī] who have believed, that they may establish regular prayers, and spend (in charity) out of the sustenance we have given them, secretly and openly….’ (Abraham 14:31) In verse 18 of the Sura The Cattle, the Almighty, Exalted God speaks of the worshippers of God, that is, His worshippers in general. In verse 49 of the Sura The Rocky Tract and verse 53 of the Sura The Groups, God is talking about his disobedient worshippers. In verse 31 of the Sura Abraham, he addresses his worshippers who believe in him and obey him. In summary, we can state that when the Almighty God in His authoritative book mentions the worshippers [‘ibād or ʿābidūn, an alternative plural), He means both the disobedient and the obedient, both those rejecting and those submitting. Many of the verses make this clear, like the word of God: —‘Those who had been arrogant will say: “We are all in this (fire)! Truly, Allah has judged between (His) servants [ʿibād]!”’ (The Forgiver God 40:48) —‘And tall (and stately) palm-trees, with shoots of fruit-stalks, piled one over another; as sustenance for (Allah’s) servants [ʿibād] ….’ (Qaf 50:10–11) For the worshipper [ʿabd allah] is a human being who can choose and who faces divine prescriptions that he can obey or disobey. If he obeys he is an obedient worshipper. If he disobeys, he is a disobedient worshipper. However, he can never escape from being a worshipper of God, whether 127

Islam and Humanity: Consequences of a Contemporary Reading

in obedience or in disobedience. Thus, God commands his worshippers to obedience and to worship him, as in the word of God: —‘I have only created jinns and men, that they may serve Me [yaʿbudūnī].’ (The Wind that Scatter 51:56) —‘Indeed Allah is my Lord and your Lord: Him therefore serve [ʿabudūhu] you: this is a way that is straight.’ (Mary 19:36) Each of these verses, and many others, contains the verb corresponding to the verbal noun ʿibāda (worship or devotion), with the meaning of obeying or submitting to commands, where disobedience remains possible. The messengers of God came to advocate for the worship of the Exalted God, in accordance with the word of God: ‘Before thee, also, the messengers We sent were but men, to whom We granted inspiration: If you realize this not, ask of those who possess the message.’ (The Prophets 21:7) And these [A 130] messengers themselves did not depart in their obedience to the prescriptions of God from being worshippers who guide disobedient worshippers to the straight path by the command of God, as in the word of God: —‘(This is) a recital of the Mercy of your Lord to His servant Zakariya. Behold! he cried to his Lord in secret’ (Mary 19:3). —‘Have patience at what they say, and remember our servant David, the man of strength: for he ever turned (to Allah).’ (Ṣad 38:17) —‘To David We gave Solomon (for a son), How excellent in Our service! Ever did he turn (to Us)!’ (Ṣad 38:30) —‘Commemorate Our Servant Job. Behold he cried to his Lord….”’ (Ṣad 38:41) —‘And commemorate Our Servants Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, possessors of power and vision.’ (Ṣad 38:45) —‘Glory to (Allah) Who did take His servant for a journey by night from the Sacred Mosque to the farthest mosque….’ (The Night Journey 17:1) It was logical that when the messengers called their peoples to the service of God and to obey His prescriptions and cease from His proscriptions, that they would be asked: How do we worship God? What are the prescriptions and proscriptions that we must submit to and approach with humility to perform the service requested from us? We return to the Book of God to search for the answer: 128

Chapter Three: There is No Force in Islam

—‘Thee do we worship, and Thine aid we seek. Show us the straight way,’ (The Opening 1:5–6) —‘“And that you should worship Me, (for that) this was the straight way?’ (Ya Seen 36:61) —‘And indeed those who believe not in the Hereafter are deviating from that way.’ (The Believers 23:74) —‘“And squat not on every road, breathing threats, hindering from the path of Allah those who believe in Him, and seeking in it something crooked….’ (The Heights 7:86) We can bring together these verses with what we said previously when discussing the righteous deed by stating that the straight path is the way and path to God, and that walking along it and in it is worship with the meaning of the worship of God [ʿibādiya], that is, by choice and satisfaction. The straight path represents the commandments, that is, the human values that began with Noah, accumulated in the hands of the prophets and messengers, and were completed by Mohammed (ṣ), as in the word of God: [A 131] ‘Indeed, this is My way, leading straight: follow it: follow not (other) paths: they will scatter you about from His (great) path: thus does He command you that you may be righteous.’ (The Cattle 6:153) The taboos and divine prescriptions and proscriptions represent the straight path, and had accumulated during history. However, there are important questions that might occur to anyone: if the term ʿibād (worshippers) is derived from the term ʿibāda (worship), as we had explained previously, and if its singular is ʿabd, as we said, and it is not connected to the topic of slavery at all, then who are the slaves [ʿabīd] and slave girls [imāʾ] mentioned in the Book of God? Let us begin by pointing out that the term ʿibād (worshippers) in the authoritative revelation does not only include males, but also females. That is clear in the Book of God: —‘…but Allah never wishes injustice to his servants.’ (The Forgiver God 40:31) —‘“If You do punish them, they are Your servant: If You do forgive them, You art the Exalted in power, the Wise.”’ (The Table Spread 5:118) —‘(Iblis) said: “O my Lord! because you have put me in the wrong, I will make (wrong) fair-seeming to them on the earth, and I will put them all in 129

Islam and Humanity: Consequences of a Contemporary Reading

the wrong, except Your servants among them, sincere and purified (by Your Grace).”’ (The Rocky Tract 15:39–40) —‘…and enough is your Lord to note and see the sins of His servants.’ (The Night Journey 17:17) Provided that we do not forget what we said before, that the ʿibād (worshippers) in all of these verses include the disobedient and the obedient, and both males and females indistinguishably, we ask one more time: Where is the slavery [riqq and ʿubūdiyya], then, in the Book of God? If we return to the texts of the Book, we find riqq and ʿabd discussed in only one verse, in the word of God: ‘Allah sets forth the Parable (of two men: one) a slave [riqq] under the dominion of another; He has no power of any sort; and (the other) a man on whom We have bestowed goodly favors from Ourselves, and he spends thereof (freely), privately and publicly: are the two equal? (By no means;) praise be to Allah. But most of them understand not.’ (The Bees 16:75) God describes the slave in the verse as having no power whatever, that he has lost his ability to choose between yes and no. Then He compares the slave to someone He has provided for and who spends from that provision, that is, who possesses power over what has been provided him, and possesses the freedom in how he spends on the ends he chooses. This confirms that God created the worshippers free and that slavery [riqq and ʿubūdiya] is a product of people. [A 132] Therefore, we understand that the authoritative revelation did not establish slavery [riqq and ‘ubūdiya], and did not recognize it, as it pleases some to imagine. We have seen that the authoritative revelation makes the plural of ʿabd ʿibād, and we have seen that it refers with that to males and females, the obedient and disobedient. How does the revelation make the plural of ʿabd (the slave), male and female? The revelation itself answers the question: the plural is ʿabīd. The term ʿabīd (the plural of male slave and female slave) appears five times in the Book of God, so let us look at each of those times in succession: —‘Allah has heard the taunt of those who say: “Truly, Allah is indigent and we are rich!” We shall certainly record their word and (their act) of slaying 130

Chapter Three: There is No Force in Islam

the prophets in defiance of right, and We shall say: “Taste the penalty of the scorching fire! This is because of the (unrighteous deeds) which your hands sent on before you: For Allah never harms those who serve Him [ʿabīd].”’ (The Family of Imran 3:181–182) —‘(Disdainfully) bending his side, in order to lead (men) astray from the path of Allah: for him there is disgrace in this life, and on the Day of Judgment We shall make him taste the penalty of burning (fire). (It will be said): “This is because of the deeds which your hands sent forth, for indeed Allah is not unjust to His servants [ʿabīd].’ (The Pilgrimage 22:9–10) —‘We certainly gave Moses the Book aforetime: but disputes arose therein. Had it not been for a Word that went forth before from your Lord, (their differences) would have been settled between them: but they remained in suspicious disquieting doubt thereon. Whoever works righteousness benefits his own soul; whoever works evil, it is against his own soul: nor is your Lord ever unjust (in the least) to His servants [ʿabīd]’ (Explained in Detail 41:46–47) —‘He will say: “Dispute not with each other in My Presence: I had already in advance sent you warning. “The Word changes not before Me, and I do not the least injustice to my Servants [ʿabīd].”’ (Qaf 50:28–29) When we compare the four verses in succession, we find the following: 1–—Taste the penalty of the scorching fire→God never harms those who serve Him 2—Taste the penalty of burning fire→God is not unjust to His servants 3—Whoever works righteousness benefits his own soul and whoever works evil, it is against his soul→Nor is your Lord ever unjust (in the least) to his servants 4—The word changes not before me→ I do not the least injustice to my servants [A 133] The first thing that we notice when we arrange the verses thematically is that they discuss the Day of Judgement, Day of Resurrection, and the stage after death, and we understand in the light of these considerations the following matters: 1—People are the servants of God in this world, the slaves of God in the next world. 131

Islam and Humanity: Consequences of a Contemporary Reading

2—The human being loses with his death the capacity to choose and he becomes a slave to God, having no power whatever (on that day, he is the property of God) 3—There is no worship on the Day of the Resurrection, and, consequently, on the Day of Judgment people are not worshippers but slaves, for worship is demanded from worshippers in this world. 4—In this world, there is freedom of choice between obedience and disobedience. In the next world, there is only mobilization without any room for freedom, as the word of God indicates: —‘That Day the drive will be (all) to your Lord!’ (The Resurrection 75:30) —‘The unbelievers will be led to Hell in crowd….’ (The Groups 39:71) —‘And those who feared their Lord will be led to the garden in crowds….’ (The Groups 39:73) 5—The Day of Resurrection is the Day of Judgement ‘Whoever works righteousness benefits his own soul; whoever works evil, it is against his own soul….’ (Explained in Detail 41:46) On that day there are neither obligations nor commands that must be obeyed or disobeyed, and there is neither prayer nor fasting. The preceding implies that the worshippers are capable of choosing between obedience and disobedience in this life only. In the next world, everyone is a slave, including the obedient and disobedient, because no one will have any power at all on that day, and they will need nothing but a fair trial. The verses reassure them as to God’s absolute justness, Who does not cheat the slaves before Him of a speck of what they accomplished of the righteous deed by their free choice when they were worshippers and before they became slaves. Starting from this difference between the two matters, we are able to compare what God says about the worshippers in this world—‘… but Allah never wishes injustice to his servants [ʿibād]’ (The Forgiver God 40:31)—and what he says about the slaves in the next world—‘“For Allah never harms those who serve Him [ʿabīd].”’ (The Family of Imran 3:182 and The Spoils of War 8:51) We can infer that the judgment and trial on the Day of Judgement count only the deeds of the worshippers who were free and choosing entirely according to their wills, [A 134] when they were 132

Chapter Three: There is No Force in Islam

not powerless slaves. Otherwise the trial lacks meaning, as the word of God indicates: ‘Those who had been arrogant will say: “We are all in this (fire)! Truly, Allah has judged between (his) servants [ʿibād]!”’ (The Forgiver God 40:48). At the moment of the trial, they are slaves with no power whatever because this life is the realm of deeds and the next world is the realm of requital, and on the day of the trial and judgement the people are transformed from worshippers to slaves, and each soul gets what he has earned. They will find what they did present, the judgement will be issued, and all will be led to where God has decided: those who disbelieved to Hell, those who feared God to Paradise. After that, those in Paradise are transformed from slaves to worshippers, but without commands and obligations. How the authoritative revelation describes the people of Paradise makes this entirely clear: —‘If you could see, when the angels take the souls of the unbelievers (at death), (how) they smite their faces and their backs, (saying): “Taste the penalty of the blazing fire because of (the deeds) which your (own) hands sent forth; for Allah is never unjust to His servants’ (The Spoils of War 8:50–51). —‘A fountain where the devotees of Allah do drink, making it flow in unstinted abundance.’ (Man 76:6) —‘(Every) fruit (enjoyment) will be there for them; they shall have whatever they call for’ (Ya Seen 36:57). —‘There will be for them therein all that they wish, and more besides in Our Presence.’ (Qaf 50:35) These verses show that after the trial those in Hell will remain slaves, as in verse 51 of The Sura The Spoils of War—”Because of (the deeds) which your (own) hands sent forth; for Allah is never unjust to His servants’— because they come to succumb to torture by force, and those in Paradise wake up as worshippers, that is, taking delight in what they want in Paradise. Nevertheless, the freedom of Paradise differs from freedom in this world. For freedom in this world is connected to being called to account concerning the acts undertaken. But there is no accountability in Paradise since there are no obligations, prescriptions, or proscriptions that must be practiced and obeyed. 133

Islam and Humanity: Consequences of a Contemporary Reading

What concerns us in this topic of conversation is freedom in this life, and the preceding has demonstrated that freedom, that is, freedom of choice, is a great blessing that God has bestowed on the human being, [A 135] and that no one has the right to strip it from him, and that God demanded from the people that they worship Him alone, and that they are worshippers of Him alone. If they choose disobedience, they disobey Him, and if they choose obedience with all their will, they obey Him, but in both cases, they are His worshippers. Adam began by expressing his worship of God by disobeying Him not by obeying Him. Therefore, the prophets and messengers first and foremost established the unity of God, and the absence of any kind of partner to the God who granted us this freedom by nature, obedience and disobedience. In that case, we will have personified God in others, and that is a violation of God’s unity [shirk]. If we say that Zaid granted life to the people, we will have personified God in Zaid; if we say that ʿUmar granted freedom to the people, we will have personified God in ʿUmar, describing them with what belongs to the Exalted God. Therefore, in the word of God: ‘Allah forgives not that partners should be set up with Him; but He forgives anything else, to whom He pleases….’ (The Women 4:48) Slavery in this life means serving someone other than God, so that the people become enslaved and powerless. God describes those in this condition as the dissolute: they lose the ability to say “absolutely not,” and can only say “yes.” They lose their dignity and their freedom, in the word of God about the Pharaoh: ‘Thus did he make fools of his people, and they obeyed him: truly were they a people rebellious (against Allah).’ (The Gold Adornment 43:54) This is characteristic of evil [ṭāghūt], despotic regimes, during history. For even when they change in form, they retain the same content. They force the people to obey them by force, stealing all their freedom and human rights. The believer in God, on the other hand, believes in his humanity, from which he derives his power to confront and revolt against evil. Thanks to this resistance, he achieves the goal for which God created him. Freedom, then, is conduct, whether in the act or speech that the human being undertakes to demonstrate his humanity, by choosing a course of advanced human life by behaving according to human values. For the firm hand-hold that will 134

Chapter Three: There is No Force in Islam

never break or the conjunction of faith in God and the rejection of evil are embodied in human conduct, not in imagination or feelings, and freedom emerges and appears in [A 136] ways of conduct, since the human being is able with his free will to follow the straight way. Freedom, then, is the conduct with which the human being can demonstrate his refusal to submit to the pressures exerted on him to steal his humanity, and this by his refusal to submit to the despot [ṭāghin] and his despotism [ṭughyān] and to impede him. For freedom is one of the highest human values, and it is constitutive of the human. It is his means to refuse all kinds of submission and enthrallment and contains the full scope of his humanity. People differ as the conduct and decisions they engage and make with full will differ. The word of God shows that the source of these differences is human freedom: ‘If your Lord had so willed, He could have made mankind one people: but they will not cease to dispute. Except those on whom your Lord has bestowed His mercy: and for this did He create them….” (Hud 11:118–119) The verses demonstrate that freedom of choice and the submission of the human being voluntarily to his choices generate differences between people, which is why the verse says ‘they will not cease to dispute.’ In other words, as long as they are free, differences will continue to exist, and this is not only natural but also generates creative innovation. According to the verse, if God wanted, he could have induced the same behavior in everyone, and this could only happen through force. However, God did not want that, and, thus, He gave the human being the full range of his freedom and asked of him that he submit to the religion voluntarily and with full choice. Thus, reward and punishment are the results of the choices of the human being, for reward and punishment presuppose freedom, which is considered the word of God that preceded the peoples of the earth, as in the word of God: ‘Mankind was but one nation, but differed (later). Had it not been for a word that went forth before from your Lord, their differences would have been settled between them.’ ( Jonah 10:19) The word of God had made them free, which produced the differences among them in choices, opinions, conceptions and perceptions of things, and ways of thinking. Thus, He said in verse 119 of the Sura Hud, ‘and for this did He create them,’ that 135

Islam and Humanity: Consequences of a Contemporary Reading

is, He created them in order that they enjoy all of their freedom and differ as a result of that in order to achieve their humanity. [A 137]

3—Types of Despotism that the Human Being Must Confront Freedom of choice leads to the variation that generates development in societies. We must begin with the soul since the human being is the fundamental factor in the development of societies. Moreover, the process of development of the soul begins with a change in the way it thinks about reform, because human thinking is the creator and producer of cultural development. Thus, the human being must strive to develop his level to achieve the cultural development advocated by all the divine messengerhoods. However, there may be many obstacles surrounding the human being in his society and prevent him from changing his way of thinking and developing himself. Consequently, they prevent him from achieving the desired development of his society. These obstacles that he faces and that block him from the benefits of development differ according to differences of their kind but all of them fall under the concept of despotism. We will explicate them until we understand how they are able to obstruct the development of the human being, and consequently, steal his humanity without his awareness and make him a slave to them by making him submit to their conditions. The human being cannot regain his stolen humanity except by confronting them and recovering his freedom and his worship of God alone.

A—Dogmatic Despotism Dogmatic despotism is the conviction that the acts of the human being, along with his financial status and length of life, have been preordained since eternity. We must radically reject this for the following reasons. The Exalted God did not destine since eternity that Zaid is wealthy or that ʿUmar is poor. While God has known since eternity that the concepts of wealth and poverty are contraries, who will be rich and who will be poor is 136

Chapter Three: There is No Force in Islam

not preordained, but rather depends on the will of the human being who acts within the laws of the Lord of the Worlds (people throughout history of humanity). For good and evil are present and within the reach of the will of the human being, and they are made concrete in the goals of his acts. Absolute divine justice lies in the creation and thus [A 138] all acts in the human constitution are obedient to it, both the good and the evil, and it is the human being himself who subjects the acts to this or that, by means of his human conscience. The first thing we must change in ourselves is our conviction that God has preordained fortune and misfortune, wealth and poverty, and the length or shortness of life for someone since eternity. Instead, He composes general moral laws that people are entirely free to follow, and within which reward, punishment, and responsibility occur. For the placement of the human being in front of one possibility implies a kind of force and this is inconsistent with the principle of freedom of choice. Thus, all possibilities are granted to human being in accordance with this principle, and, consequently, the injustice and oppression that besets a human being is not preordained since eternity. Whoever oppresses or colonizes us does so by his personal will and free choice, for injustice and justice are both represented in the knowledge of God. Therefore, we can overcome what is in us of complexes and hold others accountable, and not allow anyone to oppress us, starve us, cause our deaths, and humiliate us.

B—Social Despotism Social despotism combines the power of society with the power that customs and traditions impose on its individuals, and most of the time the human being is helpless before it and unable to refuse it despite its lacking the official authority to impose itself on him. However, the power of the existing society pushes him to practice it because the people accept it. The degrees of customs and traditions in society differ since there are family customs and tribal customs and then social customs in civil societies with different degrees of their development. 137

Islam and Humanity: Consequences of a Contemporary Reading

Most Arab societies possess established traditions that are stronger than religion, since those traditions sometimes encroach on religious teachings, and some traditions are transformed into a part of religion. Such tendencies generate [A 139] different kinds of religion, so that the religion of the East differs from the religion of North Africa. We observe these disparities among the colonies of believers in Mohammed (ṣ) in the countries of Europe and North and South America, where they differ in religious traditions but are unified in religious rituals. The religious rituals are influenced by the principle of the infallibility of forefathers, in the word of God: ‘When it is said to them: “Come to what Allah has revealed; come to the Messenger”: They say: “Enough for us are the ways we found our fathers following.” What! even though their fathers were void of knowledge and guidance?’ (The Table Spread 5:104) This principle is the belief that the ijtihād and opinions of one’s forefathers are always absolutely right to the point of attributing sanctity to them. Such an apotheosis leads to paralysis, with the dismissal and attack on all attempts at renewal, calls for revision, and criticisms of the legacy of the forefathers. This ancient and recurring phenomenon was at the top of the list of issues that the prophets and messengers were burdened with encountering, and it is a phenomenon that remains an impediment to all the re-newers and reformers who are walking in the right way and finding their steps. There has been no prophet or messenger whose people did not resist him with the plea that he had brought them unfamiliar deeds and speech out of their fear that he would debase the legacy of their fathers. There are numerous verses that picture this struggle between the call for reform and pull of the forefathers, in the word of God: —‘Just in the same way, whenever We sent a warner before you to any people, the wealthy ones among them said: “We found our fathers following a certain religion, and we will certainly follow in their footsteps.” He said: “What! Even if I brought you better guidance than that which you found your fathers following?” They said: “For us, we deny that you (prophets) are sent (on a mission at all).”’ (The Gold Adornment 43:23–24) —‘They said: “Have you come to us to turn us away from the ways we found 138

Chapter Three: There is No Force in Islam

our fathers following in order that you and your brother may have greatness in the land? But not we shall believe in you!”’ ( Jonah 10:78) The two verses disparage this principle because it incites attacks on everyone who tries to criticize it, so that the fanaticism sometimes became tragedy when it acquired the stamp of violence and bloody struggle between rival fanaticisms. Therefore, we find that those struck by the illness of the infallibility of the forefathers promote it as true because it entirely governs their minds and takes control of them. [A 140] The Arab mind was sated with this principle until it became a prisoner of it, so that its only concern was to preserve its image in society, until the image itself became the determinant of behavior in society, and the mind’s only anxiety was to prevent distortion of the image by any means until it was sometimes drawn to conduct and behavior that fully violated logic so that it could preserve its image in society. This image is transformed into a statue that every individual produces for himself and makes his relationship with the individuals of the society by means of it so that he absolutely rejects changing it or even someone criticizing it in any way. Therefore, the Arab mind must destroy this statue within which it imprisons itself and liberate itself from this deference to forefathers in its customs and traditions until it is able to depart into the vast space of thinking and earn its intellectual freedom so that it can feel the appeal of liberation and a greater trust in itself.

C—Intellectual Despotism Tens of verses appear in the Book of God that prompt understanding and thinking, for example, when the Almighty urges the observing of the earth and how it originated, in the word of God: ‘Say: “Travel through the earth and see how Allah did originate creation; so will Allah produce a later creation: for Allah has power over all thing.’ (The Spider 29:20) For if it had been impossible for people to observe the earth and travel through it to know the beginning of creation, God would not have commanded them. The Europeans applied this verse and continue to put it into operation until 139

Islam and Humanity: Consequences of a Contemporary Reading

today, and so they have achieved an understanding of how the world began by inventing many kinds of equipment to assist them in gaining knowledge and in the tremendous development of science and medicine. We, on the other hand, have neglected putting the verse into operation, and have been satisfied with looking at the books of our forefathers, making them our source for understanding the beginning of creation. We have rejected the astounding progress scientists have made, neglecting the verse as if it did not concern us. This intellectual despotism, and the feeling of inferiority pervading our societies, diminished [A 141] every area of life. The student delegates thinking about himself to his teacher until the educational aspect of the educational and instructional curriculum hardens into blind tradition and the instructional aspect declines to the teacher dictating to the student. Tests become an exercise in rote memorization, not of the understanding of information and how to engage with it, and the foundation of instruction, the instruction of the human being in how to think—since he who can think can also innovate—is ignored. We have been struck with the disease of intellectual laziness under the patronage of that kind of despotism, and we have become those who delegate thinking about ourselves to others, accepting what they say without discussion. For what matters to us is who is speaking, not what he says. Our inherited way of thinking is built on trust in tradition, not intellectual argument.

D—Scientific Despotism Let us look at the word of God: —‘Man We did create from a quintessence (of clay); Then We placed him as (a drop of ) sperm in a place of rest, firmly fixed; Then We made the sperm into a clot of congealed blood; then of that clot We made a (fetus) lump; then we made out of that lump bones and clothed the bones with flesh; then we developed out of it another creature. So blessed be Allah, the best to create!’ (The Believers 23:12–14) —‘See you not that Allah sends down rain from the sky, and leads it through springs in the earth? Then He causes to grow, therewith, produce of various 140

Chapter Three: There is No Force in Islam

colors: then it withers; you will see it grow yellow; then He makes it dry up and crumble away. Truly, in this, is a message of remembrance to men of understanding.’ (The Groups 39:21) We ask ourselves what the believers (the followers of the religious community of Mohammed) wrote about these different verses during the last fourteen centuries: (1) We do not find in the books of our heritage a discussion of the verses about the creation of the human being except for a few pages featuring much scientific speculation, although any embryologist would consider it a complete picture of the development of the fetus in the womb of the mother, and accept it as objective scientific truth. If we reviewed what was written on this topic in Europe and America [A 142] during the last half of the 20th century and the beginning of the 21st century, we would find hundreds of volumes full of information that is useful and necessary for the development of embryology and the practice of medicine derived from it. (2) The verse concerning the springs and the crops in the Sura The Groups is concerned with two of the more important and more complicated sciences, the science of groundwater (hydrology) and the science of the origin and development of plants (botany). The books in our heritage only spare these topics a few pages, and most of that is mistaken. On the other hand, there are hundreds of volumes on these two sciences written in the 20th and 21st centuries in the West, all of which are useful and necessary for the development of these two sciences. It should be clear to us that we have fallen far behind in science, and that the root of that backwardness is found in a scientific despotism that has allowed our heritage to disfigure our understanding of the Book of God. As succeeding generations pass in this condition, they are struck by the disease of utter ignorance and lose the faculty of intellectual interrogation and thinking, for the sciences require thinking and intellectual interrogation and these have been lost for many centuries in our history, and with it Arab thinking has withdrawn and slept. Therefore, we need to take another look at the extent of the suitability of the tools of knowledge in use among us as new cognitive tools in the 141

Islam and Humanity: Consequences of a Contemporary Reading

21st century, which will enable us to truly understand the texts of the Book of God so that we can rely on them to establish contemporary thinking that is consistent with new scientific developments. This is the major battle that the coming generations must plunge into, for the secret of intellectual progress lies in this point itself, that is, with the necessity of introducing the contemporary tools of knowledge into the understanding of the Book of God, in order to renew the Arab mind’s way of thinking. This is a goal that deserves sacrifices.

E—Political Despotism In the Book of God, the Pharaoh functions as an epithet and not as a proper noun for a certain person. It refers [A 143] to political despotism and autocracy, which have the following components: the arrogation of sovereignty and the arrogation of divinity. If we apply these components to the present age, we find that they are abundant in the leader who thinks he is eternal, beyond criticism and correction, and that everything takes place under his protection in the following two aspects: (1) The arrogation of sovereignty, in the word of God: ‘“…I am your Lord, Most High”’ (Those Who Pull Out 79:24). Another example, in the word of God: ‘“…O my people! Does not the dominion of Egypt belong to me, (witness) these streams flowing underneath my (palace)? What! see you not then?”’ (The Gold Adornment 43:51). In both verses, he claims for himself the characteristics of sovereignty, which we find here in the word of God: ‘Truly strong is the Grip (and Power) of your Lord. It is He Who creates from the very beginning, and He can restore (life). And He is the Oft-Forgiving, Full of Loving-Kindness, Lord of the Throne of Glory, Doer (without let) of all that He intends.’ (The Big Stars 85:16) (2) The arrogation of divinity, in the word of God: ‘Pharaoh said: “O chiefs! I know not that you have a god other than me…’ (The Stories 28:38). Here the Pharaoh claimed the characteristic of God which appears here in the word of God: ‘how clearly He sees, how finely He hears (everything)! 142

Chapter Three: There is No Force in Islam

They have no protector other than Him; nor does He share His Command with any person whatsoever.’ (The Cave 18:26) The divine ruler begins with the claim that the whole country is his personal possession, and he behaves on this basis: ‘“…Does not the dominion of Egypt belong to me….”’ (The Gold Adornment 43:51). Then he shifts to behaving on the basis that the people are also his possession, as a step to the second claim, the claim of divinity, which is peculiar to the understanding: “O chiefs! I know not that you have a god other than me…’ (The Stories 28:38) Finally, he arrives at the claim proper only to God: ‘He cannot be questioned for His acts, but they will be questioned (for theirs).’ (The Prophets 21:23). Divinity includes total obedience from the people to the Pharaoh: they do nothing for their personal satisfaction without his prior permission, as the Pharaoh said to the sorcerers: ‘“…Believe you in Him before I give you permission?...”’ (The Heights 7:123). As a consequence, he inflicts a penalty upon them: ‘“Be sure I will cut off your hands and your feet on apposite sides, and I will cause you all to die on the cross.”’ (The Heights 7:124) He punishes them not because they believed in the Lord of Moses and Aaron, but because they believed before he gives them permission. This is what the dictator does when pressure intensifies [A 144] on him to undertake reforms in society, and he does this by giving permission to an opposition to exist if it keeps to the conditions he composes, according to constitution that he composes according to his will and measure, so that the despotic ruler shifts to tyranny and execution when the rebellion reaches him, as in the word of God: ‘Now, when he came to them in Truth, from Us, they said, “Slay the sons of those who believe with him, and keep alive their females,” but the plots of unbelievers (end) in nothing but errors (and delusions)!... Said Pharaoh: “Leave me to slay Moses; and let him call on his Lord! What I fear is lest he should change your religion, or lest he should cause mischief to appear in the land!”’ (The Forgiver God 40:26) We cannot be silent in the face of this kind of despotism, for it despises the freedom and dignity of the human being, and obstructs his gaining his right and legitimate freedom, and it makes him submit to it by force to impose its control over him. 143

Islam and Humanity: Consequences of a Contemporary Reading

F—Economic Despotism Economic despotism was exemplified in the personality of Qarun, as the Exalted God described him: ‘…he acted insolently towards them: such were the treasures We had bestowed on him that their very keys would have been a burden to a body of strong men….’ (The Stories 28:76) The phenomenon of Qarun (economic despotism) has neither homeland nor nationality, so that while Qarun was from the people of Moses, this did not prevent him from treating them despotically. This is a characteristic of international monopolistic companies, whether they are multinationals or are limited to one nation. The phenomenon of Qarun has no relation to the national wealth (the national bourgeoisie) that played a positive role in the development of society and its economy. The best example of the phenomenon of Qarun is the oil, computer, automobile, and mining monopolies. They do not have homelands but are multinationals that place states and their institutions in their service. Thus, the phenomenon of Qarun must be understood so that we can resist its despotism, for example, those American-Japanese and American-European banks and companies that practically rule the world, both inside and outside their countries of origin. The distinction between religion and despotism in all its types is that religion intervenes in the [A 145] life of peoples by means of their desires, while despotism intervenes by force, preventing people from enjoying their human rights. The connection of religion to the personal life of individuals falls under worship only, not slavery, that is, it falls under their personal freedom and their complete choice, not under force. Religion is, similarly, the sole possessor of the right to intervene in their life through the totality of their will and desire. No other party has the right to intervene in it. In this way, the human conscience becomes the director who takes the lead in human affairs and its officer for its total choice with a responsible will, by undertaking the righteous deed and liberation from the chains of dependency (slavery), whether the latter concerns instincts, appetites or any kind of pressures and immoral temptations, by asserting its rejection of them because they are incompatible with human values. Whenever the human being chooses voluntarily to adhere 144

Chapter Three: There is No Force in Islam

to the religion of Islam, regardless of the religious community that he is a member of, he adheres purely to his will in following human values and his personal freedom is manifest in undertaking the righteous deed by which he lives out his humanity, including what he loves of goodness and righteousness. Freedom is expressed positively by means of the righteous deed that contains the good of humanity, which includes noble values which are the peak of humanity and which the human being aspires to rise to in his deeds. For the freedom of the human being must be embodied in the undertaking of the righteous deed that is considered a sign of human freedom.

4—The Guilt Complex The religion of Islam is characterized by mercy and inclusion and it is manifested in how people treat each other by means of absolute human values that are not subject to sale no matter the seller’s rank. These values do not need to be imposed on the human being by force; the human being does not need someone to force them on him or compel their exercise because they are the pure essence of his humanity. The high human essence contains what motivates him to undertake the righteous deed, and he [A 146] feels that with satisfaction for himself and his behavior. This positive feeling stirs him to advance in his life affirmatively, for he is satisfied with himself, on the one hand, and helpful to others, on the other hand, and this is the psychological happiness that every man hopes to attain. Nevertheless, sometimes the human being behaves in a way that violates human values, which is followed by a feeling of having sinned [dhanb] or remorse. Sometimes the feeling of the guilt leads him to the point of living in difficult psychological conditions, which lead him to the point of depression or perhaps push him to commit improper deeds as a result of his unsettled psychological condition because of the feeling of guilt. Thus, we need to understand the meaning of sin in the Book of God, and what is the difference between it and evil [sayyiʾ], and understand the treatment that the Book of God offers us for that kind of condition so that we can live in harmony with ourselves and our societies 145

Islam and Humanity: Consequences of a Contemporary Reading

and continue to live affirmatively despite the mistakes and errors that we might make. The term dhanb (sin) and its derivatives appeared 39 times in the Book of God. In 18 of those occurrences, it is paired with the term for forgiveness of sin. The term sayyiʿ (evil) and its derivatives appeared 60 times in the authoritative revelation. In 15 of those occurrences it is paired with the covering (in the sense of atonement) of an evil deed or evil deeds. It is worth noting that the term for sin is never paired with term for covering and the term for evil is never paired with the term for forgiveness. In this verse from the Book of God, we can see sin paired with forgiveness and evil paired with covering:‘….Our Lord! Forgive us our sins, cover our evil deeds and take to Yourself our souls in the company of the righteous.’ (The Family of Imran 3:193, revision by translator). Next, we will turn to the explication of sin and evil, as we understand them in the authoritative revelation, beginning with sin and forgiveness.

A—Sin and Forgiveness Dhanb or sin has two meanings, the first is “cutting off ” [jurm]and the second is “the tail” or “what comes last.” The word dhanb in the texts of the of the Book of God bore both meanings together, so that we saw [A 147] earlier that jurm is cutting off the relationship with God in a final manner, from conviction and with intention. It is the opposite of Islam. However, dhanb or sin does not mean cutting off the relationship with God finally and with intention but it is, rather, committing an act which contains disobedience, that is, cutting off the relationship with God unintentionally. In other words, the sinner is not a criminal, for the criminal cuts off his relationship with God out of conviction and finally. The sinner does not believe in God and does not respect human values intentionally but transgresses them intentionally. However, the sinner commits an act that degrades his relationship with God. If the human being commits a shameful act that God forbids, he does not cut off his relationship with God irrevocably like the criminal, for the sinner does not intend that but by committing disobedience he degrades his 146

Chapter Three: There is No Force in Islam

relationship with God. Therefore, we say that conduct that infringes on the taboos of God and his prescriptions and proscriptions are sins [dhunūb]. Sayyiʿ or the evil deed means to do something evil with the meaning of shamefulness [qubḥ], so that we say that men are evil, that is, shameful [qabīḥ]. The evil deed [sayyiʿ] is from offense [isāʿa] and it is an act that is not good, as appears in the word of God: ‘If any one does a righteous deed, it ensures to the benefit of his own soul; if he does evil [asāʿa], it works against (his own soul). In the end will you (all) be brought back to your Lord.’ (Crouching 45:15) However, the Almighty God is not affected by the good deed or the evil deed, as in the word of God: ‘If you did well, you did well for yourselves; if you did evil, (ye did it) against yourselves….’ (The Night Journey 17:7) He is, rather, worshipped in obedience and disobedience so that He is disobeyed by the committing of sin against His Exalted Right by the violation of His taboos and proscriptions. Thus, we must understand that while there is no evil deed without sin, there is sin without an evil deed. The first case is exemplified in carrying out forbidden behavior against any of the other creatures such as men and animals, and it is the degrading of the relationship of man with God, on the one hand, and committing an evil deed against the right of another creature, on the other hand, like the violating of the taboo of trespassing against truth or reason, like theft. The second case, sin without the evil deed, is exemplified in violating one of the taboos of God, that is, doing something that disobeys His right without infringing other creatures and their rights, like violating the unity of God, eating dead meat, and so on. Therefore, the sin committed against the right of God is capable of being forgiven, as in the word of God: ‘Say: “O my worshippers who have transgressed against their souls! Despair not of the mercy of Allah: [A 148] for Allah forgives all sins: for He is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful.’ (The Groups 39:53, revised by translator) We had explained earlier that the word “my worshippers” appearing in the verse comprises all the worshippers of God, the obedient and the disobedient (when they repent), and we understand in the light of that that the Exalted God informs us that almost every sin that we commit against Him can be forgiven, as the word of God shows: ‘Who 147

Islam and Humanity: Consequences of a Contemporary Reading

forgives sin, accepts repentance, is strict in punishment, and has a long reach (in all things)….’ (The Forgiver God 40:3) The one exception, the sin that cannot be forgiven, is the violation of God’s unity [shirk], as in the word of God: ‘Allah forgives not that partners should be set up with Him; but He forgives anything else, to whom He pleases….’ (The Women 4:48 & 116) With this meaning, the Almighty God addressed his noble Messenger (ṣ), saying: ‘Indeed We have granted you a manifest victory: That Allah may forgive you your faults of the past and those to follow….’ (The Victory 48:1–2) It is clear from this verse that God forgave His noble Messenger in advance for the sins that he committed later, that is, those that occurred after the revelation of the verse, and it is also clear and just that He meant only the sins between Him and Messenger, excluding evil deeds directed against the rights of others. For when the noble Prophet (ṣ) did evil to Ibn Maktūm by turning away from him, God revealed to him a Sura of rebuke, and it is the Sura He Frowned. God rebuked His Prophet (ṣ) in it for the evil deed he committed against the right of the blind man. This leads us to the second state, and it is the state that pairs sin with doing evil, and we must clarify it because of its importance in the relations between people.

B—The Evil Deed and its Covering We said that the evil deed takes place between the human being and other creatures, rational or irrational, perhaps when one human being commits evil against another human being, and perhaps when the human being commits evil against another creature in nature (torturing domestic animals, cutting down forests, polluting the water, etc.). Committing an evil deed against God, on the other hand, is preposterous. If Zayd cheats ‘Umar, then he does evil to him, and commits an evil deed against his right, which continues until the effects of the deed are remedied. The evil deed, then, has two parts: one part is related to God and one part is related to others. The part related to God is exemplified in violating [A 149] one of the taboos or proscriptions, and the remedy for that part of the evil deed is its covering, in the word of God: ‘…that they avert Evil with Good, and that they spend (in charity) 148

Chapter Three: There is No Force in Islam

out of what We have given them.’ (The Stories 28:54) In other words, it is covered because it is considered a sin against the right of God, and covering [takfir] is derived from the verb kaffar, which means “to knowingly cover,” and we can understand “covering” by means of the following examples: If someone wants to import automobiles from Japan, the first thing he must do after signing a contract with the manufacturer that includes the specifications, quantities, and schedule of delivery is to obtain credit at the bank and inform the manufacturer of that. Then it will send the car that was ordered and go to the bank to collect its money. The bank gives the buyer cover, stands as his guarantor before the manufacturer, and undertakes the delivery of the company’s claims against him. This is precisely the meaning of the word of God:‘.…It will remove [yukaffaru] from you some of your (stains of ) evil….’ (The Cow 2:271) To cover our evil deeds, God matches them against our good deeds, that is, our good deeds cover our bad deeds. However, this covering only takes place in the Next World, that is the Day of Judgement. Just as the first question the judge asks the defendant before him in court is “do you acknowledge your sins?” so no one enters hell on the Day of Resurrection before confessing his sins, as appears in the word of God: ‘They will then confess their sins: but far will be (forgiveness) from the companions of the blazing fire!’ (Dominion 67:11) In other words, covering the sins of a human being takes place on the Day of Resurrection, where God balances good deeds against evil deeds, though not one for one. For God rewards a good deed ten times over but punishes a bad deed only once, as in the word of God: ‘He that does good shall have ten times as much to his credit: He that does evil shall only be recompensed according to his evil: no wrong shall be done unto (any of ) them.’ (The Cattle 6:160) If Almighty God covers the sins and evil deeds of a human being on the Day of Resurrection, how is it handled in this world? The undeniable truth is that the life of human society in this world is built on laws and legislations that guarantee to the people their rights, and, consequently, if a human being inflicts [A 150] evil on another human being, the laws are what judge between them according to the type of evil deed, such as false witness, for example. However, there are kinds of evil deeds which do 149

Islam and Humanity: Consequences of a Contemporary Reading

not receive legal punishments, such as slander, for example. It suffices for this kind of offense that the offending human makes an apology to the person he has offended, and it is up to the offended person to accept the apology, as in the word of God: ‘The recompense for an injury is an injury equal thereto (in degree): but if a person forgives and makes reconciliation, his reward is due from Allah: for (Allah) loves not those who do wrong.’ (Consultation 42:40) Repentance to God does not suffice without making an apology to those we have wronged, and if we can follow the apology with the doing of a good deed to the wronged person, all the better, since in the word of the Almighty God: ‘….For those things that are good remove those that are evil: Be that the word of remembrance to those who remember (their Lord).’ (Hud 11:114) Now we must turn to the meaning of khaṭīʿa (fault) in the Book of God and the difference between it and sin and so that we can understand why sin but not fault can be covered by God. We said earlier that sin was unintentional and, therefore, the human being feels the complex of guilt since the human conscience rejects and disapproves of the act. Here emerges the role of repentance that covers the sin of the human being because his repentance implies his acknowledging of his deed with full courage before God and the people and, consequently, his rejecting it and striving not to repeat it. Good deeds cover bad deeds when the human being repents of the bad deeds. If he does not repent his sin or evil deed but persists in them then the two are transformed to fault [khaṭīʿa], and therefore the meaning of fault is the committing of a sin or evil deed and persisting in it. We find the same meaning of fault in the word of God: —‘No, those who seek gain in evil, and are girt round by their sins [khaṭīʿā], they are companions of the Fire: Therein shall they abide (forever).’ (The Cow 2:81) —‘But if any one earns a fault [khaṭīʿa] or a sin and throws it on to one that is innocent, he carries (on himself ) (both) a falsehood and a flagrant sin.’ (The Women 4:112) Joseph’s brothers plotted against him persistently, and they said the following: [A 151] 150

Chapter Three: There is No Force in Islam

—‘They said: “By Allah! indeed has Allah preferred you above us, and we certainly have been guilty of sin [khāṭiīna]!”’ ( Joseph 12:91) —‘They said: “O our father! ask for us forgiveness for our sins [dhunūbina], for we were truly at fault (khāṭiīna].”’ ( Joseph 12:97) We observe here how they follow their phrase “our sins” [dhunūbina] with the phrase “we are at fault” [khāṭiīna], that is, they did evil to Joseph consciously and with premeditation, and have not repented or attempted to remedy their conduct, and, thus, they are truly at fault. Those who commit a sin or evil deed with persistence without repentance or remedying their behavior will have their punishment, as in the word of God: “Nor has he any food except the corruption from the washing of wounds, which none do eat but those in sin.” (The Inevitable 69:36–37) This was the case with the people around Noah, who persisted in resisting him, denying him, and arguing with him: ‘Because of their sins they were drowned (in the flood), and were made to enter the Fire (of punishment):’ (Noah 71:25) Although khataʿ (unintentional error) shares a linguistic root with khaṭīʿa, it means a sin or evil deed that is not on purpose, as in the word of God: —‘ But there is no blame on you if you make a mistake [akhtāʿ] therein: (what counts is) the intention of your hearts: and Allah is Oft-Returning, Most Merciful.’ (The Combined Forces 33:5) —‘“Our Lord! Condemn us not if we forget or fall into error [akhtāʿ]’ (The Cow 2: 286). —‘Never should a believer kill a believer; but (if it so happens) by mistake [khati]’ (The Women 4:92). —‘….enter the gate with humility, in posture and in words, and We shall forgive you your faults (khatayā] ….” (The Cow 2:58) The faults [khaṭīʿā] are sins and evil deeds done with persistence and without repentance. Errors [khatayā] are sins followed by repentance and remedy. Khatayā has this meaning in the story of Pharaoh and the sorcerers. They believed in the divinity and sovereignty out of greed for his rewards, but once they confronted Moses and witnessed what they witnessed, they confessed that they were wrong and that Moses was right, and believed instead in the Lord of Moses and Aaron, saying: 151

Islam and Humanity: Consequences of a Contemporary Reading

—‘“For us, we have believed in our Lord: may He forgive us our faults [khatayānā] ….’ (Ta Ha 20:73) —‘“Only, our desire is that our Lord will forgive us our faults [khatayānā], that we may become foremost among the believers!”’ (The Poets 26:51) [A 152] This matches these words of God—‘Your Lord has inscribed for Himself (the rule of ) mercy: indeed, if any of you did evil in ignorance, and thereafter repented, and amend (his conduct), lo! He is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful.’ (The Cattle 6:54)—and—‘Of no effect is the repentance of those who continue to do evil, until death faces one of them, and he says, “Now have I repented indeed”’ (The Women 4:18). Thus, the law that “good deeds remove evil deeds” is open to those who abandon their errors [khatayā] and then follow the evil deed with a good deed with the sincere intention of repentance to God. It is not, however, open to those who persist in committing faults.

C—Good Deeds Remove Bad Deeds Doing a good deed is mentioned in the word of God: ‘No, whoever submits His whole self to Allah and is a doer of good, he will get his reward with his Lord….’ (The Cow 2:112) What is the good deed and how do we understand the word of God “he is a doer of good”? Since doing good is the opposite of doing evil, it has dialectical relation with it. What is demanded of the human being in his life is that his good acts outweigh his evil acts. While doing good may benefit oneself and other creatures, it does not benefit God. As we mentioned earlier, He is too mighty, great, awesome, and perfect to receive harms or benefits through someone’s acts. We, as conscious and responsible human beings, must treat every other element of existence according to the principle of doing good not evil. We must do good to all people, following evil with good to annul it, and our standpoint towards others and how we approach them depend upon whether they are doing good, benefiting others, and acting righteously towards them, not according to their appearance, their wealth or status. The doctor is accountable for doing good in his work, and likewise the lawyer, 152

Chapter Three: There is No Force in Islam

teacher, worker, farmer, etc. Since the possibilities of doing good are vast, we will mention only a few examples: (1) Doing good to the nation-state: This is manifested in protectiveness of and love for the nation-state, and striving to promote its reputation in front of foreigners, and its industry, agriculture, and borders, and thwarting those who attack it. [A 153] (2) Doing good to others, that is, the human being doing good to his brother human being regardless of his religious community. There are many practical ways to do good for those who want to, for example, the rich who want to do good to the poor. The human being can do good to others in any way he sees possible to do good, like those who volunteer to do charitable deeds or those who make contributions, no matter which kind. (3) Doing good to place: this is manifested in keeping a place clean and tidy, like the place of work, the place of residence, and consequently, neighborhoods, streets, and cities. (4) Doing good to animals: By, for example, treating them with kindness, and not doing evil to them. We can even do good in slaughtering them by using a sharp knife, and so kindness to animals falls under the category of doing good. (5) Doing good to plants: By, for example, caring for trees or forests and not eradicating them for the sake of expanding residential development, and protecting their cleanliness and the cleanliness of the running water from which they draw sustenance. (6) Doing good to nature in general: This is a trend in all populated continents, where concerns are directed to pollution in its different forms and types: whether it affects water, air, or the earth. And fighting pollution necessarily falls under the category of doing good. (7) Doing good to the self: This has two parts, one dedicated to the body, that is, maintaining health and adhering to the principles of preventive medicine, treatment and care in the case of illness, and care for neatness and clothes and the trimming of hair and nails, all of which make the human being acceptable in society. The second part is dedicated to the self as a soul, and this is individual godliness, and it concerns pious deeds that remove evil deeds and increase the human being’s credit with the Lord of the Worlds 153

Islam and Humanity: Consequences of a Contemporary Reading

(people throughout history of humanity). And it includes the performing of religious rites (prayer, fasting, regular charity, and pilgrimage). These, as we said, are examples of doing good, that the word of God abbreviates as “he is a doer of good” [wa-huwa muḥsin] [A 154] and which includes every type of worldly activity that falls under the rubric of the righteous deed. And our attention to good deeds in this word never implies that we have forgotten the Next World, for this world is just a farm for the Next World. If this world did not exist there would be no Next World, no balance, no judgement, and no reward and punishment. If we understand this, it gives flavor and meaning to this life, and we gain the ability to share in creating a human society and to make history. We must pay attention to the description ‘a doer of good’ [wa-huwa muḥsin] which appears in verse 112 of the Sura The Cow— ‘Indeed, whoever submits his whole self to Allah and is a doer of good [wa-huwa muḥsin], He will get his reward with his Lord….’ —and in verse 125 of the Sura The Women—‘Who can be better in religion than one who submits his whole self to Allah, does good [wa-huwa muḥsin], and follows the way of Abraham the true in Faith? For Allah did take Abraham for a friend.’ (The Women 4:125) The verse from the Sura The Cow instructs us that reward in the Next World is tied to doing good in this world, and that this world is really the farm for the Next World. We plant our good deeds in this world and we harvest our rewards with God in the Next World. When the recording of good deeds and rewards with God was individual, He spoke with a formulation in the singular: ‘He will get his reward with his Lord.’ When He spoke with a formulation in the plural—‘on them shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve’ (The Cow 2:38)—it refers to all doers of good in the Next World, and that doing good in this world does not imply the loss of the Next World and its sale. The verse from the Sura The Woman speaks about ‘one who submits his whole self to Allah,’ which indicates that it is referring to any religious community regardless of its orientation when: The human submits his whole self to God in it + he is a doer of good = an acceptable religious community.

154

Chapter Three: There is No Force in Islam

For religion in all its communities is what the human being professes of ethical and civil principles, and it is manifested in the doing of good that affects the human being and society, and this is the meaning of Islam, the one divine religion that began with Noah and culminated in Mohammed (ṣ). Doing good in production, for example, is holding to the relevant manufacturing specifications, in the word of God: ‘So establish weight with justice and fall not short in the balance.’ (The Most Gracious 55:9) These specifications change and develop with scientific and technological progress, and thus the specifications of a good automobile in the first decade of the 21st century differ from the specifications of a good automobile in the [A 155] last decade of the 20th century. Consequently, we can understand that if we apply the old specifications to the balance of today, we are not doing good and we have not comprehended the word of God, “he is a doer of good,” because doing good is linked with the curvature [ḥanīfiyya] in Islam, and this considers the change of place and time for the development and change in the meaning of doing good. Among the divine mercies is that good deeds remove evil deeds, and this opens the door to everyone to repent and it gives everyone who sinned or did evil a chance to reverse the matter, erasing an evil deed with a good deed, and the sin or evil it caused: ‘Say: “O my Servants who have transgressed against their souls! Despair not of the Mercy of Allah: for Allah forgives all sins: for He is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful.’ (The Groups 39:53) For God in His far-reaching mercy knows that the human being may make an error or sin or do evil to another, but if he did not act intentionally he will feel regret. Since the feeling of regret is lethal unless the matter is remedied to the point of satisfaction, God makes the opportunity always available for the human being to remove the sins and evil deeds he has committed. On this basis, we can say with full conviction that Paradise is wider than the Fire, since God’s mercy is wider than all other things: ‘….He said: “With My punishment I visit whom I will; but My mercy extends to all things….”’ (The Heights 7:156) Divine justice requires that there are more residents in Paradise than in the Fire. For a more intuitive picture, imagine that the residents of Paradise are the residents of the Earth, and the people of the 155

Islam and Humanity: Consequences of a Contemporary Reading

Fire are all those in prison. The earth has a land surface of approximately 150 million square kilometers but its prisons cover only a tiny part of that. The matter is similar in relation to Paradise and the Fire, since the Book of God describes Paradise as having the width of heaven and earth: ‘Be you foremost (in seeking) forgiveness from your Lord, and a garden (of bliss), the width [ʿarḍ] whereof is as the width [ʿarḍ] of heaven and earth, prepared for those who believe in Allah and His messengers: that is the Grace of Allah, which He bestows on whom he pleases: and Allah is the Lord of Grace abounding.’ (The Iron 57:21) The term ʿarḍ here does not “measure” but has the [A 156] meaning of “exhibition,” that is, that Paradise one day will be exhibited before us just as the heavens and earth are exhibited before us. As for Hell, God said about it: ‘One Day We will ask Hell, “Are you filled to the full?” It will say, “Are there any more (to come)?”’ (Qaf 50:30) This verse makes the very important point that Hell will be only partially full, which suggests that the surface area of Hell is limited compared to the surface area of Paradise, as the surface area of prisons is limited compared to that of the whole earth. This verse also suggests that despite the limited area of the Hell, God heard complaints that there were too few guests: “Are there any more (to come)?” All of this makes clear that on the Day of Resurrection the people of Paradise will far outnumber the people of the Fire, for God’s far-reaching mercy requires this. Consequently, the human being need not despair of the mercy of his Lord, as the word of God says: ‘He said: “And who despairs of the mercy of his Lord, but such as go astray?”’ (The Rocky Tract 15:56) Here we must raise an important question: If the mercy of God includes all things, and it is God Almighty Who dispenses forgiveness or torture by his hand, and it is He who is the forgiver of the sins of His worshippers or is the torturer on the Day of Resurrection, while human legislation is what determines punishments when evil deeds are committed that harm others or society, do the people have the right to judge each other outside of the framework of laws? That is, do they have the right to remove the sins of another and to judge him?

156

Chapter Three: There is No Force in Islam

5—The Case of Covering God said in the Book of God: ‘Say: “O my Servants who have transgressed against their souls! Despair not of the Mercy of Allah: for Allah forgives all sins: for He is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful.’ (The Groups 39:53) However, he also said the following: ‘Allah forgives not (the sin of ) joining other gods with Him; but He forgives whom He pleases other sins than this: one who joins other gods with Allah, has strayed far, far away (from the right).’ (The Women 4:116) According to the first verse, all sins can be forgiven, but the second verse states that all sins except the violating the unity of God can be forgiven, for it is not forgivable. To remove the inconsistency produced by the two verses, [A 157] we need to understand the meaning of violating the unity of God as it appears in the Book of God.

A—The Meaning of the Violation of God’s Unity We find among the beautiful names of God the name “the Eternal” and this is a name exclusive to the Almighty God because no one else can be characterized by eternity except God since only He is eternal: ‘All that is on earth will perish: But will abide (forever) the face of your Lord, full of majesty, bounty and honor.’ (The Most Gracious 55:26–27) The Arabic term for violating the unity of God is shirk, and it has a root which means to “make something an equal partner of another thing.” In the authoritative revelation, shirk takes place when eternity is ascribed to a natural or social phenomenon, that is, when the adjective “eternal” is applied to any kind of phenomenon, or, in other words, when the law of change and extinction that applies to every phenomenon is ignored. There are two kinds of shirk: (1) Concealed shirk or the “shirk of sovereignty”: This is the ascribing of eternity to natural or social phenomena at a particular stage and believing in their immutability. This makes nature and social phenomena equal to God in eternity. (2) Open shirk or the “shirk of divinity”: For example, worshipping 157

Islam and Humanity: Consequences of a Contemporary Reading

idols and natural forms, deified individuals, or one’s own passions—‘See you such a one as takes for his god his own passion (or impulse)? Could you be a disposer of affairs for him?’ (The Criterion 25:43)—and believing that these can offer benefit or drive away evil. Having learned how shirk, violating God’s unity, results from the attributing of eternity to phenomena, we can learn how monotheism results from attributing change and extinction to phenomena by means of the parable that the Almighty God presents to us in the Sura The Cave: ‘Set forth to them the parable of two men: for one of them We provided two gardens of grape-vines and surrounded them with date palms; in between the two We placed corn-fields. Each of those gardens brought forth its produce, and failed not in the least therein: in the midst of them We caused a river to flow. (Abundant) was the produce this man had: he said to his companion, in the course of a mutual argument: “more wealth have I than you, and more honor and power in (my following of ) men.” He went into his garden in a state (of mind) unjust to his soul: He said, “I deem not that this will ever perish, [A 158] Nor do I deem that the hour (of judgment) will (ever) come: Even if I am brought back to my Lord, I shall surely find (there) something better in exchange.” His companion said to him, in the course of the argument with him: “Do you deny Him Who created you out of dust, then out of a sperm-drop, then fashioned you into a man? But (I think) for my part that He is Allah, My Lord, and none shall I associate with my Lord.”’ (The Cave 18:32–38) The symbolic dialogue between the two men in the verses describes the attitude of the first man when he thought that his gardens, farm, etc. were eternal, leading him to say: “I deem not that this will ever perish.” This led him to deny the Hour of Resurrection and the Last Day since the Hour of Resurrection and the bringing to life are a complete change in the state of the universe, which will then cease and on whose ruins a new universe will emerge, and therefore he said: “Nor do I deem that the Hour (of Judgment) will (ever) come.” Because this man thought there is no Day of Resurrection he strips all meaning from it, as in his words: “Even if I am brought back to my Lord, I shall surely find (there) something better in exchange.” For 158

Chapter Three: There is No Force in Islam

he was convinced that his possessions would last forever and considered the Day of Resurrection highly improbable, and that if it did occur, he was convinced that the Lord would only be more generous to him than He was in his earthly life. According to the divine parable above, when the second of the two men replied to his friend, he exhibited two attitudes: He accused him of kufr when he said: ‘His companion said to him, during the argument with him: “Do you deny Him Who created you out of dust, then out of a spermdrop, then fashioned you into a man?”’ For the attitude of the first man was kufr, and kufr means “covering,” that is, he covered and ignored the law of development, change, and cessation in the universe, although he knew that this law is objectively present since the second man had mentioned it to him when he said: “Do you deny Him Who created you out of dust, then out of a sperm-drop, then fashioned you into a man?” We will discuss the meaning of kufr later. Secondly, He accused him of violating the unity of God [shirk], in his words: “He is Allah, My Lord, and none shall I associate with my Lord.” Because the first man undertook the shirk of sovereignty, the second responded to him saying: “none shall I associate with my Lord.” Here we can say that whoever believes in the immutability of things like social phenomena and their lack of change and cessation exhibits the attitude of shirk towards the sovereignty of God and denies the law of change and development, while whoever worships idols and natural and social phenomena and individuals—whether rulers, [A 159] patrons, or jurisprudents after their death—is guilty of the shirk of divinity because the shirk of divinity results in obedience to all of those, while the shirk of sovereignty results in a false understanding of the universe and human life. Therefore, the Almighty God makes clear to us in the Book the unity sovereignty, saying in one place: ‘Say: “Shall I seek for (my) Cherisher other than Allah, when He is the Cherisher of all things (that exist)? Every soul draws the meed of its acts on none but itself: no bearer of burdens can bear of burdens can bear the burden of another. Your goal in the end is towards Allah: He will tell you the truth of the things wherein you disputed”’ (The Cattle 6:164). In a second place, He said: ‘Say: “Praise be to Allah, who 159

Islam and Humanity: Consequences of a Contemporary Reading

begets no son, and has no partner in (His) dominion: Nor (needs) He any to protect Him from humiliation: yes, magnify Him for His greatness and glory!”’ (The Night Journey 17:111) Modern science has established a law of destruction in nature that states that there is nothing permanent in things, societies, industries, inventions, and thoughts: everything in the universe is changing and will end in extinction because immutability belongs to God alone. Therefore, there is no absolute obedience but to the Exalted God, since He alone is eternal. Consequently, the religious rituals we have received represent the connection of the human being to his eternal, immutable Lord, and we say: “God is obeyed in the law He gave us because He is eternal and we are ephemeral.” To preserve change and diversity he made religious rituals differ across different religious communities, and likewise he composed laws of divine legislation by means of the principle of the curvature [ḥanīfiyya], which contains a theory of limits that every people of the earth in every time and place follows when exercising ijtihād. We can take away from the divine parable above the following two narrow points: First: That shirk, violating God’s unity, whether open or concealed, is connected with injustice, in the words of the first man in the parable: ‘He went into his garden in a state (of mind) unjust [ẓālim] to his soul: He said, “I deem not that this will ever perish’ (The Cave 18:35). Why, we might wonder, is shirk connected to injustice? The Arabic term ẓulm (injustice) means “to put something in an improper place unintentionally or from compulsion.” If we apply this meaning to what we read in the verse then we can conclude that since a Muslim should not do injustice to himself, he stays away from the two kinds of shirk (violating God’s unity), open and concealed. For the meaning of ẓulm here is [A 160] to fall into delusion, and, therefore, Almighty God demanded from us that we avoid doing injustice to ourselves by not falling into the delusion of shirk. In other words, we must comprehend that eternity is not manifested in things, social phenomena, and legislative laws, and accept that everything in the universe is subject to change and extinction, including human legislative laws and, consequently, the only 160

Chapter Three: There is No Force in Islam

immutable things that we have received from God are the religious rituals, the limits of the divine messengerhood, and human values, that is, the taboos in their enumeration, which form the “immutable” straight path. However, when a human being applies the divine limits in a particular time and place they become mutable, as are applications of human values, for humans are making the application. Second: The mushrik, the violator of God’s unity, does not describe himself as such: ‘He went into his garden in a state (of mind) unjust to his soul: He said, “I deem not that this will ever perish’ (The Cave 18:35). For shirk, violating God’s unity, is covert not overt, since there is no man or society of men that stated or is stating that it violates God’s unity. When it is demanded of the violator of God’s unity to have faith in development and change, he refuses and argues that this is the heritage of his ancestors: ‘No! they say: “We found our fathers following a certain religion, and we do guide ourselves by their footsteps.”’ (The Gold Adornment 43:22) The Arabs before Islam were violators of God’s unity in the aspect of divinity because they were worshipping idols after attributing to them an eternal character. Shirk played a covert role in their lives and conduct. They did not say or announce that they were violators of God’s unity but, to the contrary, they asserted publicly that their worship of idols brought them closer to God, even though they knew that the Exalted One was the Creator of everything: ‘If indeed you ask them who has created the heavens and the earth and subjected the sun and the moon (to his Law), they will certainly reply, “Allah”. How are they then deluded away (from the truth)?’ (The Spider 29:61) Therefore, God described them as violators of God’s unity, but whoever announced his violation of God’s unity overtly—by speech, act, or stance (hostile conduct)—became—in addition to a violator of God’s unity—an unbeliever [kāfir], as in the word of God: ‘It is not for such as join gods with Allah, to visit or maintain the mosques of Allah while they witness against their own souls to infidelity. The works of such bear no fruit: In Fire shall they dwell.’ (The Repentance 9:17) The verse makes clear that whenever [A 161] the violator of God’s unity expresses overtly and by stance his violation of God’s unity, he is described also as an unbeliever [kāfir], 161

Islam and Humanity: Consequences of a Contemporary Reading

for violation of God’s unity [shirk] reflects conviction and unbelief reflects public conduct.

B—The Meaning of Unbelief [kufr] The Arabic term kufr is derived from the verb kafar, which means “covering or veiling or denying the existing.” In other words, it means to deny something about which there was previous knowledge by means of a public stance. The verb kafar appears with this direct, tangible meaning in the word of God: ‘….Here is a similitude: How rain and the growth which it brings forth, delight (the hearts of ) the tillers [kufār]; soon it withers; you will see it grow yellow; then it becomes dry and crumbles away….’ (The Iron 57:20) The word kufār appears here with the meaning those agricultural laborers who plow the earth, sow it with seeds, and then cover and hide the seeds with soil with the previous knowledge of its essence and presence under the soil. Another example is when a journalist publishes an article in the newspaper against the authority, and the authority arrests him for that and puts him in prison. For by imprisoning him, it expresses its covering [kufr] of what was in the article he wrote, and, consequently, that it does not want the journalist to talk and it does not want the public to learn what he says. His stay in prison amounts to placing a veil between him and society to prevent his words from reaching the people who had previous knowledge. The authority puts prisoners of conscience in prisons so that it can cover their opinions, and prevent them from reaching the people. Consequently, by imprisoning them it puts a veil between them and the society. This is precisely the meaning of kufr. Kufr in its theological meaning, that is, in regard to God, is demonstrating a lack of assent to Him and a hostility to Him, and it is expressed overtly, not covertly, that is, by public conduct, speech or act, as we see in the word of God: ‘Yet do they worship, besides Allah, things that can neither profit them nor harm them: and the unbeliever [kāfir], is a helper (of Evil), against his own Lord!’ (The Criterion 25:55, revised) The unbeliever, thus, is he who turns his back on his Lord, that is, is a public 162

Chapter Three: There is No Force in Islam

enemy to Him, and that by his public announcement of his violation of God’s unity. While we find that violation of God’s unity [shirk] is covert and is conviction, we find that unbelief [kufr] is overt and is [A 162] hostile in conduct and attitude. For unbelief is something additional to violating God’s unity: the unbeliever is someone who announces his violating God’s unity in speech or act, as we see in the word of God: ‘…But those who reject faith turn away [muʾʿriḍūna] from that whereof they are warned.’ (The Curved Sand Hills 46:3) The term muʾʿriḍūna, “those who turn away” indicates that their unbelief here is equivalent to something overt, that is, public conduct in speech or deed because “turning away” is not just conviction but public conduct, as we see in the word of God: —‘But if you bring to them any sign, the unbelievers are sure to say, “You do nothing but talk vanities.”’ (The Romans 30:58) —‘The unbelievers say (in ridicule): “Shall we point out to you a man that will tell you, when you are all scattered to pieces in disintegration, that you shall (then be raised) in a new creation?’ (Sheba 34:7) —‘The unbelievers say: “We shall neither believe in this scripture nor in (any) that (came) before it….”’ (Sheba 34:31) —‘But the chiefs of the unbelievers among his people said: “We see (in) you nothing but a man like ourselves….’ (Hud 11:27, revised) —‘They do not believe who say: “Allah is Christ the son of Mary….”’ (The Table Spread 5:72) —‘They do not believe who say: Allah is one of three in a Trinity…’ (The Table Spread 5:73, revised) We observe in each of these verses that kufr (unbelief ) is equivalent to public conduct, and it is expressed in speech since we find in each verse the Arabic verb for “say.” The Almighty God shows to us the difference between the violation of God’s unity, which is covert, and unbelief, which is overt in his words: ‘they said: “We believe in Allah, the one Allah, and we reject [do not believe in] the partners we used to join with Him.”’ (The Forgiver God 40:84) Here “we reject” [do not believe in] means taking a public stance, as signaled by “they said.” 163

Islam and Humanity: Consequences of a Contemporary Reading

Since unbelief is overt, we cannot ascribe disbelief to any human being unless we determine the object of his disbelief, that is, what it is that he does not believe in. That requires that he personally announces the target of his disbelief, for example, if one of us stated “I do not believe in despotism, that is, I reject it,” or “I do not believe in injustice, that is, I reject it.” These examples concern humanity and society and have no connection to unbelief in God. I can say entirely clearly, “I do not believe in dictatorships” with the meaning that I announce my extreme hostility to it. [A 163] Thus, during wars, the two sides, or the hostile parties in the war, pelt each other with the term unbeliever, for each side is an unbeliever to the other since it shows hostility to the other, and that hostility has reached the point of employing violence. At the time of the mission of Mohammed, idols were worshipped and graven images held sacred, and monotheism destroyed them with the call of the Prophet (ṣ). Some of those who did not believe were called mushrikūn (violators of God’s unity) and some were called kāfirūn (unbelievers). The violators were those who did not believe in God but did not express this by hostile behavior, whether speech or stance, and the unbelievers were those who, in addition to their violation of God’s unity, also announced this by means of hostile behavior towards Him by means of speech or public conduct. The Almighty God made this distinction clear in his words: ‘It is never the wish of those without faith [kāfirūn] among the People of the Book, nor of the pagans [mushrikūn], that anything good should come down to you from your Lord. But Allah will choose for His special mercy whom He will, for Allah is Lord of grace abounding.’ (The Cow 2:105) The unbelievers demanded by means of their stance that the Messenger (ṣ) renounce his messengerhood and follow their beliefs instead, but the Almighty God said: ‘Therefore, listen not to the Unbelievers, but strive against them with the utmost strenuousness, with the (Qur’an).’ (The Criterion 25:52) God demanded from the Prophet (ṣ) not only that he refuse to obey them but that he strive against them because they were in an open war against him that observed the laws of war at that time, in his words: ‘O Prophet! strive hard against the unbelievers and the hypocrites, and be firm against them. Their abode is Hell, an evil refuge indeed.’ (The 164

Chapter Three: There is No Force in Islam

Repentance 9:73) The hypocrites fell under the same judgement as the unbelievers, that is, hypocrisy was apparent in their public behavior with the implication that their hypocrisy was also overt (displayed in their conduct and stance), and thus God Almighty demanded from him (ṣ) that he treat them as he treated the unbelievers in war. The distinction between the Dar Islam and the Dar Kuffar (the house of the unbelievers or the house of the enemy) emerged in the books of biography and Islamic history. This nomenclature is purely historical, and has no relation to religion. For the descriptions of the hypocrites, the violation of God’s unity, and the unbelief that appear in the stories of Mohammed concerned with the followers of Mohammed and their enemies apply to this period of history alone. For the Prophet (ṣ) and his followers were in a state [A 164] of war with others who attacked and waged war against them. Those allied with Mohammed (ṣ) called themselves the Muslims and called those who were hostile to him and waged war with him (ṣ) “the unbelievers,” although the authoritative revelation called Mohammed’s (ṣ) allies and followers during this period and after it the muʾminūn. The historical use of this nomenclature and these descriptions persisted even after his death (ṣ), although the verses in which the hostilities were mentioned are stories of Mohammed and are part of the Qur’anic stories. Thus, they fall under the rubric of historical narration like the other Qur’anic stories and are not part of the concluding messengerhood of Mohammed (ṣ), which is characterized with mercy. Therefore, we cannot infer any legal injunctions from their contents, and we cannot draw an analogy [qiyās] from them to apply to some other historical period in order to make legal injunctions or judgements on others by borrowing one of these descriptions or names.

C—God Alone has the Right to Punish the Unbelievers on the Day of Resurrection The idea of embodying God has persisted in the minds of people throughout history, but this was expressed in different times in different ways, ways related to the level of knowledge of the people. Messengers came to call 165

Islam and Humanity: Consequences of a Contemporary Reading

them to monotheism throughout history until in the time of Moses the first commandment was formulated in this way: “Do not create an image of me.” Embodying was rooted in the minds of people in that day, as appears in the word of God: ‘The people of Moses made, in his absence, out of their ornaments, the image of calf, (for worship): it seemed to low….’ (The Heights 7:148). In this verse, the Samaritan embodied the deity in the era of Moses in the image of a calf. However, this idea persisted among the people even after Moses called for monotheism. God dispatched Jesus Christ to help the people to transcend this idea: ‘And remember, Jesus, the son of Mary, said: “O Children of Israel! I am the messenger of Allah (sent) to you, confirming the Law (which came) before me, and giving glad tidings of a Messenger to come after me, whose name shall be Ahmad.” But when he came to them with clear signs, they said, “this is evident sorcery!”’ (The Row 61:6) For confirming the Law is a validation [A 165] of the call of messengers who preceded him, which is exemplified in monotheism: ‘“’It is Allah Who is my Lord and your Lord; then worship Him. This is a way that is straight.’”’ (The Family of Imran 3:51) Nevertheless, his call did not receive the reception for which he hoped: ‘When Jesus found unbelief on their part he said: “Who will be my helpers to (the work of ) Allah?” Said the disciples: “We are Allah’s helpers: We believe in Allah, and do you bear witness that we are Muslims.’ (The Family of Imran 3:52) After the era of Jesus, opinions about his nature multiplied, as to whether it was divine or human, and one or many, settling into three major divisions: (1) The first declared that Christ had one divine nature, and that he was god embodied. And this account is a continuation of the Samaritan embodiment in the era of Moses, advancing from the embodiment of God in a calf to His embodiment in Christ. (2) The second declared that Christ had two natures, one divine and one human. Some in this division gave the upper hand to his divine nature, and some to his human nature. (3) The third declared that Christ is human, and that he was a worshipper of God and his Messenger (ṣ), and His word that He bestowed on Mary, and that Mary is not the mother of God. 166

Chapter Three: There is No Force in Islam

The Book of God had narrated for us these differences and their connections to the idea of embodiment that had endured in the human thinking, whether in those who converted from the Sons of Israel to Christianity or those who remained in their religious community, in the word of God: —‘They are unbelievers who say: “Allah is Christ the son of Mary.” But said Christ: “O Children of Israel! worship Allah, my Lord and your Lord.” Whoever joins other gods with Allah, Allah will forbid him the garden, and the Fire will be his abode. There will for the wrong-doers be no one to help.’ (The Table Spread 5:72, revised by translator) —‘O People of the Book! Commit no excesses in your religion: Nor say of Allah anything but the truth. Christ Jesus the son of Mary was (no more than) a messenger of Allah, and His Word, which He bestowed on Mary, and a spirit proceeding from Him: so believe in Allah and His messengers. Say not “Trinity”: desist: it will be better for you: for Allah is one Allah: Glory be to Him: (far exalted is He) [A 166] above having a son. To Him belong all things in the heavens and on earth. And enough is Allah as a Disposer of affairs.’ (The Women 4:171) According to verse 72 of the Sura The Table Spread, those who declare that God is Christ, the son of Mary, are unbelievers. However, the verse stresses that Christ did not demand from them that they violate God’s unity: ‘….But said Christ: “O Children of Israel! worship Allah, my Lord and your Lord….”’ Moreover, he declared to them that those who violate God’s unity will be forbidden from the garden by God: ‘….Allah will forbid him the garden, and the Fire will be his abode. There will for the wrong-doers be no one to help.’ For Jesus never claimed to be a God and he was not embodied but he called them to the worship of God (the unification of divinity) and purifying the Exalted from embodiment. We believe that those who embody God are scarce on Earth. To understand verse 73 of the Sura The Table Spread, we must place it next to verse 30 of the Sura Repentance, which mentions that Christians called Christ the Son of God, and, consequently, Christ becomes the Son of God and the third element of the Trinity (God, Holy Spirit, Christ). The Almighty God declared in verse 73 of the Sura The Table Spread that such 167

Islam and Humanity: Consequences of a Contemporary Reading

an utterance is equivalent to unbelief, for it denies the oneness of God, as he confirms in his word: ‘for there is no god except One Allah.’ The remainder of the verse suggests that unless one ceases from making that utterance, he will be punished by God: ‘….indeed a grievous penalty will befall the unbelievers among them….’ We must pay attention to the difference between verses 72 and 73 of the Sura The Table Spread, as we find in the first verse that the Almighty God forbids those who embody God from Paradise, while in the second verse He is content to mention the grievous penalty for those who profess the Trinity. However, in this second verse, he adds another important explanation, that this penalty will only strike some of those who do not believe by professing the Trinity, not all of them. Thus, we must discuss again the difference between unbelief and violating God’s unity, for those who are convinced by the Trinity are violators of God’s unity but only become unbelievers if they express this in hostile conduct, in word or deed. According to verse 171 of the Sura The Woman, both all of those who believe in the embodying of God and those who believe in the Trinity commit excesses in their religion, and “to commit an excess” is to surpass the reasonable limit [A 167] in some matter, as in the word of God: ‘…O People of the Book! Commit no excesses in your religion….’ Both those who embody God and those who believe in the Trinity believe falsely, for Christ is only a messenger of God and His Word: ‘…Christ Jesus the son of Mary was (no more than) a messenger of Allah, and His Word, which He bestowed on Mary, and a spirit proceeding from Him….’ Both groups must recant their mistaken beliefs and then turn to faith in God and his Messenger (ṣ): ‘….so believe in Allah and His messengers. Say not “Trinity”: desist: it will be better for you….’ They are forbidden to say that there are three gods because both Jesus and the holy spirit are messengers, and as for God, He has no partner, as the verse continues: ‘….for Allah is one Allah: Glory be to Him: (far exalted is He) above having a son….’ However, it is worth noting that this verse, as opposed to the two earlier verses, contains a divine address that is much gentler than the address contained in the earlier two verses. There is no mention of the banishment 168

Chapter Three: There is No Force in Islam

from Paradise, as in verse 72 of the Sura The Table Spread, and there is no mention of the threat of a grievous penalty, as in verse 73 of the same Sura. The address has a calmer tone, ‘….it will be better for you….’ And it opens the room to repentance and seeking forgiveness to both parties, in the word of God: ‘Why turn they not to Allah, and seek His forgiveness? For Allah is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful.’ (The Table Spread 5:74) It suggests that banishment from Paradise, entry into the Fire, and the threat of grievous penalty are only reserved for those who persist in unbelief, in the word of God: ‘Those who reject Faith, and die rejecting, on them is Allah’s curse, and the curse of angels, and of all mankind’ (The Cow 2:161). Those who repent to God will find merciful forgiveness. For Almighty God gave the chance to both groups to return from their mistaken doctrine. This makes it clear that unbelief and violating God’s unity are not permanent qualities over time but they change with the change in the creed of the human being. Today’s unbeliever or violator of God’s unity may become a monotheist and thus will no longer be considered an unbeliever or violator of God’s unity. If we look around today, we will observe that humanity is much improved in regard to violating God’s unity and not believing in God. Therefore, we cannot help but laugh at those who destroy historical statues [A 168] like the Sphinx in Egypt out of fear that they will be worshipped, or those who believe that people in America offer sacrifices to the Statue of Liberty to flatter God. The people’s minds have moved away entirely from personification and embodiment across all the religious communities. Abstraction is now implanted in their minds, and their perceptions of the universe and its dimensions have become much wider, and their knowledge in understanding the verses of God has deepened. They are now far from the old blend of paganism and personification. All of this is what Abraham, the Father of the Muslims, left to us when we shifted from personification to abstraction: Peace be to Abraham. Summing up, the relationships of the religious communities to one another remain relationships that are stamped with mutual respect built on respect for the religious and intellectual freedom of each religious community. For the foundation in the relationships between people is the “knowing of 169

Islam and Humanity: Consequences of a Contemporary Reading

each other” in this word of God: ‘O mankind! We created you from a single (pair) of a male and a female, and made you into nations and tribes, that you may know each other (not that you may despise (each other). Indeed, the most honored of you in the sight of Allah is (he who is) the most righteous of you. And Allah has full knowledge and is well acquainted (with all things).’ (The Dwellings 49:13, italics from translator) Moreover, no one has the right to judge that someone else is a violator of God’s unity or an unbeliever unless he announced this himself. Moreover, even if he announced that he does not believe in God, and unless he used instruments of force and violence to force his ideology on others, no one has the right to punish him for that, and thus unbelief is a matter between him and his Lord. If he repents and seeks forgiveness, then he has used the divine chance granted to him to return to faith. If he does not do that, it is up to God to punish him if He desires or forgive him if He desires: ‘To Allah belongs all that is in the heavens and on earth. He forgives whom He pleases and punishes whom He pleases; but Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful.’ (The Family of Imran 3:129) The Almighty God left the door wide open for repentance and for the return to faith, and punishment and forgiveness for violating God’s unity or unbelief in God is exclusively a matter for God. Only the Exalted God has the right to this. For God alone knows the secrets thought and what is hidden in the soul, and He is the one who judges between the people on the Day of Resurrection: ‘Those who believe (in the Qur’an), those who follow the Jewish (scriptures), and the Sabians, Christians, Magians, and Polytheists, Allah will judge between them on the Day of Judgment: for Allah is witness of all things.’ (The Pilgrimage 22:17) However, if someone uses his unbelief ideologically [A 169] and imposes it on the people by force, as some political regimes do, and this presumes a society ruled by a dictatorial regime like that of the Soviet Union, then we must confront it, resist it, and respond to it on its own terms. Whoever practices violence under any ideological banner, even if it is in the name of religion, and forces the people to follow it, just as the terrorist organizations do that turn death into an institution in the name of religion, is exhibiting unbelief towards God and the human values that appear in Islam, the first 170

Chapter Three: There is No Force in Islam

of which is freedom. Resisting is a duty and an honor at the same time on the part of all humanity because despotic institutions use religion to camouflage themselves as they seek to reach their goals and schemes by violently subjecting people to their ideology. Religion is entirely free of this, but rather it commands us to stand in the face of this kind of despotism that wants to enslave the people despite the fact that God had created them free worshippers. No one, therefore, has the right to exert force on anyone in the name of God if the Almighty God Himself does not exert it. We still need to stress that when someone announces his hostility to some issue (for example, unbelief in God, we are free to deal with him with the same instruments: speech versus speech and caricature versus caricature. Nevertheless, expression through violence is rejected in every religious community since the freedom to express one’s view or its contrary is the best means to raise controversial issues between people and to analyze them, and it is the way that is civilized, moral, and legitimate both in regard to law and religion.

171

Chapter Four The Citizen and Loyalty to Islam

At present, the Arab world is living through a political scene whose expectations and outcomes are indefinite and unknown, and in which common and rising slogans reverberate, some of which defend nationalism and some of which advocate various religious and political leanings. This fusing and blend of concepts expresses the extent of the fusing of the borders of religious, sectarian, and ethnic membership with political membership (monarchical, republican, or constitutional) in these countries until the differences between the community and the nation-state are no longer possible to demarcate. These concepts, however, are not new to our culture, but as ancient as our historical existence. Thus, we need a careful reading of this topic directly from the texts of the Book of God to clarify and separate the various meanings of these terms in a way that leaves no room for uncertainty.

1—The Meaning of Community, People, and Nation These terms are used often in the daily life of our societies in different areas, sometimes with meanings that are fused or inconsistent. Thus, we need [A 172] to draw their meanings entirely from the texts of the Book of God until we have comprehended how they differ and identified the borders between them.

173

Islam and Humanity: Consequences of a Contemporary Reading

A—The Community The Arabic term umma was derived from the root umm (mother). This root has numerous meanings, and the meaning that concerns us here is concerned with collective human behavior, in the word of God: ‘And when he arrived at the watering (place) in Madyan, he found there a group [umma] of men watering (their flocks)….’ (The Stories 28:23, revised). The collective behavior that unites the community in the verse is watering the flocks. The plural term umam (communities) was used with the meaning of collective behavior for both people and animals, so that we find Almighty God apply it to animals in this word of God: ‘There is not an animal (that lives) on the earth, nor a being that flies on its wings, but (forms part of ) communities [umam] like you. Nothing have we omitted from the Book, and they (all) shall be gathered to their Lord in the end.’ (The Cattle 6:38) God also applied the term to groupings of more primitive humans, that is, those before Noah, groupings that were conscious, in the word of God: ‘Mankind was one single nation [umma], and Allah sent messengers with glad tidings and warnings; and with them He sent the Book in truth, to judge between people in matters wherein they differed; but the People of the Book, after the clear signs came to them, did not differ among themselves, except through selfish contumacy. Allah by His Grace guided the believers to the truth, concerning that wherein they differed. For Allah guided whom He will to a path that is straight.’ (The Cow 2:213) God used the term in an third way to apply to modern human groupings, in the word of God: ‘Let there arise out of you a band [umma] of people inviting to all that is good, enjoining what is right, and forbidding what is wrong: They are the ones to attain felicity.’ (The Family of Imran 3:104) Therefore a grouping, whether human or animal, with stable behavior is called an umma (community). We know that in the period before Noah and before the prophets the people were one community, but after that human groupings began to diverge, and the stage of difference in culture [A 173] and behavior emerged, and it was a stage in which ‘If your Lord had so willed, He could have made mankind one people [umma]: but they will not cease to dispute.’ (Hud 174

Chapter Four: The Citizen and Loyalty to Islam

11:118) This divergence between people in their behavior continued to our day, and it will continue until the end of history because of the development of knowledge, law, and customs. The differences between people in behavior arose because of the differences in consciousness, which led to the mission of the prophets, both preaching and giving warning, beginning with Noah. As they diverged further, God bestowed the prophets to them. This series of prophethoods and messengerhoods was reflected in the proclamations and legislations that they conveyed to all the people of the earth, and on their knowledge and moral values, and they became distinct communities because of the differences in their cultures and disparities in their development. Because of that, the term umma (community) flowed into the meaning of the conscious behavior of a human being, and this is what we call in our present era culture. Commencing from this meaning of umma (community), we find that the Exalted God made the community the basis of His demand that the people undertake common work and accept a common conviction, as in the word of God: ‘Let there arise out of you a band [umma] of people inviting to all that is good….’ (The Family of Imran 3:104) When He mentions historical development, it is in the context of the development of practices of worship, behavior, and law, the differences between them, the collapse of communities and the appearance of others, and the collapse of cultures and the appearance of other new cultures, as in the word of God: ‘That was a people [umma] that has passed away. They shall reap the fruit of what they did, and you of what you do! Of their merits there is no question in your case!’ (The Cow 2:134) And also in this word of God: ‘To every people is a term appointed: when their term is reached, not an hour can they cause delay, nor (an hour) can they advance (it in anticipation).’ (The Heights 7:34) The Exalted God never used the term umma to refer to an individual except with Abraham, because he was an exception to his nation in his behavior and all alone in his monotheism and truth to the Faith, and thus he became a nation by himself because of his singularity in conduct, as in the word of God: ‘Abraham was indeed a model [umma], devoutly obedient 175

Islam and Humanity: Consequences of a Contemporary Reading

to Allah, (and) true in Faith, and he joined not gods with Allah’ (The Bees 16:120). [A 174]

B—The Peoplehood In the Book of God, qaum (people) is a more advanced concept than community and represents a later stage of human development, in accordance with the following meanings: (1) A collection of people, as in the word of God: ‘And his people [qaum] came rushing towards him, and they had been long in the habit of practicing abominations. He said: “O my people! Here are my daughters: they are purer for you (if you marry)! Now fear Allah, and cover me not with shame about my guests! Is there not among you a single right-minded man?”’ (Hud 11:78) That the meaning of qaum in the verse means nothing more than a collection of men is shown by how the verse ends, “Is there not among you a single right-minded man?” (2) A group of rational people, males and females, in a particular social environment. For example, note how the term is used in this dialogue between God and Noah, in the word of God: ‘We sent Noah to his people [qaum] (with the command): “Do you warn your people [qaum] before there comes to them a grievous penalty.” He said: “O my people [qaum]! I am to you a Warner, clear and open’” (Noah 71:1–2). (3) A group of rational people with a common language (oneness of language), as God says: ‘We sent not a messenger except (to teach) in the language of his (own) people [qaum], in order to make (things) clear to them.’ (Abraham 14:4) Note that qaum is here defined by language, and the proclamation of the Prophet served the purposed of clarification, which is a function of language. The second and third meanings, that is, that qaum is a group of rational people with a common language (which God expressed in His Book by the term “tongue”) implies that people were one community [umma], then became different communities in their cultures, including different knowledge and laws. Since culture requires language, the people also became 176

Chapter Four: The Citizen and Loyalty to Islam

peoples (groups of people defined by a common language) as a result of their differences in culture. The concept of community preceded the concept of peoples in history since community in its first meaning is represented by instinctual animal behavior (the natural dispositions of animals), and only then developed into the concept of conscious rational behavior (the culture of a rational community), so that cultures diversified and, because of the difference in cultures, people became different communities. [A 175] However, they also differentiated because of the differences in their language and thus became peoples (groups of people defined by a common language). Peoplehood [qaumiyya] is the essential term for groups of rational people who share a common language with which they communicate. The Arabs do not exist without the Arab peoplehood [qaumiyya], and the Arab peoplehood does not exist without the Arabic language. Thus, the Arab peoplehood becomes, from this point-of-view, not an imagined, but a real existence, and it is one of many other peoplehoods [qaumiyyāt]: Turkish, Kurdish, English, etc. For the Arab peoplehood is a conscious affiliation with the Arab in language and culture.

C—The Nation The term shaʿb (nation) is derived from the verb “shaʿaba,” which is an autoantonymic verb: it means bringing together and separation. We find the meaning of separation in this word of God: ‘“Depart you to a shadow (of smoke ascending) in three columns [shuʿab]’ (Those Sent Forth 77:30). We can observe this meaning in our saying “it’s complicated,” that is, it splits into a number of directions. Sometimes it appears with the meaning of gathering and separation, as in the word of God: ‘O mankind! We created you from a single (pair) of a male and a female, and made you into nations [shuʿūb] and tribes, that you may know each other (not that you may despise (each other). Indeed, the most honored of you in the sight of Allah is (he who is) the most righteous of you. And Allah has full knowledge and is well acquainted (with all things).’ (The Dwellings 49:13) The Exalted One introduces in this verse nations and tribes, ignoring communities and peoplehoods. However, 177

Islam and Humanity: Consequences of a Contemporary Reading

communities and peoples are incorporated into nations and tribes. For a nation is a group of rational people, ‘O mankind!’, and sometimes they share one tongue (one language) and sometimes they have many tongues (different languages) because sometimes they belong to the same peoplehood and sometimes to different peoplehoods. And they are either a single community because they share similar behavior or different communities because of the differences in cultural and religious behaviors. Thus, the concept of nation, since it can be composed of one community or disparate communities, or from one or many peoplehoods, is more general than the concept of community or people, because it incorporates both. The Arabs were many tribes although they were one peoplehood, so that one tribe of them would include a number of clans, and a clan would include a number of families. Every tribe had its [A 176] vital space which it lived in and defended, though it made raids at times of scarcity and economic crisis on the space of other tribes. Each tribe had a chief, consultative council, and warriors, that is, a full apparatus that represented—despite it being primitive—a regime of authority for the tribe, and that defended its vital space. When a group of tribes united, voluntarily or under compulsion, they combined their vital spaces with one another, and formed a nation with its economic and private legal codes and united vital space with boundaries that represented a nation-state [watan]. Nation-state and nation, then, share a seamless organic relationship, and peoplehood and community are two elements in the substructure of the nation. To understand the concept of a nation, we must connect it to a very advanced concept, a state with political and economic substance, so that we can understand how both peoplehood and community could meet in the term nation, and how the community (behavior = culture, including religious orientations) could include different peoplehoods (languages), and a peoplehood (language) could include different communities (different cultures with different religious orientations). The nation, then, is represented in that all of its different individuals live under the same social, economic, and legal codes under the protection of one state. For the people includes different groups of individuals who differ from one another either because 178

Chapter Four: The Citizen and Loyalty to Islam

they have different cultures, that is, there are different communities within the same people and every one of them has its own special culture (community), or because of differences in its peoplehoods (its languages), that is, there are different peoplehoods in the same nation so that each peoplehood has its own special language. Sometimes these groups are woven together so that there are a number of communities in the same peoplehood and sometimes so there are a number of peoplehoods in the same community. In any case, each of these groups submits to the authority of the one state and its laws. Conscious relationships bring together individuals of the same nation regardless of their peoplehoods and communities, and common interests expressed by the legal and legislative system tie them together, [A 177] and on the ground, there is a vital space for them all and it is called the nation-state, so that the authority of the state organizes the relationships by imposing its legal control over all of them inside its national soil.

2—Loyalty to Islam is Loyalty to Human Values Islam across all of its religious communities urges the building of a civil state and calls out for it emphatically, but without pompous slogans since it carries within itself a human charter which must be the foundation for this state. This charter represents the highest human values, which represent the human nature on the basis of which the human being was created, with the goal of creating a civil state. The religion of Islam left the political variations in the state to the people to dispose of as they wish according to what suits their needs and demands. Thus, we deeply need to understand the meaning of walāʾ (attachment) and barā’ (disassociation) as they are found in the Book of God without exaggerations, so that we can recognize how the Almighty God directs us in the Book to practice them in building a powerful civil state.

179

Islam and Humanity: Consequences of a Contemporary Reading

A—The Meaning of Walāʾ and Barāʾ The Arabic term walāʾ has two contradictory meanings, the first is to approach by following, as in the word of God: ‘As to those who turn (for friendship) to [yatawallā] Allah, His Messenger, and the (fellowship of ) believers, it is the fellowship of Allah that must certainly triumph.’ (The Table Spread 5:56) The second is to leave by turning away, as in the word of God: ‘….when you do commemorate your Lord and Him alone in the Qur’an, they turn [wallau]on their backs, fleeing (from the Truth).’ (The Night Journey 17:46) A walīy is a master who is followed and a maulan is the follower obeying and accepting the prescriptions and proscriptions of his master. About the walīy, the word of God says: ‘Allah is the Protector [walīy] of those who have faith: from the depths of darkness He will lead them forth into light. Of those who reject faith the patrons are the evil ones: from light they will lead them forth into the depths of darkness….’ (The Cow 2:257) [A 178] About the second meaning, the word of God says: ‘Behold! indeed on the friends [auliyāʾ] of Allah there is no fear, nor shall they grieve’ ( Jonah 10:62). Walāʾ (attachment) is a human social relationship, which begins with the individual thinking theoretically when he decides to adopt for himself a walīy to follow in everything he does. This meaning appeared in the word of God: ‘To each is a goal to which Allah turns him [muwallīha]; then strive together (as in a race) towards all that is good….’ (The Cow 2:148) Then this relationship becomes practical behavior that embodies the theoretical thinking, and if the followed walīy becomes one for a great group of people and gives them a common goal, according to the expression of verse 148, their behavior becomes similar and becomes a group behavior, and here the attachment becomes collective and the name of this group becomes “community.” The community, as we defined it, is a group of people united by uniform conscious behavior. It is natural behavior for the human being: it accompanied him since he was a man among the animal kingdom, before he became human and before God breathed His spirit into him and made him His deputy on the Earth. Then this natural attachment began to take new forms as the human being developed socially: there 180

Chapter Four: The Citizen and Loyalty to Islam

was the family attachment, as in the word of God: ‘And Noah called upon his Lord, and said: “O my Lord! surely my son is of my family! and Your promise is true, and You are the justest of judges!”’ (Hud 11:45) Then there was the clan attachment, in the word of God: ‘And admonish your nearest kinsmen’ (The Poets 26:214). Then there was the tribal attachment and the attachment to nation. The attachment to the family, clan, and tribe is an attachment by kinship, and it has strong affinities with ethnic or racial attachment. The attachment to a people is an attachment to language and tongue, which sometimes overlaps with family, clan, and tribal attachment and sometimes does not, that is, sometimes people who share a language are of the same kin and sometimes they are not. All these attachments are natural attachments that revolve around the prevailing customs and inherited traditions. The heavenly messengerhoods, from Noah to Mohammed (ṣ), and passing through Abraham, Moses, Jesus and others of the prophets and messengers, were revealed, in general, to correct this attachment and to govern it within the framework of mutual understanding and communication and common living, and [A 179] in an atmosphere of cooperation founded in charity and piety. This is what the word of God indicates: ‘O mankind! We created you from a single (pair) of a male and a female, and made you into nations and tribes, that you may know each other (not that you may despise (each other). Indeed, the most honored of you in the sight of Allah is (he who is) the most righteous of you. And Allah has full knowledge and is well acquainted (with all things).’ (The Dwellings 49:13) In the authoritative revelation, the term barāʾ means to leave and avoid, as if you say: “He avoided the matter, that is, he announced his leaving it,” as in the word of God: ‘Behold! Abraham said to his father and his people: “I do indeed clear myself [barāʾ] of what you worship:’ (The Gold Adornment 43:26). More fully, it means to disassociate from someone, that is, deny a relationship with them and to disapprove of having a connection with him, as in the word of God: ‘And Abraham prayed for his father’s forgiveness only because of a promise he had made to him. But when it became clear to him that he was an enemy to Allah, he disassociated [tabarraʾa] himself from 181

Islam and Humanity: Consequences of a Contemporary Reading

him: for Abraham was most tender-hearted, forbearing.’ (The Repentance 9:114) Disassociation, like attachment, is entirely an expression of a voluntary human social relationship, beginning with an individual thinking theoretically when he decides to disassociate from a matter that is inconsistent with his convictions, or to disassociate from a person who has done something that makes him disassociate himself from him, and thus this theoretical decision is transformed into practical behavior. Walāʾ (attachment) has two opposite meanings, “following” and “avoidance,” while barāʾ (disassociation) has only one meaning, “leaving and avoiding.” It is worth noting that since we consider disassociation to be a human behavior, it has boundaries that reduce its scope and range. There is a highest limit that it cannot exceed in ascent, and a lowest limit that it cannot exceed in descent. For whenever something exceeds its limits it becomes its opposite, for if things exceed their limits, the prohibited takes place. Examples of this phenomenon are the following: when praiseworthy courage exceeds its limits, it is transformed into blameworthy rashness, and in the same way, deliberateness becomes indecision, generosity becomes waste, self-confidence becomes megalomania, and dreams become delusions. Thus, the Book of God provides the following guidelines to disassociation: —‘“But if they strive to make you join in worship with Me things of which you have no knowledge, obey them not; yet bear them company in this life with justice (and consideration)….”’ (Luqman 31:15) —‘And Abraham prayed for his father’s forgiveness only because of a promise he had made to him. But when it became clear to him [A 180] that he was an enemy to Allah, he disassociated himself from him: for Abraham was most tender-hearted, forbearing.’ (The Repentance 9:114) Verse 15 of the Sura Luqman talks about the conflict and ideological difference between the generations in that the two parents strive to convert the son to their ideology, and in this case, the divine direction appears to permit the son to refuse to submit to the parental authority while accompanying them in life with justice and consideration, in the word of God: ‘bear them company in this life with justice (and consideration).’ 182

Chapter Four: The Citizen and Loyalty to Islam

And here there is no avoidance or disassociation, but rather He orders accompaniment with kindness. Verse 114 of the Sura Repentance discusses Abraham and his attitude towards the man who brought him up and took care of him, Azar. After Azar’s hostility to him became clear, and in this case, the legitimacy of the disassociation of the transgressor has its source in the condition we find in the verse, and this is when his hostility is confirmed. This is the meaning of the expression, ‘But when it became clear [tabayyana] to him that he was an enemy,’ for the strength of the confirmation here is indicated by the use of the verb tabayyana (to prove in the end) rather than bāna (to be clear). Nevertheless, while Abraham, because of his attachment to the One God, announced his disassociation from his father because of his father’s hostility to him because of his faith, his faith in Almighty God and his attachment to Him was not incompatible with his acknowledgement of and gratitude for his father’s role in raising and caring for him. For he remained upset, sighing in compassion and pity for him, indulgent and long-suffering because of his disassociation from him, as verse 114 of the Sura The Repentance indicates. However, we must understand here that the terms walāʾ (attachment) and barāʾ (disassociation) have been in use since the early days of Arab societies. And their uses changed with the changes in the ties that bound groups in these societies—family, clan, tribe, people, nation. So that walāʾ (attachment) and barāʾ (disassociation) were known before Islam at the level of the family, and walāʾ (attachment) took place in two ways, by adoption and by admission into kinship, while barāʾ (disassociation) took place by renunciation, since during the Jahiliyyah, if a man’s son caused him great trouble, he could take him to the harvest fair and shout: “O you people, I renounce my son so-and-so, I will not vouch for him if he does harm, and I will not make demands if he is harmed, and that means that I disown him.”1 [A 181] Historical evidence suggests that attachment and disassociation at the level of the tribe was entirely analogous to attachment and disassociation 1 Al-Zamakhshari, Asās al-Balāgha, page 118 183

Islam and Humanity: Consequences of a Contemporary Reading

at the level of the family or clan, but for the introduction of a new form of attachment and disassociation that we do not find in the family and clan. The novel attachment was attachment by affiliation or alliance, where the affiliate or ally was considered the equivalent of a member of the tribe by kin or blood, except in the case of slaves, for they lacked the right of affiliation or allying themselves to someone other than their owners. The novel disassociation was the renunciation of the tribe of one of its members and disassociation from him if he departed from some of its principles, violated one of its customs, failed to worship one of its gods, or neglected to adhere to its principles. We must, then, conclude that both attachment and disassociation are always tied to some object. We cannot pursue an attachment absolutely or perform a disassociation absolutely since attachment and disassociation always concern a particular object. Attachment and disassociation take place with someone for some reason: the notion of an absolute attachment or disassociation, to nothing in particular, is illogical. This clarification of the semantics of attachment and disassociation prods us to immerse ourselves in this subject to approach the true meaning of attachment and disassociation in a religious context according to the authoritative revelation.

B—How is Attachment to Islam Attachment to Human Values? Attachment [walāʾ] in the family is expressed by mutual understanding, sympathy, and affection among its members, giving assistance to one another without regard to their political and confessional affiliations. Disassociation [barāʾ] in the family is represented by defense of family members when they are exposed to injustice or hostility from others and according to the available means in the press and judiciary, and from the use of mild speech to curses and insults. It also includes the members of the family offering material assistance to each other, and this is what we call kinship. While attachment in the community is represented by its individuals performing common behaviors, disassociation is represented in avoiding this behavior. For example, the followers of Mohammed (ṣ) are the community of Mohammed [A 182] and those whom God in His almighty Book called 184

Chapter Four: The Citizen and Loyalty to Islam

the muʾminūn since they all prayed toward one direction and performed the same religious rituals. Their attachment to the community was represented in their observing everything related to their religious rituals: performing prayer, fasting during Ramadan, bestowing the alms tax [zakāh], and undertaking the pilgrimage. Therefore, peoples and communities are not incompatible since there can be many peoples in one community and many communities in one people, like the Christian Arabs and the Muslim Arabs. An attachment in any one of them does not preclude attachment to others. For example, attachment to family is not incompatible with attachment to community or to a people since each one has its specific scope and its specific function. For example, attachment to a people preserves the language from extinction, and the relationships between peoples should include cultural exchange but not the imposition of a language on another people, and attachment to a people assists in spreading cultural centers and schools that teach different languages. One state can have a collection of co-existing communities in it, and in some cases the relationships between the communities may be tense, but hostility and aggression are not necessary, since religious rituals are private behavior that the authority of the state should not interfere with by promoting or hindering. This would be an interference within the scope of the personal freedom of the individual. For the sake of maintaining the sanctity of religious rituals, they should have no connection to the administration of justice or politics in any society. Therefore, a number of different religious communities can co-exist in one state just as one religious community can exist in many states. The community of Mohammed (ṣ), for example, exists in a group of Arab states just as it exists in many other states around the world. For human values are the first standard that people should employ in social life, regardless of their religious communities and peoples. Human values, then, are the firm foundation on which human societies are built, and it is the religion of Islam that all the prophets and messengers brought to this world. It represents the nature of God, which He used as a pattern in creating mankind so that they conduct their social life on its basis to form a humane society. [A 183] The human being is led to human 185

Islam and Humanity: Consequences of a Contemporary Reading

values willingly since there is no compulsion in religion. He submits to it according to the authority of the conscience that assists him in co-existing with others in any state with any range of religions and peoples. This manifests the superiority of the religion of Islam since it instructs the human being, whatever his religious community, on how to conduct himself socially according to human values with others within a framework that is built on mutual respect. The religious rituals have no relationship to the human values because they are concerned with how the human being connects to his Lord through worship, everyone performs them in conformity with their religious community, and they are not incompatible with humanity in any way. Islam rests on pluralism in regard to the differences of religious communities and on the principle of curvature in legislation, and this matches the condition of those living on earth and in states. In light of the preceding, we understand the word of God: ‘Let not the believers [muʾminūn] take for friends or helpers unbelievers rather than believers: if any do that, in nothing will there be help from Allah….’ (The Family of Imran 3:28) The verse means that attachment and disassociation are achieved when the believers make allies of each other and disassociate themselves from the unbelievers. To understand the meaning here, we must compare this verse with verse 256 from the Sura The Cow: ‘Let there be no compulsion in religion: truth stands out clear from error: whoever rejects evil and believes in Allah has grasped the most trustworthy hand-hold, that never breaks. And Allah hears and knows all things.’ (The Cow 2:256) This verse implied that verse 28 from the Sura The Family of Imran did not use the term “believers” [muʾminūn]merely to refer to the followers of religious community of Mohammed (ṣ), but that it also referred to those who believe in God and the Last Day and carry out the righteous deed, that is, all Muslims regardless of their religious communities. For the faith that appeared in verse 256 of the Sura The Cow was voluntary adherence to human values. This is the human meaning of faith in God which the verse urged, for faith equals unbelief in despotism, that is, unbelief in all kinds of despotism. This is a recognized principle in all religious communities because they all call for one divine messengerhood, which is faith in God and the Last Day and the 186

Chapter Four: The Citizen and Loyalty to Islam

righteous deed. Therefore, verse 28 of the Sura The Family of Imran, when it called all Muslims to be allies of one another by clinging to heavenly human faith (Islam), [A 184] that is, to adhere to human values and, above all, freedom in the conduct of people among themselves, called similarly for not taking unbelievers [kāfirūn] as allies since they refuse to conduct themselves according to human values and refuse to respect those values and the freedoms of others. They and those who help them and support them are despots. We observe here the meticulousness of the authoritative revelation, as we observed every time before. Unbelief implies a clearly hostile attitude to believers in freedom, for they are despots and their helpers and followers. It is natural that the Muslims, regardless of their religious communities, disassociate themselves from them and take towards them a clearly hostile attitude, that is, publicly, and do not make friends with them, etc. The verse clearly implies that taking the unbelievers as friends will help to spread despotism because they fail to conduct themselves according to human values, especially freedom. The attachment of Muslims with one another is a human attachment and their disassociation from the unbelievers who are despots hostile to them is a human disassociation free of any inclinations to a particular religious community. This suggests that the human being must be attached to every human being who believes in and respects human values whatever his religious community and people. With this, mutual respect is achieved among all, which includes the rights of all. Similarly, the human being disassociates from all of those who believe in despotism, no matter what type, because despotism calls to vanquish the dignity of others, crush their freedom, and thwart their rights. This is the true meaning of attachment and disassociation in religion because it demonstrates the universality of the religion of Islam and its refusal to withdraw into particular geographical and temporal boundaries. Thus, the loftier meaning of religious attachment is human attachment since the religion of Islam is a human religion that calls for universal human values regardless of religious communities since human values are the common factor among all attachments, and thus people need not differ in terms of them. For the first and most important attachment is to values and the first 187

Islam and Humanity: Consequences of a Contemporary Reading

and most important disassociation is from injustice, despotism, and those who advocate them. Therefore, attachment to Islam is attachment to human value and not attachment to personalities. [A 185]

3—The Citizen (Attachment to the Nation-State is an “Attachment to the Homeland”) When he lives in some country, the human being, no matter what his religious community, needs to determine the kind of relationship he requires to conduct himself with others at the political, economic, social, and intellectual level in the shadow of the globalism and universalism that imposes itself so strongly on today’s world. Thus, the following question is unavoidable: How should the human being comport himself towards his homeland or the nation-state he lives in? Before we can answer that question, we must understand what the nation-state of the human being means.

A—The Home “The Nation-State” The term “nation” [shaʿb] does not appear in the authoritative revelation before the era of the Prophet (ṣ), since the nation is a more advanced body of human beings that occupies a step higher than a community or people. The individual in the nation is the citizen [muwāṭin]. The nation did not appear as an organizational form in the Arabian Peninsula until after the Hijra, when the Prophet (ṣ) arrived at Yathrib and wrote a constitution with the Jews. He began by writing that the believers [muʾminūn] were a religious community and the Jews were a religious community, that they had equal rights and responsibilities, and that the authority in the constitution belonged to the Prophet (ṣ). It is very important that he called his followers a religious community and the Jews a religious community, that all of them lived in one area, Yathrib, and that he made them equal in rights and responsibilities, for it implies that the first nation understood as civil entity was formed in Yathrib. For this reason, he (ṣ) called it Medina, since the state was a moral entity instituted by a group of individuals who represented a nation in a 188

Chapter Four: The Citizen and Loyalty to Islam

defined geographical area and who submitted to the power of the state that guided their affairs. They all submitted to the state in accordance with the law that it imposed on them. Therefore, the nation is equivalent to a collection of people composed of one or more religious communities and one or more peoples, [A 186] all living under one economic and legal system in a defined space called the nation-state [watan] (the homeland [diyār]). The foregoing suggests that the nation-state is composed of three elements combined: they are the nation, the authority, and defined geographical boundaries. To ensure the stability of the nation-state, it must be built primarily on the principle of “the attachment to the nation-state” [al-walāʾ li’l-waṭan] or what is called “the citizenship [muwāṭaneh].” This attachment is compatible with the attachment to community, the attachment to a people, and, especially, the attachment to a religion. Let us use as an example of the nation the residents of the United States of America. (a) A group of Muslim believers are of the community of Mohammed and their community attachment is to the community of Mohammed. Thus, they all turn towards the same Qibla and fast during Ramadan. (b) Part of them is from the Arab peoplehood. They speak Arabic in their homes and English at their workplace, and there is no incompatibility between the two. And their attachment in their homes is to their mothertongue. Another part is Turkish, and another part is Persian, etc. They all share the same situation. (c) All are American citizens and part of the American nation. Their political and governmental attachment is to the United States of America, that is, their attachment is to the law in force there and they adhere to it because for them the interest of the American nation prevails over the interest of any other nation. There is no incompatibility between these three attachments. Every country in the world shares the same standard. Since the attachment to Islam is an attachment to human values, it is the first of the attachments in regard to it being the attachment to heavenly human values that Islam urges us to follow and which are the common denominator among the religious communities and intellectual and political orientations. Consequently, they are a human possession that should not be 189

Islam and Humanity: Consequences of a Contemporary Reading

renounced and should be subject of universal agreement since it is the basic requirement brought by the divine messengerhoods. The other attachments are inferior in rank to the attachment to human values, and there is no incompatibility among them. The next attachment in rank after the attachment to human values is the attachment to the nationstate: [A 187] we will explain its importance later. It is no less important than the attachment to human values and compatible with it, and it also compatible with the attachment to a people, as we will explain later. Third in rank is the attachment to a community, that is, attachment to a religious community, for example, for a believer from the followers of the community of Mohammed (ṣ), his attachment to human values precedes his attachment to his religious community, that is, obeying the religious rites of the community of Mohammed. And for a Muslim from the people of the Book (a Christians or a Jew), his attachment to human values precedes his attachments to the religious rituals of his religious community, and so on. On the other hand, disassociation in Islam (which includes all the religious communities) is disassociation from dissent to God, that is, all Muslims, whatever their particular religious communities, must disassociate from despotism, its people, and its followers. For dissenters have cut off their relationships to God fully by their lack of faith in God, the Last Day, and a consequent lack of commitment to and respect for human values. Those dissenters are the true enemies to every human society since they are not committed to respecting human values, and above all, freedom, and they do not strive to spread the righteous deed that issues from faith in God to build society in the proper way. The next attachment in rank is attachment to a peoplehood, and it is an attachment that aids in preserving the identity of any human being whatever his country of residence and whatever his religious community, because the attachment to a peoplehood preserves the mother-tongue of the human being, and no disassociation applies to this attachment.

190

Chapter Four: The Citizen and Loyalty to Islam

B—How Can there be Citizenship (the Attachment to the NationState)? The relationship between the individuals in any state in the world is built on human values so that every individual in the society has an attachment to those values, respects them, and acts according to them. At the same time, those individuals turn disassociation towards dissent and disassociate themselves from dissenting and dissenters, since their thoughts are despotic and harmful to every society. The law remains the master in every society, and everyone has the duty to respect it, rulers and ruled, so that the stability prevails in the state. However, problems arise in the state when the lower ranking attachments of a citizen, the attachments to a people and community, are distorted into attachments of fanaticism and extermination, [A 188] so that the relationships between individuals in one country reach a hostile degree. This is what has happened historically and continues to happen in different countries. Fanaticism in these two attachments grows until it reaches the state of extreme conflict and violence. The worst kind of fanaticism results when domain of the attachment to a community, especially, “religious behavior,” which is open in principle, swells to the point that it crowds out other attachments and becomes a sectarian and political fanaticism. The attachment to the religious community, in reality, is an individual conviction that depends on a personal relationship between the human being and his Lord. It never bears the stamp of fanaticism just as it should not have any connection with the political and the struggle for power so that disorder does not spread in the state. Islam, as we defined it previously, is a global religion that comprehends all differences between religious communities, and it never submits to considerations connected with the struggle for power. Therefore, it is very important to ensure the stability of any state and to detach the concept of attachment to a community from authority so that it becomes possible to build a civil, democratic, liberal state, or, in other words, a state of citizenship in which the freedom of individuals is respected no matter what 191

Islam and Humanity: Consequences of a Contemporary Reading

their intellectual or religious orientations, and, consequently, ensures their rights as citizens so that they come to have in it human rights regardless of their religious community or people, and, at the same time, a collection of social obligations. For the less the state interferes with the religious and mundane choices of the people, the closer it is to God. The first who achieved that goal historically was the Prophet (ṣ) in what he accomplished in Al-Medina Al-Munawwarah, which was a great leap forward in the creation of a civil society built on diversity, and here is where the principle of citizenship emerged. The task of the civil state is to ensure the rights and freedoms of all citizens since it is built on the principle of a state of citizenship, that is, equality between citizens in rights and responsibilities regardless of their religious communities and peoples. Such a state must generate an attachment to its citizens that is stronger than the attachment to a people and to a religious community, and this is the attachment to the nation-state. This attachment rests on [A 189] the feeling of belonging to a nation-state in the souls of the individuals of a nation, that is, a state, and the readiness to protect the unity of the state when necessary. Citizenship as a political principle regulates the rivalries between citizens in the society by general rules. One of the most important of these is the good of the state and its unity resting on respect for diversity, for the sake of benefiting from this diversity in the strengthening the foundation of national unity. Thus, every individual in the society will feel that their future depends on the degree of success of this unity, which does not deny any of their private matters since it adheres to a positive neutrality towards the convictions, doctrines, and ideologies of its citizens. Therefore, activating the feeling of citizenship (belonging to the nationstate and defending it) as a basic principle in the society is considered an effective mechanism to place a limit to strife and sectarian, ethnic, and racial struggles in any state according to the foundation of equality and absence of discrimination among its citizens. That foundation, as a constitutional principle, does not suppress the activity of rivalry and competition in the social space, but regulates it within the general rules of the nation-state and its unity resting on respecting diversity. It strives with its legal and peaceful means to 192

Chapter Four: The Citizen and Loyalty to Islam

benefit from this diversity in strengthening the foundation of national unity until everyone feels that their futures are subject to it. It does not deny their private matters but provides the scope for their expression with means that are in harmony with advances in culture. Consequently, the attachment of citizens to the nation-state becomes the law in force in the nation-state and it applies to each individual of society. For citizenship is built on economic and legal relationships between the individuals of the society.

4—The Fighting Belief According to the authoritative revelation, the attachment to Islam is an attachment to human values since it protects the humanity and dignity of the human being and guards his private freedom. This suggests that when individuals in any society believe in the necessity of preserving the principle of behaving towards others according to human values [A 190] regardless of their religious communities and intellectual and political orientations, this generates for those individuals the belief in the desire to defend human values when they feel that the sanctity of those values have been violated and disparaged in their being replaced with despotic views that are hostile to the rights of others. This belief, which sometimes becomes a fighting belief when necessary, must be individual, that is, it must have a personal source. The attachment to the nation-state or citizenship generates in the individuals in the society (the citizen) a belief in defending the nation-state due to the presence within them of the feeling of belonging to the nation-state, and a faith in the necessity of preserving their nation-state and to stand shoulderto-shoulder against any attack that might threaten their nation-state in any way. This resolution becomes collective among all the citizens in the face of a danger that threatens it and them, and it is what we call the collective fighting belief that must be part of the attitude of all the citizens of the civil state. Therefore, we will explain the belief in the attachment to Islam, that is, the individual fighting belief, and the belief in the attachment to the nationstate, that is, the collective fighting belief, separately, as follows: 193

Islam and Humanity: Consequences of a Contemporary Reading

A—The Individual Fighting Belief (the Belief in Defending Human Values and Freedom of Choice, “The Highest Word of God”) The faith in the attachment to Islam requires the necessity of the defense of human values, the first of which is freedom. It generates in the human being a strong desire to stand in ranks of those who defend human values in every place in the world against despotism and its promoters. The human being was born free, and one of his rights is to stand shoulder-to-shoulder with his brother human being when he sees that his freedom is exposed to aggression from a despotic other who practices compulsion and violence to achieve his personal ambitions and aspirations by crushing the freedoms and rights of others. This confrontation, no matter what means it employs, the tongue, the pen, a demonstration or, in extreme cases, a weapon, is legitimate because it comprises fighting [A 191] despotism in all its types and supporting the human values that all the messengers and the last of the prophets and the messengers called for and established. This is the struggle [jihād] in God’s way that the Almighty God called for in His definite revelation [muḥkam al-tanzīl] and it is the struggle for the sake of freedom (freedom of choice at every level) that is considered the word of God that preceded the people of the earth, and to give recognition to the other different from us in belief and opinion. For the belief in struggle of the Muslim human being, whatever his religious community, is represented in his faith in the duty to defend human rights and freedom of choice of the other regardless of his religious community, peoplehood, and political orientation. This is the personal conviction in the thinking of every human being who believes in human values and he has the freedom to express it by a personal initiative that embodies his true desire to come to the aid of these values and stand up to despotism. He can undertake that in any place in which he sees that the rights of the human being are suppressed and that it is his duty to come to their aid and defend them as an individual, on the condition that it is organized and within a legal structure that operates voluntarily within international 194

Chapter Four: The Citizen and Loyalty to Islam

organizations for human rights like peacekeeping forces, etc. Do not infer from this that we support the suicide operations that some undertake in the name of religion, like the suicide operations sponsored by extremist terrorist groups. We, in fact, oppose them strongly because these operations have no connection to religion at all, and they do not serve human values in any respect. They are destructive operations whose goal is to shake the stability of societies and sow chaos in them for political ends or the personal ambitions and interests of some individuals. If the individual fighting belief turns into a collective extra-legal principle for the sake of imposing an ideology by force and violence, then death has become its foundation since it trains its individuals to kill themselves in the midst of others. We must confront it with all the power we have been given because it is a foundation that spreads death in contrast to a regular army in the world that trains its soldiers to preserve [A 192] their lives and the lives of others. This is the state of terrorist organizations that spread death under whatever ideological cover, and this is the greatest danger that humankind faces, especially at the present time. Therefore, the individual fighting belief rising from the attachment to Islam (the attachment to human values) should not have any connection to the authority in any state and it should not have any ideology since its purpose is defending human rights. It should be organized, submit to supervision, and be neither random or spontaneous. For this reason, international organizations for human rights are non-political and do not obey any authority, and even those that are governmental submit to the international laws of human rights drawn up by the United Nations.

B—The Collective Fighting Belief (the Belief in Defending the Nation-State or Homeland) The nation-state is a place for habitation and common living among all the citizens. Thus, the attachment to the nation-state, which is considered emotional, is what motivates the human being to be always prepared to sacrifice for its sake, to display allegiance to it, to act for the sake of its progress and advancement, and to defend it when it confronts adversities and trials. 195

Islam and Humanity: Consequences of a Contemporary Reading

For the attachment to the nation-state is what motivates the individual in society when his nation-state is exposed to hostile action. The authoritative revelation calls a nation-state a diyār and it is one of the loftiest things that the human being must defend, as in the word of God: ‘To those against whom war is made, permission is given (to fight), because they are wronged; and indeed, Allah is most powerful for their aid; (They are) those who have been expelled from their homes [diyār] in defiance of right, (for no cause) except that they say, “our Lord is Allah”….’ (The Pilgrimage 22:39–40) The diyār is the nation-state [waṭan], which is sometimes small like the Principality of Monaco and sometimes large like the United States of America. The human being without a homeland (nation-state) is lost in the universe no matter what his religious community or people, because the human being needs a nation-state (homeland) whose protection he lives under and in which he enjoys all his rights and, in exchange for them, carries out the duties derived from it to achieve harmony and oneness with it. He defends his nation-state with the precious and expensive when it is exposed to threat because [A 193] its exposure to danger exposes the lives of the individuals in it to both threats and danger. The human being’s defense of the nation-state is a defense of himself, his family, his people, and his life. The authoritative revelation has expressed with precision the issue of defending the nation-state and that the relationships between nations are built on the respect of each state for the freedom, geographical borders, and sovereignty of the other states, in the word of God: ‘Allah forbids you not, with regard to those who fight you not for (your) faith nor drive you out of your homes, from dealing kindly and justly with them: for Allah loves those who are just. Allah only forbids you, with regard to those who fight you for (your) faith, and drive you out of your homes, and support (others) in driving you out, from turning to them (for friendship and protection). It is such as turn to them (in these circumstances), that do wrong.’ (The Woman to be Examined 60:8–9) The first verse suggests that the relationship between states that respect each other’s geographical borders and sovereignty should be friendly and peaceful, and demands that the relationship be built on justice and charity to achieve international agreement and harmony between the nations so that they are able to enjoy 196

Chapter Four: The Citizen and Loyalty to Islam

every kind of commercial, cultural, and scientific exchange, etc. All nations are enriched by these exchanges and see their standards of living increase and advances in their development at every level. The second verse suggests that if a state encroaches on another state, which it expressed in the following word of God—‘[they] drive you out of your homes, and support (others) in driving you out’— it is legitimate to resist the encroaching state, act hostilely towards it, and fight it with every method. The defense of the human being of his nation-state, then, becomes the defense of his existence and life. This is the collective fighting belief that we find among every people that feels its nation-state is threatened and whose individuals undertake its defense and resist the attack upon it. Fighting to defend the nation-state (homeland) is an obligation for its residents (citizens) regardless of their peoplehoods and religious communities. It is not considered fighting in God’s way but it is legitimate and noble fighting, and no lower in status than fighting in God’s way. For it is classified under the same rubric because it is one of the types of fighting in God’s way since it is standing up to injustice and despotism in one of its aspects. When the human being in his nation-state enjoys a happy life, he enjoys his rights and feels the spread of the culture of freedom [A 194] and justice, and that they are being effectively practiced in society. He is, then, obligated to defend his nation-state against every kind of hostility since the security of his nation-state (his homeland) is the security of his life and the security and stability of the life of his family. This collective belief is exemplified today in national military conscription when the nation-state (the homeland) is under threat. The individuals of the society, no matter what their religious communities and peoples, are obligated to rise to defend their nation-state (their homeland) against the enemy since attachment to the nation-state or citizenship outranks all other attachments. Nevertheless, the attachment to the nation-state alters with alterations in the nation-state.

197

Islam and Humanity: Consequences of a Contemporary Reading

5—The Difference between Shāhid (Witness on the Basis of Previously Acquired Knowledge) and Shahīd (Eyewitness) Compare the following two words of God, the first: ‘“Our Lord! we believe in what You have revealed, and we follow the Messenger; then write us down among those who bear witness [shāhidīn].”’ (The Family of Imran 3:53) The second: ‘And the Earth will shine with the glory of its Lord: the record (of deeds) will be placed (open); the prophets and the witnesses [shuhadāʾ] will be brought forward and a just decision pronounced between them; and they will not be wronged (in the least).’ (The Groups 39:69) Of all the elements of the two verses, we must concentrate on one, the element of shahāda (witness) in order to understand the meaning of shuhadāʾ (witnesses) and shāhidīn (witnesses) and recognize the difference between them. For shahīd and shāhid are two nouns with the one root—sh-h-d. The plural of shahīd is shuhadāʾ and the plural of shāhid is shāhidīn. We must ask ourselves here: is there a difference between the shahāda (witnessing) of the shahīd and the shahāda of the shāhid. The word of God tells us this about the shahīd: ‘To Him is referred the knowledge of the hour (of judgment: He knows all): No date-fruit comes out of its sheath, nor does a female conceive (within her womb) nor bring forth the Day that (Allah) will propound to them the (question), “Where are the partners (you attributed to Me?” They will say, “We do assure you not one of us can bear witness [shahīd]!”’ (Explained in Detail 41:47) We understand from this that those who attribute partners to God will apologize and place the matter in the hands of God since none of them was present witnessing the bringing forth of the buds of the fruits and none of them know what is being carried and brought forth [A 195] by the female plants, animals, and humans. This notion recurred many times in the in the authoritative revelation (The Cattle 6:143–144, The Thunder 13:8, Luqman 31:34). In this word of God— ‘Why did they not bring four witnesses [shuhadāʾ] to prove it? When they have not brought the witnesses, such men, in the sight of Allah, (stand forth) themselves as liars!’ (The Light 24:13)—God is demanding that those who accuse people of adultery bring forward four 198

Chapter Four: The Citizen and Loyalty to Islam

shuhadāʾ. Shuhadāʾ is the plural of shahīd, masculine and feminine. In other words, God requires four witnesses to prove a charge of adultery, and they need to be witnesses who were present and have perceived the act in question with their own senses, that is, eyewitnesses. We observe also in the word of God: ‘“That they may witness [liyashhadū] the benefits (provided) for them, and celebrate the name of Allah, through the days appointed, over the cattle which He has provided for them (for sacrifice)….’” (The Pilgrimage 22:28) The verse is addressing the pilgrims of the Holy House of God who are eyewitnesses [shuhadāʾ] of the ceremonies of the pilgrimage including the circumambulation and the festival assembly of pilgrims on Mount Arafat. For those who witness the ceremonies of the pilgrimage on television are not pilgrims. The witness referred to in the verse [liyashhadū] is a shahāda of shahīd, i.e., eyewitness. Likewise, in the word of God: ‘They said, “Then bring him before the eyes of the people, that they may bear witness [yashhadūna].”’ (The Prophets 21:61) The verse indicates with the phrase ‘before the eyes of the people’ that the witness in yashhadūna is a shahāda of shahīd, i.e., eyewitness. In regard to other kind of witness, shāhid, the word of God says of Abraham: ‘He said, “No, your Lord is the Lord of the heavens and the earth, He Who created them (from nothing): and I am a witness [shāhidīn] to this (truth).”’ (The Prophet 21:56) The meaning of shāhid differs from the meaning of shahīd since shahīd is an eyewitness. Abraham cannot be a shahīd because he was not present during the process of creation of the heavens and earth. However, he inquired and was guided by his heart to the knowledge that God is Lord of the heavens and earth, and thus the shahada of Abraham is a witness on the basis of previously acquired knowledge, i.e., shāhid.

A—The Witness of the Eyewitness [shahīd] Semantically, the shahīd is physically present to the object of his knowledge (as opposed to absent) and thus his knowledge of the thing or event [A 196] he witnesses is a present knowledge, by seeing and hearing. In other words, to qualify as an eyewitness, the human being must fulfill these two conditions. 199

Islam and Humanity: Consequences of a Contemporary Reading

(a) He must be present, that is, he must hear and see the thing or event. (b) He must perform the act of witnessing or be prepared to perform it on demand. The word of God makes this clear: ‘O you who believe! When you deal with each other, in transactions involving future obligations in a fixed period of time, reduce them to writing. Let a scribe write down faithfully as between the parties: let not the scribe refuse to write: as Allah has taught him, so let him write. Let him who incurs the liability dictate, but let him fear His Lord Allah, and not diminish anything of what he owes. If the party liable is mentally deficient, or weak, or unable himself to dictate, let his guardian dictate faithfully, and get two witnesses [shahīdain], out of your own men, and if there are not two men, then a man and two women, such as you choose, for witnesses [shuhadāʾ], so that if one of them errs, the other can remind her. The witnesses [shuhadāʾ] should not refuse when they are called on (for evidence). Disdain not to reduce to writing (your contract) for a future period, whether it be small or big: it is juster in the sight of Allah, more suitable as evidence, and more convenient to prevent doubts among yourselves but if it be a transaction which you carry out on the spot among yourselves, there is no blame on you if you reduce it not to writing. But take witness [shahīd], whenever you make a commercial contract; and let neither scribe nor witness suffer harm. If you do (such harm), it would be wickedness in you. So fear Allah; for it is Good that teaches you. And Allah is well acquainted with all things. If you are on a journey, and cannot find a scribe, a pledge with possession (may serve the purpose). And if one of you deposits a thing on trust with another, let the trustee (faithfully) discharge his trust, and let him fear his Lord conceal not evidence; for whoever conceals it, his heart is tainted with sin. And Allah knows all that you do.’ (The Cow 2:282) According to this verse, the shahīd is the name of the human being who witnesses by eye and ear a sales transaction or commercial contract and then testifies to what he witnessed. The verse stipulates the summoning of ‘two witnesses out of your own men’ when needed, that is, two men of those who attended the event. It is worth noting the phrase ‘out of your own men,’ for 200

Chapter Four: The Citizen and Loyalty to Islam

the Exalted God had to specify this because there is no feminine version of shahīd: shahīd covers both males and females. If there were a feminine version of shahīd, like shahīda, God would not have needed to add ‘out of your own men,’ for it would have been redundant, and God is far above that, and thus it is clear that women were accepted as witnesses in that day and were the equivalent to male witnesses in everything but oral sales and commercial transactions, which are no longer used in our day. [A 197]

B—The Witness on the Basis of Previously Acquired Knowledge As for the witnessing of a shāhid, it is a witness on the basis previously acquired knowledge and experience. It is distinct from the witness of present knowledge, seeing and hearing. The word of God clearly supports our conclusion: ‘He said: “It was she that sought to seduce me from my (true) self.” And one of her household saw (this) and bore witness, (thus): “If it be that his shirt is rent from the front, then is her tale true, and he is a liar! But if it be that his shirt is torn from the back, then is she the liar, and he is telling the truth!” So when he saw his shirt, that it was torn at the back, (her husband) said: “Behold! It is a snare of you women! Truly, mighty is your snare!’” ( Joseph 12:26–28) The event described is one that occurred behind closed doors, and only Joseph and the wife of ʿAziz were in the room, so there was no one present to qualify as an eyewitness. The witness cited in the verse was from her household but his witness rested on indirect knowledge and evidence, and how the particulars of the narrative could be inferred from the results. For a man who assaults a woman assaults her in front, so that had she resisted him, the marks of her resistance would be left on his face, chest, and front of his clothes. On the other hand, when a woman chases a man fleeing from her, and she tries to grab him, marks of that will be left on his back and the back of his clothes. The result of the evidence of the marks was that the wife of ʿAziz was lying and Joseph was telling the truth. This is the meaning of witnessing based on previously acquired knowledge. The shāhid bases his witness on experience, knowledge, or a basis of knowledge. Another contrast is between, on the one hand, someone who is present at the 201

Islam and Humanity: Consequences of a Contemporary Reading

scene and observing with his eyes when a building collapses and then gives his witness as a shahīd. On the other hand, someone who sees a collapsed building and takes evidence with him, undertakes an analysis and testing of the plans and structures, and then makes his witness statement in the form of a technical report, explaining the cause of the collapse which he did not see in person, is a shāhid.

C—The Almighty God is Both a Shahīd and Shāhid There are many verses that use shahīd as one of the beautiful names of God, for example, the following [A 198] words of God: —‘….Allah is Himself witness [shahīd] to all you do” (The Family of Imran 3:98). —‘….Allah is witness [shahīd] of all things.’ (The Pilgrimage 22:17) —‘…. my reward is only due from Allah: And He is witness [shahīd] to all things.’ (Sheba 34:47) —‘….Is it not enough that your Lord does witness [shahīd] all things?’ (Explained in Detail 41:53) These verses make it entirely clear that the Almighty God is a shahīd of all things. However, how is it possible that the Exalted God is a shahīd, as he describes himself in the verses above? In many verses, God describes Himself as seeing and hearing but without embodiment, as in the following two verses, the first: ‘That is because Allah merges night into day, and He merges day into night, and indeed it is Allah Who hears and sees (all things).’ (Pilgrimage 22:61) The second: ‘And your creation or your resurrection is in no wise but as an individual soul: for Allah is He Who hears and sees (all things).’ (Luqman 31:28) These two verses make clear that God is seeing and hearing, and thus we know that All-Seeing and Hearing are two of the Beautiful Names of God, and that God knows what he sees and hears without embodiment. Since the shahīd is present knowing, that is, the shahīd knows what he witnesses, the Almighty God in His knowledge of existence and what it includes of nature, creatures, and events is the shahīd of that and the knower who has present knowledge, seeing and hearing. 202

Chapter Four: The Citizen and Loyalty to Islam

Seeing & hearing ======> shahīd As long as the Exalted God has perfect knowledge of everything, seeing and hearing without embodiment, He is shahīd on all things but without fulfilling the condition of being present Himself as is the case with the human shahīd, and without descending into the universe. For He knows the details of the creation of existence including nature and creatures because He is their Creator, and He sees and hears the people because He is with them without being embodied wherever they are, as the Exalted God says: ‘Allah is He Who created seven firmaments and of the earth a similar number. Through the midst of them (all) descends His command: that you may know that Allah has power over all things, and that Allah comprehends, all things in (His) Knowledge.’ (The Divorce 65:12) This verse explains that the knowledge of God [A 199] comprehends all things in existence absolutely, and this is the essence of the name of shahīd. If the witness of the shahīd is a present witnessing, seeing and hearing, the witness of God as shahīd is likewise seeing and hearing, and it is necessarily connected with the perfection of His knowledge and the completeness of His understanding as Omniscient, and it is strongly connected with the other names of the Almighty like the Comprehending and All-Aware. Present knowledge ====> seeing & hearing =====> shahīd Scientific knowledge ===> knowing & being aware ===> shāhid In closing, the meaning of shahīd as it appeared in the texts of the authoritative revelation differs entirely from the meaning which prevails in our culture where it means to be killed for the sake of one’s beliefs and religious community. That widespread meaning did not come to us from the Book of God but, rather, from the Christian culture. Thus, the term in its first use was connected to killing and blood as appeared in the writings of both Paul and John. Paul talked about shahīd in the following context: ‘And when the blood of your martyr [shahīd] Stephen was shed, I also was standing by, and consenting unto his death, and kept the raiment of them that slew 203

Islam and Humanity: Consequences of a Contemporary Reading

him.’ (Acts 22:20, King James Bible) John spoke of the shahīd in this way in Revelations 17:6 (King James Bible): ‘And I saw the woman drunken with the blood of the saints, and with the blood of the martyrs [shuhadāʾ] of Jesus: and when I saw her, I wondered with great admiration.’ John here sanctifies those who paid with their lives for witnessing about their faith in Jesus Christ but the reference here is to the living who made a sacrifice for the sake of their witnessing. They were not called shuhadāʾ after their death. Later, this term was used for everyone who died under torture whether Jew or Roman, and especially in the third century after Christ, which witnessed images of the obscenest kinds of torture and persecution of them, in the era of Diocletian, who ordered the demolition of churches and destruction of its holy books, and ordered the seizing of the priests and the rest of the clergy. Thus, the prisons were full of Christians, and many of them were killed after their bodies were ripped apart with whips and iron claws, sawed into pieces, the flesh scraped [A 200] from the bones, and burned by fire. The use of the term shahīd with the meaning of someone who was killed for the sake of his beliefs and religious community spread until this era became known as the “Era of Martyrs” according to Christian sources.2 Consequently, we return and repeat here that death has no connection to witnessing in any form, even a death like the death for the sake of the nation-state, despite that defending the nation-state or homeland is a legitimate fight and a great sacrifice. For as we saw previously, a shahīd is everyone who witnessed a matter and testified regarding it. Likewise, we find that scientists are at the head of the list of shuhadāʾ in all eras because they discover the secrets of nature and testify about them based on what they observed. We today are in the most urgent need for scientists offering their testimony, which is considered equivalent to material evidence, for the credibility of the prophethood of Mohammed (ṣ), by means of the interpretation of the verses of the Qurʾan from the authoritative revelation. There are many kinds of evidence: universal, historical, scientific, and sociallegal. This is the sole means by which we can become shuhadāʾ for the 2 Claude Lepelley, L’empire Romain et le Christianisme, pp. 29, 90, Edition Flammarion, 1969. 204

Chapter Four: The Citizen and Loyalty to Islam

credibility of his prophethood and his messengerhood (ṣ). Scientists are those who offer scientific and rational explanation that support the credibility of the messengerhood and the prophethood, entirely like the scientists who established the foundations of genetic science, for their work was a striking witness on the basis of previously acquired knowledge for what appeared in the word of God: ‘Man We did create from a quintessence (of clay); Then We placed him as (a drop of ) sperm in a place of rest, firmly fixed’ (The Believers 23:12–14). For the establishment of the witnessed evidence to the truthfulness of the messengerhood of Mohammed always results in knowledge. These shuhadāʾ are those whose witnessing is considered true and who we need most urgently because they help in making giant leaps forward in human knowledge that enable it to approach its goals of [A 201] development and advancement. Only in this way can our states and societies progress and build powerful states with firm foundations, proud of their religious identity and open to other cultural identities without complexes or infringing on the freedoms and rights of others.

205

Conclusion

Some may wonder why our contemporary reading of the authoritative revelation arrived at results at odds with what we are accustomed to in our religious culture. Our answer is that after we saw the great number of contradictions that confused us in our religion and caused us to stumble about in a tremendous intellectual chaos, so that each came to claim that he was a guardian of the religion, and that he was the only one who possessed the absolute truth, until the voices of the religious awakening rose with every wave of condemnation that others were godless and unbelievers, and each one was lost in the momentum of that chaos that diverted them from religion as the final Prophet and Messenger (ṣ) proclaimed it, we realized that until we understand the true Islamic religion as God wants us to understand it, we must push the heritage to the side and begin instead with the founding text of the religion and that is the Book of God that ‘No falsehood can approach it from before or behind it: It is sent down by One Full of Wisdom, Worthy of all Praise.’ (Explained in Detail 41:42) For it is His direct address to us that cannot contain any contradictions. Since the Exalted God has perfect and absolute knowledge, His Book must also be perfect as conveyed, that is, its credibility depends on its lack of contradictions. We are convinced that since He is the creator of this vast universe with its infinite precision, it is not possible that he would send the people a book with contradictions so that anyone could explain it as he wishes. The Book of the Exalted and Almighty has the precision of the universe, and just as mankind needed to establish a scientific methodology to understand the universe and its secrets, which became the mission of centers of scientific research in geology, physics, [A 204] chemistry, medicine, etc., we now need a scientific methodology to provide the texts of the authoritative version an understanding that constructs a true structure for the human being so that 207

Islam and Humanity: Consequences of a Contemporary Reading

he can become a being that deserves to be God’s deputy on the Earth. The first rule of this methodology is that of the well-ordered arrangement [tartīl] that the Almighty God commands: ‘O you folded in garments! Stand (to prayer) by night, but not all night, half of it, or a little less, or a little more; and give the Qurʾan a proper order [rattil al-qurʾan tartīlan). Soon shall We send down to you a weighty message.’ (The One Wrapped in Garment 73:1–5) Tartīl is from the root r-t-l and has the meaning of “to put in proper order and organize,” or as we say, to give something a proper order. Thus, the expression rattil al-qurʾan tartīlan means to give the Qurʾan a proper order, and the following verse confirms this, ‘Soon shall We send down to you a weighty message,’ since it describes the Qurʾan as a weighty message and refers to the difficulty of understanding its scientific knowledge. Given this, the meaning of rattil al-qurʾan tartīlan must be to arrange the topics appearing in various verses of the Qurʾan in a sequence that better facilitates understanding. Here tartīl means to take verses related to one topic and arrange them in a sequence. The themes of the Qurʾan are scattered across Suras, for example, the theme of Adam is present in the Suras The Cow, The Heights, Ta-Ha, and others, and, similarly, the stories of Noah are present in the Suras Noah, Hud, The Heights, and The Believers. Unless we arrange the verses in the proper order, we cannot understand any of the topics in the Book of God. While the process of tartīl is fundamental to the understanding of the authoritative revelation, it is not sufficient. The second crucial rule is the necessity of rejecting synonymity. Without this rule, we cannot achieve absolute precision in how we understand the texts of the Book of God, for Almighty God with His perfect knowledge could never send the people a book in which different words have the same meanings so that whoever considers those meanings with care is lost, just as there cannot be a medical specialist who puts more precision into the writing of a medical prescription, in which he concerns himself with all the details that reflect the state of the sick person, than [A 205] the Almighty God in His Book. God forbid that He is described like that, for His Book, inspired from above the seven heavens, has all the precision of the universe that we live in, and the precision of our bodies and minds that must use precision in the understanding of His texts. We, then, must employ the 208

Conclusion

rules of tartīl (organizing into a proper order) and non-synonymity to search for the credibility of the texts by projecting them against the present reality, not the reality of 1400 years ago, that is, the reality that we live in now, in order to solve the complications that we face, and this according to the scientific knowledge that we possess, which grants us an entirely different understanding than the customary understanding of our inherited culture. This method that we used is built on the scientific foundations of removing apparent contradictions among the texts of the authoritative revelation and bringing them all into harmony with one another in an unbroken intellectual order which confirms the credibility of its knowledge, the credibility of its transmitter (ṣ), and the credibility of its Almighty Speaker. In all simplicity, it is a method that rests on explaining the texts of the Book in an interrelated manner, and this is what is called in our religious culture “explaining the Qurʾan by the Qurʾan.” It is recognized by everyone as yielding the best and highest interpretations, and those with the greatest credibility. We have taken this approach because we believe strongly that the key to the understanding the Book of God must be within it, through examination and organization, in accordance with a firm scientific foundation that provides a contemporary reading which assists us in advancing our nations and pushing them with a firm step forward into the path of intellectual, social, and cultural progress. This method is what we need now when opinions quarrel with each other before the bodies, causing destruction wherever they land. For they are opinions that impose repulsion, hate, aversion, cruelty, and human damage, with all it contains of mental, moral, social, structural, and racial damage on the religion of God, which, to the contrary, calls for tolerance, brotherhood, cooperation, sympathy, charity, and human accomplishment with all it contains of accomplishments—mental, moral, social, structural, etc. It is a religion free of these meanings because it is a universal message redolent with the divine spirit that exalts amnesty and forgiveness [A 206] and the advance of one chance after the other to the human being until he repents his sins and returns to his Lord. It is the spirit that must spread throughout the world because we are all, in the end, Muslims, and human values remain the sole criterion for the authenticity of the individual’s assent to God. 209

Islam and Humanity: Consequences of a Contemporary Reading

The Divine Messengerhood

The Mother of the Book

The Book of God

The Divine Seal and Signature

The Ambiguous Verses

The Ambiguous Verses ‘…others are ambivalent [mutashābihāt]. But those in whose hearts is perversity follow the part thereof that is ambivalent…’ (The Family of Imran 3:7)

The Explanation of the Ambiguous Verses

The Explanation of the Definite Verses ‘…all things have We explained in detail.’ (The Night Journey 17:12)

The Qur’an and the Seven Oft-Recited and Ambiguous Verses and their Explanation ‘And We have bestowed upon thee the Seven Oft-repeated (verses) and the Grand Qur’an.’ (The Rocky Tract 15:87) // ‘Allah has revealed (from time to time) the most beautiful Message in the form of a Book, consistent with itself, (yet) repeating (its teaching in various aspects)….’ (The Groups 39:23) // ‘Say: «If the whole of mankind and jinns were to gather together to produce the like of this Qur’an, they could not produce the like thereof, even if they backed up each other with help and support.’ (The Night Journey 17:88)

The Final Divine Address to Mankind (Valid Until the Day of Judgement) ‘He it is Who has sent down to thee the Book: In it are verses basic or fundamental (of established meaning) [āyāt muḥkamāt]; they are the foundation of the Book [umm al-kitāb]: others are ambivalent [mutashābihāt]. But those in whose hearts is perversity follow the part thereof that is ambivalent, seeking discord, and searching for its hidden meanings, but no one knows its hidden meanings except Allah. And those who are firmly grounded in knowledge say: “We believe in the Book; the whole of it is from our Lord:” and none will grasp the Message except men of understanding.’ (The Family of Imran 3:7) [see ems 123]

The Explanation of the Mother of the Book

The Explanation of the Definite Verses ‘…all things have We explained in detail.’ (The Night Journey 17:12) ‘For We had certainly sent unto them a Book, based on knowledge, which We explained in detail, a guide and a mercy to all who believe.’ (The Heights 7:52)

The Definite Verses and Their Explanation ‘A. L. R. (This is) a Book, with verses basic or fundamental (of established meaning), further explained in detail, from One Who is Wise and Well-acquainted (with all things).’ (Hud 11:1)

The Mother of the Book [Umm al-Kitāb] ‘Allah blots out or confirms what He pleases: with Him is the Mother of the Book [umm alkitāb].’ (The Thunder 13:39)

The Divine Seal and Signature (Incapable of Being Counterfeited or Copied) // It Came to Confirm and Protect the Messengerhood ‘This Qur’an is not such as can be produced by other than Allah; on the contrary, it is a confirmation of (revelations) that went before it, and a fuller explanation of the Book - wherein there is no doubt - from the Lord of the worlds.’ ( Jonah 10:37) // ‘To thee We sent the Scripture in truth, confirming the scripture that came before it, and guarding it in safety.’ (The Table Spread 5:48)

210