How does one prevent religious arrogance in Islam?

[hidayah]

Salaam Alaykum

I read with deep interest a thread (on comparative studies) started by Muslimwoman on "who teaches religious aggrogance?" It makes me wonder on another question.

Bearing in mind that people may get sensitive I'd like to say first that my question is humble, is stemmed from pure curiosity and that I bear no malice. How does one avoid or prevent religious arrogance when Islam clearly states that there is no God but Allah? That we should believe ourselves to be the 'right ones' and all others are unbelievers whose eventual abode is Hell?

This kind of thinking seems to make a lot of room (and encouragement) for arrogance despite Islam teaching its followers to be humble and tolerant. We are instructed and taught to make no exceptions when it comes to believing that Islam is the only Right path towards G-d's Favour. It is only natural that we derive pride in this and it's easy for that pride to regress into arrogance.

Any thoughts?

 

[Thomas]

The way is dialogue.

As a Christian, I have great concern for those views, expressed by Islamic scholars, that the intellectual voice of Islam has been/is being silenced. The fundamentalists speak too long, too loud, too violently, and incite the rest against their own brothers who seek dialogue and moderation.

We have the same problem ourselves — it's not unique to you.

Thomas

 

[hidayah]

The problem exists in other religions too, of course. I'm aware of that. I was just curious how Muslims specifically would respond to this, especially those whom like you [Thomas] said "speak too long, too loud, too violently, and incite the rest against their own brothers who seek dialogue and moderation." That's why I posted it in the Islam board instead of Comparative Studies.

I'm sure there are Muslims here who support the abovementioned group. Why else are they the only ones who are heard?

Maybe I should expand on my question. How should Muslims bring up/educate their youth in a way which discourages religious arrogance? Is it even possible to do that with our strict beliefs?

I'm not saying Islam encourages religious arrogance of course. There is just not enough being done to quell religious intolerance/arrogance, which I believe is the root of most religious conflicts these days.

 

[Thomas]

Hi Hidayah —

Sorry, didn't mean to come in on an Islamic question, I missed the fact it was posted to this board.

Welcome, by the way, I don't think we've spoken before.

Thomas

 

[hidayah]

Thank you for the welcome, Thomas.

I've been a member for a while. Was just more of a reader/lurker.

 

[wil]

How does one avoid or prevent religious arrogance when Islam clearly states that there is no God but Allah?

Time to asssist me in my education here. I believe Muslimwoman also posted some other Koran pieces that were more inviting....but pointed out that many like to ignore those verses and point again at others...

But am I miss informed or does not Allah mean G-d in Arabic? So could I say there is no Allah but Allah? and there is no G-d but G-d? And would that not be your understanding and defintion of Allah or G-d?

Thank you for the contemplation and your point is one we all need to address in our own belief systems.

 

[Tao_Equus]

My understanding is that Islam has a tiered system in which Muslims are at the top, Christians and Jews still have the chance of salvation and everyone else is damned. Its a pretty anti-social start point and for me personally I think it an unacceptable frame of reference on which to base a religion.

My belief is that the nature of this belief system has an in-built wrecking mechanism that will prevent peace ever being found between Muslims and non-muslims. As there is this belief in a Judgement day so people are absolved from the responsibility of seeking peace here and now. Its a subtle concept but I believe it to be absolutely pivotal. Islam does not just have these two facets of division, it is riddled with them. Some come from the Q'uran but it's the many insane edicts found in the Sunnah that really present Islam with it's greatest challenge for those peaceable Muslims such as you and Muslimwoman. But other things too play a part, from poverty to sexual repression, in radicalising young men.... and it is by and large this group that are the problem.

I think the only hope for Islam to deal with these issues is for a massive uprising within itself by moderate peaceable Muslims. Currently this would be a very dangerous thing for moderates to do and it is no surprise there are few takers.

2c

TE

Edit: The other thing Islam has to do to protect itself from malign influences is to remove itself from politics. No small task.

 

[Muslimwoman]

Thank you for the welcome, Thomas.

I've been a member for a while. Was just more of a reader/lurker.

as salaam aleykum hidayah

A lurker yikes should we hide under the blankets with a torch?

Thank you so much for picking up on my thread. I too did not want to offend anyone but as you say, are we not taught to be intolerant/arrogant? And does this in fact go against our teaching of tolerance and understanding?

Of course there is only one G-d but as Wil so eloquently points out, do we not say "Ash-hadu an la ilaha illa'llah" - for those that do not know that means "I bear witness there is no Allah but Allah" or in fact no G-d but God.

One thing I have learned from coming on this forum is that some Christians do not see the trinity in the way we are taught they do - ie as idol worship, seperating out Jesus (pbuh) as a seperate G-d. I am still trying to get my head around it but perhaps our perceptions need to be challenged, as Thomas says, through dialogue?

I find so many verses of the Quran and stories in the Sunnah that go absolutely against this teaching of arrogance, so how on earth do we combat it? Did the Prophet himself not live peacefully with Christians and Jews? So how can I decide that this is the wrong way? Simply, I cannot, I must hold true to the terachings of the Prophet Mohammad (pbuh).

My way is to concentrate on the teaching of Allah and our Beloved Prophet (pbuh), who taught us that there is no compulsion in religion and that only Allah can judge between us. I therefore try to be humble and treat all people with dignity and leave the judgements to Allah. Maybe I am on the wrong path but I have no fear of answering this question on the Day of Judgement, whereas if I took an arrogant "we are right and everyone else is wrong" stance I would really fear answering for that when the time comes.

I also would like to hear from other Muslims on this subject.

Salaam

 

[Abdullah]

Assalamualikum wr wb.

Allah [swt], the one and only God and Creator of the universe, has sent down guidance to mankind, from the time of the first man, Adam [as], to this time, and this guidance points out the righteous path and the path of misguidance and error, and this guidance is called 'The Truth', for every man made ideology/theology/philosophy/religion is false, and only God's guidance is the absolute and objective truth.

The religion of God, from the time of the first man Adam [as] has allways been Islam, although some of the principles did undergo changes with the advent of God's Messengers.

The people were required to believe in whatever new Prophet God sent them, and submit to their teachings, even if they were a little different from what previous Prophets brought, for example, at the time of Moses [pbuh] the israelites were required to submit to Moses' [pbuh] teachings and at the time of the prophet Jesus [pbuh], they were required to submit to Jesus teachings, although they may have been a little different from what Moses [pbuh] taught.

All Messenger's are from God, therefore, if a people reject the latest Messenger, or the teachings of the latest Messenger that God sends them, they become rejectors of faith and go out of God's religion, although they may continue to believe in the past Messenger that came to them and his teachings.

So therefore, Allah and His last Messenger [saw] has made it clear that Allah sent His last Messenger [saw] with clear signs [Quranic revelations] to the whole of mankind, and that all of mankind are to follow the latest and last messenger Muhammad [saw] and the perfected and finalised version [with some changes in it from the past versions given to past Messengers] of Gods religion, that is Islam [submission to the One God, Allah swt], so rejection of the latest and last Messenger Muhammad [saw] and rejection of the final revelation, the Holy Quran, amounts to rejection of Gods religion, although people may believe to be following the religion brought to them by previous Messengers.

The belief, that only God's religion is the truth, and all man-made religions, or religions that were originally of past Messengers and which have been distorted so much that it no longer resebles the religion of the past Messengers and which also leaves out essential core and fundemental principles of God's religion, such as the principle that God is One, or the principle that people are required to believe in all of the messengers and adopt any changes in God religion brought by new Messengers, are false, is not religious arrogance for it is only believing that God religion is the truth and the rest is falsehood, and that is exactly what God wants us to believe, for if any way of life should be the truth which leads to salvation, then there would have been no point for God to send us guidance and he would have just left it to us to devise our own way of life.

Believing in God's religion as the one and only truth , and wahtever contradicts it as flasehood is what faith is all about, as 'belief' is what differentiates a believer from a rejector of faith, so therefore how can that be arrogance?

Each and every Muslim is required to believe that they are the worst and most sinfull and most inferior Muslim on earth and that all other Muslims are better than them, and concerning non-Muslims, I think I heard/read something like that Muslims should not think themselves better than the non-Muslims or think of them as worse than them and just to remain neutral on this point, for it remains to be seen as to which non-Muslim will die as a kaafir and which one will die as a believer [a non-Muslim may convert to the truth anytime before his/here death] and which one's die as kaafir, and the same remains to be seen regarding Muslims as well [for a Muslim may become a kaafir before his death, Allah forbid].

I also heard that there is an opinion in Islam that a muslim should even consider himself worse than a non-Muslim...

So given the inferiority complex which all Muslims should adopt, for humility and humbleness reasons, how can it be that believing in Gods religion as the truth and whatever contradicts it as falsehood be arrogance?. Nay, it is infact the opposite of arrogance for to disbelieve in what God defines as falsehood in His revelation, and consider it as good, or that such a path of erorr leads to salvation, is arrogance, for such a notion disregards what God says and puts our own personal reasoning above Gods words.

In the Quran it says that those who believe in some Messengers and reject others are the rejectors of faith and that the rejectors of faith will be doomed to hell.

The Jews reject Jesus [pbuh] and Muhammad [saw] and the Christians reject Muhammad [saw] and reject Jesus as a Messenger/Prophet of God. [for they regard him as God Himself]

In the Quran it says that Allah does not forgive the sin of shirk [joining partners with God]

The Christians commit shirk by taking Jesus as their god or Gods son.

And both the jews and the Christians commit shirk by obeying their priests and rabbi's in what Allah had made haraam as halaal and what Allah has made halaal as haraam.

Simmilary, all other religions other than Islam, commit the same kind of shirk, or shirks.

Peace.

 

[inhumility]

How does one avoid or prevent religious arrogance when Islam clearly states that there is no God but Allah? That we should believe ourselves to be the 'right ones' and all others are unbelievers whose eventual abode is Hell?

Hi
The right attitude is mentioned in the very first Surah Al-Fatihah of the Quran.One being already on the right path is still asking guidance from Allah. That means that one should alwayes be in a state of mind to accept any truth that comes from even an evil person. Truth is truth must be accepted on merit. This way no arrogance in attitude gets created and one remains humble, courteous and flexible with everybody, be a Mulsim or non-Muslim.
Thanks
I am an Ahmadi – a peaceful faith in Islam bridging gaps between faiths/denominations/religions/agnostics

 

[Muslimwoman]

So given the inferiority complex which all Muslims should adopt,

wa aleykum sallam brother

Surely this is the issue, Muslims SHOULD adopt this attitude but a majority do not. We have Imams that rant and condemn people during Friday prayer, Muslims go on the net and spew hatred of others - is this humble? Should we not be more concerned with our own sins and way of life, rather than point fingers and judge others, as they do to us?

Salaam

 

[Abdullah]

wa aleykum sallam brother

Surely this is the issue, Muslims SHOULD adopt this attitude but a majority do not. We have Imams that rant and condemn people during Friday prayer, Muslims go on the net and spew hatred of others - is this humble? Should we not be more concerned with our own sins and way of life, rather than point fingers and judge others, as they do to us?

Salaam

Salamualikum wr wb sister,

I'm still searching for your 'answer', so inshAllah I will post it up to you in a few days .

Regarding what you said above, I think you are right sis, in that a lot of muslims are arrogant, and they should be extra cautious of harbouring any arrogance in their hearts for it is well known in Islam that even an atom of arrogance takes one to the hell-fire.

However my dear sister, all Muslims are required to forbid the evil and enjoin the good, therefore, it is the intention that counts, i.e, if I point out the path of misguidance to other people and exhort them to the path of guidance from the intention of giving dawah [calling to Islam so that they may be saved inshAllah], then that is not arrogance and it is only doing what we are bid to do by Allah and His Messenger [saw], but if a person says such things out of arrogance, such as '"na na na na na, we have the truth, and your all going to hell" , then that is ofcourse blameworthy.

So since condemning and forbidding the munkar [evil] and enjoining righteousness is part of the duty of a Muslim, that is why we should assume the best [and not the worst] when Imams condemn munkar in their friday prayers and we should not doubt that they are doing it for dawah purposes, and not out of arrogance. [to be suspicious of a Muslim that he is doing something out of arrogance, without clear evidence, is wrong as well, for Allah tells us in the Quran not to be of much suspicion, however Allah does tell us to verify any news which a faasik [evil-doer] brings us, so we should verify to our hearts content before accepting the news brought to us by a faasik]

Aslo, when we here/read other Muslims condemn the munkar, the principle of 'giving them the benifit of the doubt' is more in line with Islam so therefore we should assume that they are doing it for dawah reasons and not out of arrogance.

However, dawah should be given in the nicest and politest of ways, and the errors/dangers of the ways of life of the non-Muslim or non-practicing Muslim should be pointed out in the nicest way possible, taking sensetivities into consideration, and it should not resemble as if one is spewing out hate, or looking down on someone's way of life out of arrgoance.

The type of 'finger pointing' that Muslims are dissuaded from is the type which only aims to bring out faults in other Muslims to publicly shame them or to ridicule or belilttle them etc, or out of a sense of arrogance

But to point out a fault of any person, for dawah reasons [so that person may rectify his/her fault and save himself from error/sin] is a good thing, for that falls under the principle of giving dawah, and a hadith enjoins it as well:

There is a hadith that says that a muslim is a mirror for another Muslim, i.e, if they see some fault in him, they point it out, so he/she can rectify it.

Salaam.

 

[Abdullah]

©Nuh Ha Mim Keller 1996

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Dear `Abd al-Matin, [/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]In the name of Allah, Most Merciful and Compassionate [/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]as-Salaamu 'alaykum wa rahmatu Llahi wa barakatuh. [/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Thank you for your question about the notion of the "universal validity" of all religions and its relation to the Sufism of Sheikh Muhyiddin Ibn al-`Arabi and Emir `Abd al-Qadir al-Jaza'iri. I do not have all the English books you mentioned that ascribe this notion to them, but I believe that some kind of an answer can be given on the basis of the books I have seen in English, and traditional Islam as I have taken it from my shiekhs in fiqh and Sufism. [/FONT]


[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]I will try to touch on some general considerations about the universality of the message of the prophets (on whom be peace), the finality of Islam, the validity of non-Islamic religions, and the positions of Ibn al-`Arabi and Emir `Abd al-Qadir versus that of some of their modern interpreters. Some of the material included has been drawn from Tariqa Notes, and some from a letter last year to Christians in the Ukraine.[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]

[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]1. The Universality of Religions and Finality of Islam. [/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Allah sent mankind and jinn His prophetic messengers (upon whom be peace), who were trustworthy, intelligent, truthful, and fully conveyed their messages. He protected them from sin, and from every physical trait unbecoming to them, though as human beings, they ate, drank, slept, and married. They were the best of all created beings; and the highest of them was him whom Allah chose to be the final seal of prophethood, our prophet Muhammad (Allah bless him and give him peace). [/FONT]


[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Though the Sacred Law of the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) superseded all previously valid religious laws, it was identical with them in beliefs, such as tawhid or "oneness of God", and so on, a fact that the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) emphasized by saying, "Let none of you say I am superior to [the prophet] Jonah," (Bukhari, 4.193: 3412), for the illumination of Jonah's tawhid (upon him be peace)--under the darkness of the storm, the darkness of the sea, and the darkness of the belly of the fish--was not less than the illumination of the Prophet's tawhid at the zenith of his success as the spiritual leader of all Arabia (Allah bless him and give him peace). The light of their message was one, in which sense the Qur'an says, "We do not differentiate between any of His messengers" (Qur'an 2:285), showing that previous religions were the same in beliefs, and though differing in provisions of works, and now abrogated by the final religion, were valid in their own times. [/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]As for today, only Islam is valid or acceptable now that Allah has sent it to all men, for the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) has said, [/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]"By Him in whose hand is the soul of Muhammad, any person of this Community, any Jew, or any Christian who hears of me and dies without believing in what I have been sent with will be an inhabitant of hell" (al-Baghawi: Sharh al-sunna 1.104).[/FONT] [FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]This hadith was also reported by Muslim in his Sahih by `Abd al-Razzaq in his Musannaf, and others. It is a rigorously authenticated (sahih) evidence that clarifies the word of Allah in surat Al 'Imran[/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]"Whoever seeks a religion other than Islam will never have it accepted from him, and shall be of those who have truly failed in the next life" (Qur'an 3:85) [/FONT][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]and many other verses and hadiths. That Islam is the only remaining valid or acceptable religion is necessarily known as part of our religion, and to believe anything other than this is unbelief (kufr) that places a person outside of Islam, as Imam Nawawi notes: [/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]"Someone who does not believe that whoever follows another religion besides Islam is an unbeliever (like Christians), or doubts that such a person is an unbeliever, or considers their sect to be valid, is himself an unbeliever (kafir) even if he manifests Islam and believes in it" (Rawda al-talibin, 10.70).[/FONT]


[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]This is not only the position of the Shafi'i school of jurisprudence represented by Nawawi, but is also the recorded position of all three other Sunni schools: Hanafi (Ibn 'Abidin: Radd al-muhtar 3.287), Maliki (al-Dardir: al-Sharh al-saghir, 4.435), and Hanbali (al-Bahuti: Kashshaf al-qina', 6.170). Those who know fiqh literature will note that each of these works is the foremost fatwa resource in its school. The scholars of Sacred Law are unanimous about the abrogation of all other religions by Islam because it is the position of Islam itself. It only remains for the sincere Muslim to submit to, in which connection Ibn al-`Arabi has said: [/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]"Beware lest you ever say anything that does not conform to the pure Sacred Law. Know that the highest stage of the perfected ones (rijal) is the Sacred Law of Muhammad (Allah bless him and give him peace). And know that the esoteric that contravenes the exoteric is a fraud" (al-Burhani: al-Hall al-sadid, 32). [/FONT]​

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]

[/FONT][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]2. Ibn al-`Arabi and Contemporary Non-Islamic Religions[/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]As for the abrogation of all religions by Islam, many of us know Muslims who believe the opposite of orthodox Islam, perhaps due to a literary and intellectual environment in which any and every notion about this world and the next can be expressed, in which novelty is highly valued, and in which tradition has little authority. Many have even sought backing for their emotive preference for the validity of other religions from the books of famous Sufis who are far from such a beliefs, such as Ibn al-`Arabi or `Abd al-Qadir al-Jaza'iri. In a recent work for example entitled "Imaginal Worlds: Ibn al-`Arabi and the Problem of Religious Diversity", Professor William Chittick says:[/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]"The Shaykh [Muhyiddin Ibn al-`Arabi] sometimes criticizes specific distortions or misunderstandings in the Qur'anic vein, but he does not draw the conclusion that many Muslims have drawn--that the coming of Islam abrogated (naskh) previous revealed religions. Rather, he says, Islam is like the sun and other religions like the stars. Just as the stars remain when the sun rises, so also the other religions remain valid when Islam appears. One can add a point that perhaps Ibn al-`Arabi would also accept: What appears as a sun from one point of view may be seen as a star from another point of view. Concerning abrogation, the Shaykh writes, [/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]"'All the revealed religions (shara'i') are lights. Among these religions, the revealed religion of Muhammad is like the light of the sun among the lights of the stars. When the sun appears, the lights of the stars are hidden, and their lights are included in the light of the sun. Their being hidden is like the abrogation of the other revealed religions that takes place through Muhammad's revealed religion. Nevertheless, they do in fact exist, just as the existence of the light of the stars is actualized. This explains why we have been required in our all-inclusive religon to have faith in the truth of all messengers and all the revealed religions. They are not rendered null (batil) by abrogation--that is the opinion of the ignorant.'([al-Futuhat al-Makkiyya,] III 153.12[16])[/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]"If the Shaykh's pronouncements on other religions sometimes fail to recognize their validity in his own time, one reason may be that, like most other Muslims living in the western Islamic lands, he had little real contact with the Christians or Jews in his environment, not to speak of followers of religions farther afield. He had probably never met a saintly representative of either of these traditions, and he almost certainly had never read anything about these two religions except what was written in Islamic sources. Hence there is no reason that he should have accepted the validity of these religions except in principle. But this is an important qualification. To maintain the particular excellence of the Qur'an and the superiority of Muhammad over all other prophets is not to deny the universal validity of revelation nor the necessity of revelations appearing in particularized expressions" (Religious Diversity, 12526). [/FONT]

read full article here:

Universal Validity of Religions

 

[Abdullah]

In the Name of Allah, Most Merciful and Compassionate

Universal Validity of Religions and the Issue of Takfir

Assalamu alaikum,

In On the validity of all religions, Sheikh Nuh Keller quotes Imam Nawawi as saying:

“Someone who does not believe that whoever follows another religion besides Islam is an unbeliever (such as Christians), or doubts that such a person is an unbeliever, or considers their sect to be valid, is himself an unbeliever (kafir) even if he manifests Islam and believes in it.” (Rawda al-talibin, 10.70).

Sheikh Nuh Keller added an important note to this:

“This ruling should not be mistaken as a manifesto to anathematize (takfir) others who outwardly profess Islam, which is the duty of the Islamic magistrate (qadi) alone, not the ordinary Muslim. Nor is it applicable without exception, but rather is subject to legal restrictions and conditions that have been detailed in the third following question, “Is someone who has an idea that is kufr or “unbelief” thereby an “unbeliever”?—to which Islamic law answers, surprisingly as it may seem to many Muslims of our times, “Not necessarily.”


read full article here:

Universal Validity of Religions and the Issue of Takfir

Peace.

 

[Abdullah]

It seems that Ibn Al-Arabi is misquoted and misunderstood when some people claim that he does not believe that the coming of Islam abrogated (naskh) previously revealed religions:

...Chittick’s claim above that Ibn al-`Arabi "does not draw the conclusion that many Muslims have drawn--that the coming of Islam abrogated (naskh) previously revealed religions" is false, and could have been corrected by a fuller translation of the passage he has quoted from the Futuhat:

"The religious laws (shara’i’) are all lights, and the law of Muhammad (Allah bless him and give him peace) among these lights is as the sun’s light among the light of the stars: if the sun comes out, the lights of the stars are no longer seen and their lights are absorbed into the light of the sun: the disappearance of their lights resembles what, of the religious laws, has been abrogated (nusikha) by his law (Allah bless him and give him peace) despite their existence, just as the lights of the stars still exist. This is why we are required by our universal law to believe in all prophetic messengers (rusul) and to believe that all their laws are truth, and did not turn into falsehood by being abrogated: that is the imagination of the ignorant. So all paths return to look to the Prophet’s path (Allah bless him and give him peace): if the prophetic messengers had been alive in his time, they would have followed him just as their religious laws have followed his law.

"For he was given Comprehensiveness of Word (Jawami’ al-Kalim), and given [the Koranic verse] ‘Allah shall give you an invincible victory’ (Koran 48:3), ‘the invincible’ [al-’aziz, also meaning rare, dear, precious, unattainable] being he who is sought but cannot be reached. When the prophetic messengers sought to reach him, he proved impossible for them to attain to--because of his [being favored above them by] being sent to the entire world (bi’thatihi al-’amma), and Allah giving him Comprehensiveness of Word (Jawami al-Kalim), and the supreme rank of possessing the Praiseworthy Station (al-Maqam al-Mahmud) in the next world, and Allah having made his Nation (Umma) ‘the best Nation ever brought forth for people’ (Koran 3:110). The Nation of every messenger is commensurate with the station of their prophet, so realize this" (al-Futuhat al-Makkiyya, III 153.1220).

The passage, when read carefully, is merely an affirmation that Allah’s messengers (upon whom be peace) were true, and everything they brought was true, which is believed by every Muslim. It further suggests that everything their laws (shara’i’ means nothing else) contained has not only been abrogated, but is thereby implicitly contained in the new revelation, in which sense "their religious laws have followed his law." A familiar example cited by ulama is the law of talion, "an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth", which was obligatory in the religious law of Moses (upon whom be peace), subsequently forbidden by the religious law of Jesus (upon whom be peace) in which "turning the other cheek" was obligatory; and finally both were superseded by the law of Muhammad (Allah bless him and give him peace), which permits victims to take retaliation (qisas) for purely intentional physical injuries, but in which it is religiously superior not to retaliate but forgive. This is the absorption of the stars’ lights into that of the sun, of "what, of the religious laws, has been abrogated by his law (Allah bless him and give him peace) despite their existence, just as the lights of the stars still exist." This is the sense in which Ibn al-`Arabi is interpreting Comprehensiveness of Word (Jawami’ al-Kalim) here.

What the passage does not say is that non-Islamic religions are valid now that the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) has been sent with Islam. Professor Chittick’s omission of the second half of the passage (which is plainly punctuated in finish by the words "so know this") is puzzling, for it is highly material to the topic, and in spirit and in letter ("because of his being sent to the entire world (bi’thatihi al-’amma)") plainly contradicts the professor’s suggestion that Ibn al-`Arabi does not believe that the coming of Islam abrogated (naskh) previously revealed religions. The wrongness of this notion is clear to anyone who reads the second half and knows what the expression bi’thatihi al-’amma means from having read it in similar contexts from other works of the traditional Islamic sciences that formed Ibn al-`Arabi’s education.

In fact, one looks in vain in the works of Ibn al-`Arabi for the belief of the validity of currently existing non-Islamic religions, for this is kufr, as Imam Nawawi and the other Imams mentioned above unanimously concur. Traditional Islam certainly does not accept the suggestion that

"it is true that many Muslims believe that the universality of guidance pertains only to pre-Koranic times, but others disagree; there is no ‘orthodox’ interpretation here that Muslims must accept" (Religious Diversity, 124).

Orthodoxy exists, it is unanimously agreed upon by the scholars of Muslims, and we have conveyed in Nawawi’s words above that to believe anything else is unbelief. As for "others disagree," it is true, but is something that has waited for fourteen centuries of Islamic scholarship down to the present century to be first promulgated in Cairo in the 1930s by the French convert to Islam Rene Gunon, and later by his student Frithjof Schuon and writers under him. Who else said it before? And if no one did, and everyone else considers it kufr, on what basis should it be accepted?

Universal Validity of Religions and the Issue of Takfir

 

[Muslimwoman]

I'm still searching for your 'answer', so inshAllah I will post it up to you in a few days .

wa aleykum salaam wr wb brother,

Thank you so much for this. I also asked a number of questions about this on the 'unseen' part of the site you gave me, they feel that I need a comprehensive answer so have forwarded my questions to a scholar. Really, may Allah bless you for your help in my seeking knowledge.

However my dear sister, all Muslims are required to forbid the evil and enjoin the good, therefore, it is the intention that counts,

I accept this brother, my difficulty comes when people that sin are telling other people that they are sinning. Should we not first work on ourselves? I shall give one small example. I like to paint my toenails and many young women will stop me in the street to point this error out, yet while they are lecturing me I am looking at the 1/2 cm of khol and mascara they wear around their eyes, to make them more beautiful, under their face veil. If I can see this so can men. So how can it be right to point out anothers fault if you yourself are at fault? Also there is the difficulty that each school has different interpretations, so what may be a fault to one is not to another (eg these women feel obliged to wear a face veil, while I do not).

So since condemning and forbidding the munkar [evil] and enjoining righteousness is part of the duty of a Muslim, that is why we should assume the best [and not the worst] when Imams condemn munkar in their friday prayers and we should not doubt that they are doing it for dawah purposes,

I am sorry brother but as you know I live surrounded by mosques and I hear the friday prayers for myself every week. Some of the Imams do spew hatred and spread tradition rather than Islam. Some of their messages are purely political and teach the ummah hatred and mistrust. Of course there are others that teach the right way and speak in a way to bring the Muslims away from the wrong path. Surely giving the ones that spew political hatred 'the benefit of the doubt' just encourages this awful and unacceptable behaviour?

However, dawah should be given in the nicest and politest of ways, and the errors/dangers of the ways of life of the non-Muslim or non-practicing Muslim should be pointed out in the nicest way possible, taking sensetivities into consideration, and it should not resemble as if one is spewing out hate, or looking down on someone's way of life out of arrgoance.

But how is this possible? Even if we speak in such a polite way the people we speak to will look at how Muslims are living and be turned from the right path. This is all I am saying, do the ummah not have to live as good Muslims before we have any right to judge others as being on the wrong path? I would not be Muslim if I did not strongly believe it to be the right path to G-d but I am too ashamed and embarrassed to make dawah. For example, I say to people that Islam is a religion of peace and killing is prohibited except in war and then Muslim brothers are killing Muslim brothers and flying planes into buildings and blowing up tourists. Of course, the people I am speaking to laugh at me and say "is this your religion of peace?" and I cannot argue against this. I know our religion is one of peace but until Muslims prove this how can we convince anyone else?

 

[Abdullah]

wa aleykum salaam wr wb brother,

Thank you so much for this. I also asked a number of questions about this on the 'unseen' part of the site you gave me, they feel that I need a comprehensive answer so have forwarded my questions to a scholar. Really, may Allah bless you for your help in my seeking knowledge.

InshAllah you will get a good and comprehensive answer from that site .

I accept this brother, my difficulty comes when people that sin are telling other people that they are sinning. Should we not first work on ourselves? I shall give one small example. I like to paint my toenails and many young women will stop me in the street to point this error out, yet while they are lecturing me I am looking at the 1/2 cm of khol and mascara they wear around their eyes, to make them more beautiful, under their face veil. If I can see this so can men. So how can it be right to point out anothers fault if you yourself are at fault? Also there is the difficulty that each school has different interpretations, so what may be a fault to one is not to another (eg these women feel obliged to wear a face veil, while I do not).

It is correct that we ourselves should be practicing Islam before we give dawah to people, for not to practice what we preach is a kind of hypocrysy

But the hadith expounds on this principle for us, and from it we know that we dont have to practice everything that we give dawah of.

Here is a chapter from the book 'Faza ile Amaal' by Shaykul Hadith, Maulana Muhammad Zakariyya Khandalvi, that explains this principle:

Most of us think that as we ourselves do not posess the essential virtues and qualities of Islam, we are not competent to perform the duty of propagation of those qualities amongsat others. This is a clear misunderstanding. Since an obligation has to be fullfilled, particularly when we have been commanded by Allah tha-ala for that task, there can be no question of denying obedience to it. We must set ourselves to work in obedience to the Divine Command. Our efforts than shall, inshAllah, gather great strength and make us more determined and resolute. In this way, our sustained endevour on proper lines wll one day bring us great honour of being dear to Allah Tha'ala. It is against the convention and Sunnah of Allah Tha'ala, that, if one perseveres and strives for His sake, He would not condescend to not bestow favours and kindness because the person was not competent or fit for the task!. This point is fully brought out in the following hadith:

Hazrat Anas [ra] relates: "We enquired of the Holy Prophet [saw], "O Prophet of Allah, is it right that we should not enjoin virtue unless we practice all the virtues oursleves, and should not forbid thw wrong unless we oursleves completely abstain from them all? "Nay", said the Prophet [saw], "do enjoin others to practice good deeds even though you do not practice all of them, and do forbid evil actions even though you do not abstain from all of them".

But how is this possible? Even if we speak in such a polite way the people we speak to will look at how Muslims are living and be turned from the right path. This is all I am saying, do the ummah not have to live as good Muslims before we have any right to judge others as being on the wrong path? I would not be Muslim if I did not strongly believe it to be the right path to G-d but I am too ashamed and embarrassed to make dawah. For example, I say to people that Islam is a religion of peace and killing is prohibited except in war and then Muslim brothers are killing Muslim brothers and flying planes into buildings and blowing up tourists. Of course, the people I am speaking to laugh at me and say "is this your religion of peace?" and I cannot argue against this. I know our religion is one of peace but until Muslims prove this how can we convince anyone else?

There were even evil-doers and hypocryts amongst the Muslims during the golden era of Islam [first three generations of Islam] sister, and did the Prophet [saw] or the Sahabas or the Tabieen stop their duty of dawah just because their were wrongdoers amongst them?, ofcourse not, so likewise, we shouldn't stop.

Dawah is the way to encourage, persuade, influence the evil-doers to stop their evil ways and surrender to God, so if there are bad Muslims amongst us, then we have all the more reason and urgency to do the work of dawah, not just to non-Muslims, but to Muslims that are astray.

And if non-Muslims say things like 'If islam is a religion of peace, then why are Muslims flying planes into buildings", then we should explain to them that it is only a tiny minority of Muslims that engage in teorrorism, and that their terrorist actions are not in accordance with Islam. We can also take the oppurtunity to show them the proof from the Quran and Sunnah of how peacefull and Just Islam really is, so we should look upon such instances as an oppurtunity to give good dawah, rather than a reason to be ashamed and ambarassed.

In Islam, no-one shares in the sin of another, and no one is responsible for anothers sin [unless we encourage it, influence it, partake in it, etc], the only reason Muslims should feel a little guilty and a bit 'responsible' for the bad actions of other Muslims is when, they were in a position to stop, influence, encourage etc [by giving dawah, etc], those Muslims to stop their bad actions, and they did not do so. So in order to absolve ourselves from sharing in the shame, ambarressment, guilt, etc, of the bad actions of other Muslims, we should be engaged in the work of dawah to the best of our ability.

Not engaging in dawah, results in the people of munkar, "pulling down everyone else with them":

The Prophet [saw] compared the society to a ship with two decks floating in a lake. He said, "Imagine that the people on the lower deck of the ship had to go to the upper deck to fetch water to drink, but one day they decided that there was no longer a need to go to the upper deck since they could easily drill a hole through the bottom of the ship. If those from the upper deck do not prevent those from the lower deck from drilling the hole, then the whole ship will end up sinking."

hope that helps

Salaam

 

[Muslimwoman]

But the hadith expounds on this principle for us, and from it we know that we dont have to practice everything that we give dawah of.

I certainly accept that an older man that drinks alcohol should encourage younger people not to do so and I would hope that Allah would reward this man for trying to keep others from the sin he commits. Perhaps the difference between dawah and hypocracy is intention?

And if non-Muslims say things like 'If islam is a religion of peace, then why are Muslims flying planes into buildings", then we should explain to them that it is only a tiny minority of Muslims that engage in teorrorism, and that their terrorist actions are not in accordance with Islam.

I am sure you have read some of my posts where I do exactly this, however I believe until Muslims are prepared to really speak out against other Muslims then our efforts are wasted and must seem hypocritical. It is not just the tiny minority of terrorists, it is also the horrific oppression of women in Saudi and Afghanistan, the mutilation of girls in Egypt, the Saudi's that spend a fortune on prostitutes and alchohol when they visit London, etc. These things stay in peoples minds and for me to say "oh no, none of this is Islam", when millions of Muslims live this way makes me look like I have a screw loose and know nothing of our religion. We have all seen the Imams on tv that say if they knew of a group of Muslims planning to bomb a city they would not tell the police, as it is unIslamic to speak against another Muslim. IMHO this shows the world that Muslims are not prepared to deal with their own, we are prepared to allow people to die because it is not our place to criticise another Muslim who is following his beliefs. Sorry but I can't get my head around that, if I knew a Muslim that was planning a bombing I would be in the police station in 30 seconds flat. So why should anyone believe me when I say Islam is a religion of peace? Yes I can show them verses of the Quran but people do not want to read a book they are told is full of hatred and violence and many Muslims do prove this to them. It is like trying to lean against a mountain and expect the mountain to move.

I would be interested in your view on when a person is deemed to have received the message of Islam? I have asked this a couple of times on other threads but no-one has answered me.


Salaam

 

[hidayah]

Thank you for the comprehensive replies. (Oh, I do so enjoy exchanges of words between the both of you [Abdullah, Muslimwoman])

I would like to add how education and da'wah plays a strong part in all this. On the radio, in mosques, in classes, almost all asatizahs I have studied underhave a similar way of teaching. They preach Islam with a clenched fist and raised voices. They preach fear before love.

This is where it all starts. I'm lucky to be brought up in a peaceful, multi racial and religious country else I fear I might just strap myself to bombs, with all the anger that is preached. Alright, I'm joking. But seriously. You can't blame people for acting a certain way when they're brought up and taught since young that Non Muslims are alcohol guzzling, immoral infidels. (I don't think this myself, it's just how Muslims kids seem to be brought up to know mostly)

I was brought up in a religious environment, alhamdulillah. But what a religious environment! Imams shouting Allahu Akbar with clenched fists, frightening stories about Hell torture, mothers whispering and pointing and associating Non Muslim attire with Satan and such. Hm. I am lucky in the course of my early years as a Muslim, that I was a curious kid. I read more than I listened. I thought, surely there is more to Allah than fear and judgement! Only through Qur'anic studies, other books and websites did I discover the true beauty of Islam, not from my religious teachers.

But what about others? What about kids who just swallow whatever is fed to them about Islam?

It's not surprising to me to see so many violent acts committed under the flag of Islam. They are acting on how they are brought up.

I'm just saying, something needs to be done about how we educate our kids on Islam. Something needs to be done about the loud voiced Imams with their clenched fists.

By G-d, surely love comes before fear...

 

[Abdullah]

Thank you for the comprehensive replies. (Oh, I do so enjoy exchanges of words between the both of you [Abdullah, Muslimwoman])

If only I could get the better of her bro, but she is too clever for me lol

I would like to add how education and da'wah plays a strong part in all this. On the radio, in mosques, in classes, almost all asatizahs I have studied underhave a similar way of teaching. They preach Islam with a clenched fist and raised voices. They preach fear before love.

This is where it all starts. I'm lucky to be brought up in a peaceful, multi racial and religious country else I fear I might just strap myself to bombs, with all the anger that is preached. Alright, I'm joking. But seriously. You can't blame people for acting a certain way when they're brought up and taught since young that Non Muslims are alcohol guzzling, immoral infidels. (I don't think this myself, it's just how Muslims kids seem to be brought up to know mostly)

I was brought up in a religious environment, alhamdulillah. But what a religious environment! Imams shouting Allahu Akbar with clenched fists, frightening stories about Hell torture, mothers whispering and pointing and associating Non Muslim attire with Satan and such. Hm. I am lucky in the course of my early years as a Muslim, that I was a curious kid. I read more than I listened. I thought, surely there is more to Allah than fear and judgement! Only through Qur'anic studies, other books and websites did I discover the true beauty of Islam, not from my religious teachers.

But what about others? What about kids who just swallow whatever is fed to them about Islam?

It's not surprising to me to see so many violent acts committed under the flag of Islam. They are acting on how they are brought up.

I'm just saying, something needs to be done about how we educate our kids on Islam. Something needs to be done about the loud voiced Imams with their clenched fists.

By G-d, surely love comes before fear...

You ae right that we indeed need a better aproach to teachings our children and Muslims in general; to worship with love is indeed better than to worship with fear.

Salaam.