Pages

Tuesday, July 21, 2020

Is Quran the Word of God or Sayings of a Great Reformer? A Study of The Most Authoritative Books of Quran Sciences, Ahadith And Tafaseer By Imam Ibn Hanbal, Imam Suyuti, Ibn-e-Kaseer, Etc

By Abdur Rahman Hamza, New Age Islam

 26 May 2020
  
(Revised with some additions on 8 June 2020)
  
“Every madrasa in the world teaches that Qurʾān is uncreated, like God. The implication is that the universality of any of the verses of Quran cannot be questioned, all of them have to be followed till eternity and every instruction remains applicable to Muslims for ever. Now, with this understanding, how can one question the motives of Jihadis when they quote militant, war-time verses of Qurʾān from Surah Tawbah, Surah Anfal and several others to justify their actions.”
  
This is what Mr. Sultan Shahin said in his speech at UNHRC, Geneva on 19 November 2019 entitled “Indian Muslim Clergy to Counter ISIS Propaganda: But they should go beyond rhetoric to a genuine counter-narrative that refutes Jihadism based on traditional Islamic theology” Though, I highly appreciate Mr. Sultan Shahin’s  tireless efforts for bringing a progressive change in the Muslim attitude in order to come out of the trap they are in and march towards a better future, after a thorough study of the Quran, I have reached the conclusion that if we sincerely and honestly want to bring about a meaningful change in the  Muslim outlook, we will have to, go even beyond the question of createdness and uncreatedness of Quran. We must first of all, ponder over the question whether Quran is really the word of God or Hazrat Muhammad just used revelation as a convenient way of carrying out his mission which he thought was necessary to reform the uncivilized Arab society. In the times and environment, he lived in, claims of revelation was perhaps the most powerful way of influencing the minds of illiterate Bedouins living in a desert 1400 years ago.

 Unless we tackle this basic issue first and reflect on it openly and frankly, no reform in Muslim worldview seems possible. The question of createdness and uncreatedness of Quran will stand automatically resolved if we accept Hazrat Mohammad as a great reformer of his time.

We find in the Quran many examples of the verses being produced as mere response to a particular situation after an incident had already occurred. They cannot be said to have been written in Lauh-e-Mahfooz (the Preserved Tablet, co-eternal with God, lying in an eternal divine vault in Heaven) from before the creation as is believed by majority of Muslims. This is not possible as some of the verses are statements of Hazrat Muhammad during verbal confrontations between him and his opponents while some others are desires, suggestions or statements made by his close friends, Sahaba and his wives which were immediately testified to by Allah (or Hazrat Muhammad) as a part of revelations. Here are a few such examples:
 Note: The occasions of the revelation of all these verses are mentioned in the most authoritative books on the study of Quran, taught in all madrasas, “Al- Itqan Fi Uloom-il- Quran (The Perfect Guide to the Sciences of the Qur’an) by Allama Jalaluddin Suyuti and Tafseer Ibne Kathir, etc. Interestingly, Maulana Maududi, Maulana Shabbir Usmani and many others have completely refrained from mentioning them in their discourses on Quran. The reasons are not difficult to imagine.

First example: Quran 2:125
وَاتَّخِذُواْ مِن مَّقَامِ إِبْرَهِيمَ مُصَلًّى

2: 125 (And take you (people) the Maqam (place) of Ibrahim (Abraham) as a place of prayer) meaning, they return to it repeatedly.’’ He then narrated that Anas bin Malik said that `Umar bin Al-Khattab said, “I agreed with my Lord, or my Lord agreed with me, regarding three matters. I said, `O Messenger of Allah! I wish you take the Maqam of Ibrahim a place for prayer.’ The Ayah,
﴿وَاتَّخِذُواْ مِن مَّقَامِ إِبْرَهِيمَ مُصَلًّى﴾

(And take you (people) the Maqam (place) of Ibrahim (Abraham)) was revealed. I also said, `O Messenger of Allah! The righteous and the wicked enter your house. I wish you would command the mothers of the believers (the Prophet’s wives) to wear Hijab. Allah sent down the Ayah that required the Hijab. And when I knew that the Prophet was angry with some of his wives, I came to them and said, `Either you stop what you are doing, or Allah will endow His Messenger with better women than you are.’ I advised one of his wives and she said to me, `O `Umar! Does the Messenger of Allah not know how to advise his wives, so that you have to do the job instead of him’ Allah then revealed:
﴿عَسَى رَبُّهُ إِن طَلَّقَكُنَّ أَن يُبْدِلَهُ أَزْوَجاً خَيْراً مِّنكُنَّ مُسْلِمَـتٍ﴾

(It may be if he divorced you (all) that his Lord will give him instead of you, wives better than you. (66:5)

Tafseer Ibn Kathir further says: (at that time) Umar said:  "I said, `O Messenger of Allah, what trouble do you feel from your wives If you have divorced them, verily Allah is with you, His angels, Jibril, Mikal, I, Abu Bakr and the rest of believers are with you.' Often, when I talked, all praise is due to Allah, I hoped that Allah would testify to the words that I uttered. And so, the Ayat of option was revealed. Allah said,
(Maybe his Lord, if he divorces you, will give him in your place wives better than you,) and, (but if you help one another against him, then verily, Allah is his Protector, and Jibril, and the righteous among the believers; and after that the angels are his helpers.
These verses related to the scandal of Maria Qibtia.

Second example: Quran 33:35

إِنَّ الْمُسْلِمِينَ وَالْمُسْلِمَاتِ وَالْمُؤْمِنِينَ وَالْمُؤْمِنَاتِ وَالْقَانِتِينَ وَالْقَانِتَاتِ وَالصَّادِقِينَ وَالصَّادِقَاتِ وَالصَّابِرِينَ وَالصَّابِرَاتِ وَالْخَاشِعِينَ وَالْخَاشِعَاتِ وَالْمُتَصَدِّقِينَ وَالْمُتَصَدِّقَاتِ وَالصَّائِمِينَ وَالصَّائِمَاتِ وَالْحَافِظِينَ فُرُوجَهُمْ وَالْحَافِظَاتِ وَالذَّاكِرِينَ اللَّهَ كَثِيرًا وَالذَّاكِرَاتِ أَعَدَّ اللَّهُ لَهُمْ مَغْفِرَةً وَأَجْرًا عَظِيمًا

35. Verily, the Muslims: men and women, the believers: men and women, the Qanit: men and the women, the men and women who are truthful, the men and the women who are patient, the Khashi`: men and the women, the men and the women who give Sadaqat, the men and the women who fast, the men and the women who guard their chastity and the men and the women who remember Allah much with their hearts and tongues, Allah has prepared for them forgiveness and a great reward.

The Reason for Revelation

Founder of the Hanbali school of Sunni jurisprudence, Imam Ahmad Ibn Hanbal recorded that Umm Salamah, may Allah be pleased with her, the wife of the Prophet said, "I said to the Prophet, `Why is it that we are not mentioned in the Qur'an as men are.' Then one day without my realizing it, he was calling from the Minbar (a pulpit in the mosque) and I was combing my hair, so I tied my hair back then I went out to my chamber in my house, and I started listening out, and he was saying from the Minbar: Quran 33: 35

 

«يَاأَيُّهَا النَّاسُ إِنَّ اللهَ تَعَالَى يَقُولُ:
﴿إِنَّ الْمُسْلِمِينَ وَالْمُسْلِمَـتِ وَالْمُؤْمِنِينَ وَالْمُؤْمِنَـتِ……﴾»

(O
(O people! Verily Allah says: [For Muslim men and women,- for believing men and women, for devout men and women, for true men and women, for men and women who are patient and constant, for men and women who humble themselves, for men and women who give in Charity, for men and women who fast (and deny themselves), for men and women who guard their chastity, and for men and women who engage much in Allah's praise,- for them has Allah prepared forgiveness and great reward.]  Quran 33: 35 '')
This incident and Umm Salamah’s statement were also recorded by An-Nasa'i and Ibn Jarir

(Note that “O people! Verily Allah says: “is not part of the Quran, though reported by Umm Salamah as part of revelation.)

Third example: Quran 2:97-98

قُلْ مَنْ كَانَ عَدُوًّا لِجِبْرِيلَ فَإِنَّهُ نَزَّلَهُ عَلَىٰ قَلْبِكَ بِإِذْنِ اللَّهِ مُصَدِّقًا لِمَا بَيْنَ يَدَيْهِ وَهُدًى وَبُشْرَىٰ لِلْمُؤْمِنِينَ٩٧مَنْ كَانَ عَدُوًّا لِلَّهِ وَمَلَائِكَتِهِ وَرُسُلِهِ وَجِبْرِيلَ وَمِيكَالَ فَإِنَّ اللَّهَ عَدُوٌّ لِلْكَافِرِينَ٩٨

97. Say (O Muhammad ): "Whoever is an enemy to Jibril (Gabriel) (let him die in his fury), for indeed he has brought it (this Qur'an) down to your heart by Allah's permission, confirming what came before it (i.e. the Tawrah and the Injeel) and guidance and glad tidings for the believers. 98. "Whoever is an enemy to Allah, His Angels, His Messengers, Jibril and Mika'il, then verily, Allah is an enemy to the disbelievers.''

 The Reason for Revelation

Imam Abu Ja`far bin Jarir At-Tabari said, "The scholars of Tafsir agree that this Ayah (2: 97-98) was revealed in response to the Jews who claimed that Jibril (Gabriel) is an enemy of the Jews and that Mika'il (Michael) is their friend.'' Al-Bukhari said, "Allah said,

Say (O Muhammad): "Whoever is an enemy to Jibril (Gabriel) (let him die in his fury), 98. "Whoever is an enemy to Allah, His Angels, His Messengers, Jibril and Mika'il, then verily, Allah is an enemy to the disbelievers.''

Allama Jalaluddin Suyuti writes in “Al- Itqan Fi Uloomil Quran” that it has been narrated that Abdur Rehman Bin Abi Laila said that one day a Jew met Umar Bin Al- Khattab and said to him. “Gabriel about whom your friend (Muhammad) often talks is our enemy. Umar replied, “Whoever is an enemy to Allah, His Angels, His Messengers, Jibril and Mika'il, then verily, Allah is an enemy to the disbelievers.'' Abdur Rehman says Umars’s words were testified by Allah and this verse was revealed.

Allama Suyuti has also mentioned many verses which were actually words from the mouth of Sahabah (Hazrat Muhammad’s followers) and were later testified by Allah (or Hazrat Muhammad) and became part of the Quran. Apart from these, there are many examples of Hazrat Muhammad being rescued rather conveniently from one predicament or another by divine revelation about which Hazrat Aisha, his favourite wife, once commented, “I feel that your Lord hastens in fulfilling your wishes and desires.

Fourth example: Quran 2:196

وَأَتِمُّوا الْحَجَّ وَالْعُمْرَةَ لِلَّهِ ۚ فَإِنْ أُحْصِرْتُمْ فَمَا اسْتَيْسَرَ مِنَ الْهَدْيِ ۖ وَلَا تَحْلِقُوا رُءُوسَكُمْ حَتَّىٰ يَبْلُغَ الْهَدْيُ مَحِلَّهُ ۚ فَمَنْ كَانَ مِنْكُمْ مَرِيضًا أَو
بِهِ أَذًى مِنْ رَأْسِهِ فَفِدْيَةٌ مِنْ صِيَامٍ أَوْ صَدَقَةٍ أَوْ نُسُك ٍ

 2: 196. “And complete Hajj and `Umrah for Allah. But if you are prevented, then sacrifice a Hady that you can afford, and do not shave your heads until the Hady reaches the place of sacrifice. And whosoever of you is ill or has an ailment on his scalp (necessitating shaving), he must pay a Fidyah (ransom) of either fasting or giving Sadaqah or a sacrifice.”

The Reason for Revelation

Al-Bukhari reported that `Abdur-Rahman bin Asbahani said that he heard `Abdullah bin Ma`qil saying that he sat with Ka`b bin Ujrah in the mosque of Kufah (in Iraq). He then asked him about the Fidyah of the fasting. Ka`b said, "This was revealed concerning my case especially, but it is also for you in general. I was carried to Allah's Messenger and the lice were falling in great numbers on my face. The Prophet said:
«مَا كُنْتُ أُرَى أَنَّ الْجَهْدَ بلَغَ بكَ هذَا، أمَا تَجِدُ شَاة»؟
؟لَاقُلْتُ
(I never thought that your ailment (or struggle) had reached such an extent as I see. Can you afford a sheep (for sacrifice)' I replied in the negative.) He then said:

«صُمْ ثَلَاثَةَ أَيَّامٍ أَوْ أَطْعِمْ سِتَّةَ مَسَاكِينَ، لِكُلِّ مِسْكِينٍ نِصْفُ صَاعٍ مِنْ طَعَامٍ، وَاحْلِقْ رَأْسَك»

(Fast for three days or feed six poor persons, each with half a Sa` of food (1 Sa` = 3 kilograms approx.) and shave your head.)

So, this is a general judgement derived from a specific case.

We also find plenty of examples of just in-time revelations in the Quran. The following is one such example of the prophet of Allah being rescued rather conveniently from one predicament by divine revelation.

لَا يَسْتَوِي الْقَاعِدُونَ مِنَ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ غَيْرُ أُولِي الضَّرَرِ وَالْمُجَاهِدُونَ فِي سَبِيلِ اللَّهِ بِأَمْوَالِهِمْ وَأَنْفُسِهِمْ ۚ

Q 4:95: “Not equal are those of the believers who sit (at home), except those who are disabled, and those who strive hard and fight in the cause of Allah with their wealth and their lives.”
Interpretation of this verse in Sahih Bukhari:

حَدَّثَنَا عُبَيْدُ اللَّهِ بْنُ مُوسَى، عَنْ إِسْرَائِيلَ، عَنْ أَبِي إِسْحَاقَ، عَنِ الْبَرَاءِ، قَالَ لَمَّا نَزَلَتْ ‏{‏لاَ يَسْتَوِي الْقَاعِدُونَ مِنَ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ وَالْمُجَاهِدُونَ فِي سَبِيلِ اللَّهِ‏}‏ قَالَ النَّبِيُّ صلى الله عليه وسلم ‏"‏ ادْعُ لِي زَيْدًا وَلْيَجِئْ بِاللَّوْحِ وَالدَّوَاةِ وَالْكَتِفِ ـ أَوِ الْكَتِفِ وَالدَّوَاةِ ـ ثُمَّ قَالَ ‏"‏ اكْتُبْ لاَ يَسْتَوِي الْقَاعِدُونَ ‏"‏ وَخَلْفَ ظَهْرِ النَّبِيِّ صلى الله عليه وسلم عَمْرُو بْنُ أُمِّ مَكْتُومٍ الأَعْمَى قَالَ يَا رَسُولَ اللَّهِ فَمَا تَأْمُرُنِي فَإِنِّي رَجُلٌ ضَرِيرُ الْبَصَرِ فَنَزَلَتْ مَكَانَهَا ‏{‏لاَ يَسْتَوِي الْقَاعِدُونَ مِنَ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ {‏غَيْرُ أُولِي لضَّرَرِ‏}‏‏"‏

Translation:
 Narrated Al-Bara:
 There was revealed: 'Not equal are those believers who sit (at home) and those who strive and fight in the Cause of Allah.' (4.95) The Prophet () said, "Call Zaid for me and let him bring the board, the inkpot and the scapula bone (or the scapula bone and the ink pot)."' Then he said, "Write: 'Not equal are those Believers who sit..", and at that time `Amr bin Um Maktum, the blind man was sitting behind the Prophet (). He said, "O Allah's Apostle! What is your order for me (as regards the above Verse) as I am a blind man?" So, instead of the above Verse, the following Verse was revealed: 'Not equal are those believers who sit (at home) except those who are disabled (by injury or are blind or lame etc.) and those who strive and fight in the cause of Allah.' (4.95) - Sahih Bukhari 6:61:512
 Note the sequence of events in the above hadith:
Prophet Muhammad receives a revelation, which is part of Sura 4:95 as it exists today.
Prophet Muhammad calls Zaid to write down the revelation and begins to recite it to Zaid: “All who fail to participate in jihad are viewed as inferior to those who do participate.”
A blind man asks how the verse applies to him, since he is blind and cannot participate in jihad.
Prophet Muhammad then conveniently receives a new revelation that adds an exception to jihad for the blind and disabled.
 The famous Pakistani Alim Mufti Muhammad Taqi Usmani, the son of Maulana Ashraf Ali Thanwi’s Khalifah Mufti Shafi Usmani, in his book, ‘The Chronology and Background of Quranic Revelation’ says  that “The  smallest portion of the Quran to be  revealed  was ” لضرر غيرأولى "...except those who are disabled” (al-Nisa’, 4:94) which forms part of a longer verse.

 In the light of the above verses, it is difficult to determine which verse is genuine (divine), which verse is altered and which verse is simply a human addition.

Before we reach a final conclusion, it would be appropriate for us to look at a few Islamic rulings which are open violation of human rights, but Islam retained some of them in their original form and some others with minor changes because these  were common among the Bedouin tribes of pre-Islamic Arabia and were not considered flawed. Here are some examples:

(1) Punishment for adultery: First the Qur'an commanded such women to be imprisoned in the house for life according to the old custom of the Arab society (4:15) and later according to the second commandment they are to be stoned to death which was the punishment in the Torah.

(2) Punishment for theft: Verse 5:38 “As for the thief, both male and female, cut off their hands. It is the reward of their own deeds, an exemplary punishment from Allah. Allah is Mighty, Wise”.

(3) Violence against women: The Qur'an allows the husband to beat his wife for disobeying and speaking out, although severe beating, that is, beating that causes injury is forbidden. The purpose of the permission for husband to beat his wife lightly is to force her to obey. Reference: Majmooa-e-Qawaneen-ne- Islami, Published by Muslim Personal Law Board Page 150 Section 214

(4) Arrangement of marriage of a minor by the father or grand-father: If the father or grandfather arranged with good intention, the marriage of the minor to a person who is not equal to her in the society, for example, the husband is illiterate, poor or illiterate  whereas the girl is from a civilized and educated family, then the marriage will take place and it will remain obligatory. In such a case, even after reaching puberty, the girl will not have the right to get the marriage annulled. In case the girl insists on annulment, she will have to prove to the Qazi the cruelty of the husband or that he is suffering from some communicable disease. Then, the Qazi will take the decision at his own discretion because in Islam, marriage is the slavery of the woman and after the marriage the husband becomes the owner of the wife's body just as the slave girl is his property. That is why the Mahr  (dowry) is called “Maal-e- Buza in Islam, i.e. the price of woman’s vulva  (her private parts). - Reference: Majmooa-e-Qawaneen-e- Islami, Published by Muslim Personal Law Board, Page 238 Section 323 with Arabic footnote.

Note: The custom of selling daughters by their fathers existed in the Arab society as one of four types of marriages before the advent of Islam with the exception that the mehr was then received by the father, not by the daughter).

(5) If a man remarries without the consent of the first wife and the first wife cannot bear the trauma and she only demands khula  (separation), still the woman does not have the right to khula on that basis. (when Ayyub Khan introduced family laws in Pakistan and gave this right to the first wife if she is unable to reconcile, the Ulema of that country vehemently opposed it by saying that it was un-Islamic).

(6) In the case of Qisas (retaliation in kind), Islamic law says that if a Muslim kills an infidel, the Muslim will not be killed in return, but the heirs of the slain person will be forced to take Diyat (blood money). And the amount of Diyat is also very discriminatory. For example, in Saudi Arabia, where Islamic law is enforced, the Diyat of the slain people belonging to different religions is like this.

Diyat (blood money) of a Muslim victim is 100,000 riyals
Diyat for a Muslim woman and a Christian man is 50,000 riyals
Diyat of a Christian woman 25000 riyals
Diyat of a Hindu man is 6,666 riyals
Diyat of a Hindu woman is 3,333 riyals

 (7) Apostasy: Apostasy is punishable by death or life imprisonment. A person is born in a Muslim home so he is called a Muslim without any reference to his will or consciousness. When he grows up and becomes an adult, he studies Islam honestly, reads the books written by his own elders and Islamic scholars and finds many things unreasonable or out of date. He is not satisfied with this religion and ultimately decides to leave it. Now, as per the Islamic law he will be given a chance to repent and come back to the fold of Islam within three days, but if he fails to do so in the stipulated period, he will be sentenced to death or life imprisonment. This practice is considered against the freedom of religion and freedom of conscience in today's world.

(8) If the father of a minor girl dies and she has no grandfather either, then her uncle or uncle’s son becomes her guardian. Now, if a situation arises when the minor girl is forced to be married , then her mother who gave birth to her, does not have the right to choose her daughter’s husband, instead, the uncle, and  in his absence,  the cousin of the minor girl will have the right to choose her husband.

(9) Marriage of a minor girl: Marriage of a minor girl is permissible in Islam. Even a three- or four-year-old girl can get married. Scholars advice the husband not to have intercourse with her until she becomes an adult, but if the husband does so and the child is injured or physically harmed as a result, then the husband, though, will be responsible for her treatment, but neither he will  be punished in this world, nor will he be sinful in the sight of God.

(10) If a father kills his son or daughter, retribution (Qisaswill not be taken from the father even if the mother of the slain son or daughter demands it.

(11)  Although slavery is now abolished, it is not without interest to know that if a master kills his slave, the master will not be killed in retaliation. This was the custom in the Arab society even before the advent of Islam. This practice continued in Islam.

(12) Offensive Jihad: The jihad movements being waged by ISIS, Boko Haram and various Islamic organizations in fact represent the true teachings of Islam, even though our scholars issue fatwas against it saying that their activities are un-Islamic. These are just rhetoric. After reading the commentaries of Maulana Abul-Ala Maududi, Syed Qutb of Egypt, Mufti Shafi Usmani of Pakistan and Allama Ibn Katheer etc, it becomes crystal clear that verse 193 of Surah Al- Baqarah demands from all Muslims to keep fighting for the world domination of Islam till the Day of Judgment. 

However, Islamic jurisprudence allows Muslims to extend a hand of friendship and peace to non-Muslims wherever they are weak and do not have the strength to fight and win, but it is mandatory for them to try their utmost to strengthen themselves within, and when they are confident of victory in any  part of the world, they must wage jihad under the leadership of a Khalifah and must reject the offer of friendship and peaceful coexistence and strive to enforce Sharia. This offensive jihad is farz-e-kifayah. ISIS and Boko Haram etc. are the true followers of real Islam. These organizations are citing the Qur'an and Hadith, particularly the war related verses of surah AL-Anfal, surah At-Taubah and surah Al-Baqarah (verse 193), as proof of their jihad being Islamic.

In fact, most of the above practices are those that were already prevalent in Arab society. The society in which Hazrat Muhammad (pbuh) opened his eyes was a tribal society consisting of illiterate Bedouin tribes. Obviously, in order to reform such a society, it was possible to reform it only within the limitations of the same social structure. For this, it was necessary to take into account their temperament, beliefs and habits. Shah Waliullah Muhaddith Dehlavi writes in his famous book Hujjatullah -ul-Balghah that, when  prophets  legislate Shara’e ( plural of Sharia) laws, they take into account all the hidden beliefs and habits that are embedded in the people such as the disease, “ Maraz-e- Kalb” (Rabies) is embedded in a person.  Reference: Hujjatullah al-Balighah, Volume I, Page 224, Chapter 56.  

See also Hujjatullah al-Balighah, Volume I, Chapter-73, Page No- 32. For further details.

Note: Mufti Abdul Quddus Rumi Saheb Marhoom, the then mufti shaher Agra, had serious objection to Hujjatullh-ul-Balighah being taught in Darul Uloom Deoband, by Qari Tayyab Saheb Marhoom, the then rector of the madrasah.

In the light of the above facts, it can be rightly assumed that not all the rules of Islam are eternal and universal, but most of the rules could only apply to that generation and that also for a certain period of time.

However, the fact that most of the teachings of the Qur'an are useful and worthy of imitation for humanity is beyond dispute. But we must also realize that the changes that Prophet Muhammad brought to Arab society were merely an improvement for that region and society of that time. In his time and in his generation, Hazrat Muhammad was a great social reformer. He created a new system of social security and a family structure that improved the previous system. We can accept the good things out of it and let go of the things that are harmful to us in the 21st century, such as offensive jihad, underage marriage, violence against women, etc.

Therefore, the change of time and place demands that Islamic jurisprudence be revised and amended so that it can meet the requirements of the 21st century.
In the light of the above facts, some people would be right in concluding that Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) was a great social reformer and that he adopted the method which was most appropriate at that time for the betterment of his uncivilized society. It seems that he himself may have felt that he was chosen by God to do this job. This is also conceivable in the light of the rational explanation offered by Shah Waliyyullah when, after mentioning Hazrat Muhammad and Hazrat Maryam seeing Hazrat Jibril and Hazrat Muhammad’s Meraj (ascending to heavens) experience and some other similar incidents, he has written, that  all  these things can also be considered as sensory existence, which means that it was merely a feeling of the person concerned  i.e., Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) and Hazrat Maryam as is the case with a person in a state of sleep or illness when he  visualises strange things and hears terrible voices which are his own feelings while in reality, they do not exist outside in  the real world.

It is tragic, that all this information is contained in the writings of our elders. Allama Suyuti's al-Atqan Fi Uloom-il-Quran is available for external study in all Islamic madrassas including Darul Uloom Deoband, Mazahirul Uloom, Saharanpur, And Brailvi madrasas, all over the country and is part of the curriculum of Islamic studies at Jamia Millia Islamia and Aligarh Muslim University. Hujjatullah Al-Balgha is being taught in the specialization curriculum after Faraghat in Darul Uloom Deoband.

 It is written in the same book, “Al-Itqan Fi Uloom-il-Quran that Hazrat A’esha said  that after  the death of the Holy Prophet, when People were busy preparing and burying his dead body,  many verses of the Qur'an, including the verse of stoning and many verses of surah Al-Ahzab which were written on leaves and were placed under the pillow were eaten by the animal of the house (goat). Therefore, a large part of the Qur'an has now disappeared from the Qur'an. If so, what about God's promise to protect the Qur'an?  

On his part, Shah Waliyyullah has written in Hujjatullah-ul-Balighah, “It was the duty of the prophet (Hazrat Muhammad) to establish the domination of Islam over all other religions and not leave anybody outside its domination whether they accept it voluntarily or after humiliation. Thus, the people will be divided into three categories. 

“1) Those who follow the religion of Islam inwardly (sincerely).  
“2) Those who follow Islam outwardly because they have no other option and no capability to resist.
“3) Lowly Kafir (unbelievers), who have to be tasked with lowly labour works like harvesting, threshing, carrying of loads, for which animals are used.  

“The messenger of God also imposes a law of suppression and humiliation on the kafirs and imposes jizya on them in order to dominate and humiliate them …. He does not treat them as equal to Muslims in the matters of Qisas (Retaliation in kind), Diyat (blood money), marriage and government administration so that these restrictions should ultimately force them to embrace Islam.”

Now, our claim of Islam being a religion of peace and “la ikraha fiddin” (there is no compulsion in religion) becomes meaningless.  It should have happened that these books would not have existed in the first place, or if they had, they should have been burnt in the beginning if our Ulema wanted to protect the Muslims’ aqeedah (faith) in prophethood.  

The questions that naturally come to mind after reading these books have no satisfactory answers. Instead, the questioner is only asked not to let these questions prop up in his mind, lest the faith in prophet-hood should be lost. How is this possible?

درمیان قعرِ دریا تختہ بندم کردئی ۔۔۔۔ باز می گوئی کہ دامن تر مکن ہشیا ر باش
Translation: "I have been tied to a plank in the middle of the river and then it is said to me, "Look, don't get wet, be careful.”

How can this be?


Monday, July 20, 2020

Hagia Sophia: Conversion of A World Heritage to A Worship Place for One Community Is an Insensitive Act

By Fr. Midhun J Francis for New Age Islam
20 July 2020
The conversion of a symbolic world heritage to a mosque amid widespread international protest is an insensitive act that would turn millions of Christians around the world against Islam. This also goes against the wish of the document “Human Fraternity for World Peace and Living Together,” signed by His Holiness Pope Francis and the Grand Imam of Al-Azhar Ahamad al-Tayyib, which states, "In the name of human fraternity, which embraces all human beings, unites them and renders them equal.”

Hagia Sofia, the Byzantine cathedral, is renowned for its wonder since it was built in the sixth century by Emperor Justinian I. It has also witnessed the “Great Schism” between Latin West and Greek East, when Cardinal Humbert, a French Benedictine, laid a papal bull of excommunication of the patriarch Michael I Cerularius, on the high altar of the Cathedral of Hagia Sophia during the celebration of the Divine Liturgy on 16 July 1054. (Note: This excommunication was lifted by the "Joint Catholic-Orthodox Declaration of 1965”, signed by Pope Paul VI and Constantinople's Patriarch Athenagoras I). The fourth crusaders from the western church invaded the Byzantine Empire and occupied it in 1204, converting the Hagia Sofia to the Roman Catholic Church, later recaptured by the Byzantine Emperor in 1261, restoring it to the Greek Orthodox Cathedral. The Ottomans under the rule of the Sultan, Mehemet II, conquered the Byzantine Empire and converted the cathedral into a mosque on 29 May 1453 and it remained a mosque until 1931. Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, the founding father of the Republic of Turkey, who served as the first president from 1923 until his death in 1938, turned the mosque into a museum for the entire of humanity, recognizing the legacy of Hagia Sofia. The Byzantine Empire, as the new Rome, lasted nearly a thousand years. It was renowned for its literature, politics, theology, and architecture. The empire is also a synthesis of Roman politics, Greek philosophy, and Christian spirituality: the Asian religion founded in Jerusalem. So, the empire’s history has political, military and ecclesiastical past as well. 
The Hagia Sofia Cathedral has been a synthesis of all these traditions, Greek philosophy and Christian theologies, with the Emperor of Byzantine as its political head and the Patriarch of Constantinople as its ecclesiastical head. The study of Hagia Sofia is not merely an archaeological investigation of a building, but more than that, it is a political, religious and cultural investigation. Hagia Sophia remains so exceptional that it has also been used to promote tourism in Istanbul, Turkey in the 21st century. This classical building is the most visited tourist spot in Turkey since the early 21st century, and few modern tourists are likely to visit Istanbul without seeing at least the exterior of the building designed by Isidorus of Miletus, a mathematician, engineer and an expert on Archimedes and Anthemios of Tralles, a mathematician and experimental scientist of the Classical tradition.
 President Recep Tayyip Erodgan allowed Muslim prayers at Hagia Sophia in May as part of a ceremony to commemorate the 567th anniversary of the conquest of Istanbul. Credit...Associated Press
---
On 10 July 2020, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan officially turned Hagia Sophia into a mosque that had been a museum for nearly a century, despite strong opposition from Christian Orthodox Church leaders in Turkey, Greece, Cyprus and Russia, and from secular world leaders who wanted Hagia Sophia to remain unchanged as a museum. Erdogan 's decision on Hagia Sofia seems like a victim's decision, since Turkey's 20th-century secular rulers have also restricted freedom of religious speech, for decades banning headscarves in state institutions, among other initiatives. Erdogan being the conservative victimized leader of the country said, “The revival of Hagia Sophia is the harbinger of freedom of Al-Aqsa and the footsteps of Muslims emerging from the era of interregnum.” Converting the museum into a mosque has also his political motives, which aim to score political points more than anything else and to drum up the electoral support he needs after his loss at the municipal elections in Istanbul last year. In a way, he claims to be the saviour of the Turkish Muslims nation, which endangered human family.
As a human heritage building, its architectural roots lie, at least in part, in the Classical heritage of the early Byzantine period, it has become a mosque with pure political and fanatical religious motives. Hagia Sophia sang exultantly, "Allah is Great," as news came out. It hurt the Arab Christians who, in their daily lives, declare that "Allah is Great" as their principle of faith. The Orthodox Christians have expressed deep dismay. Pope Francis said that during his Angelus prayer in St Peter 's Square on 12th July, he was deeply pained. The ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew, Istanbul's spiritual leader of the Orthodox Christians of the world, considered the President's decision disappointing. Patriarch Kirill, patriarch of the Russian Orthodox Church, called for "prudence" and the protection of the "current neutral status" of Hagia Sophia, which he said was one of the "devoutly venerated symbols" of Christianity.
 Illustration by Abro
-----
It affected the heart of the religious-secular life of Turkey. When Hagia Sofia was turned into a museum on 1 February 1935, Kemal Atatürk, the father of the modern Turkish Republic, had in mind that it was no longer a religious property, but that it belonged to all the people of the world who had witnessed great historicity and architecture. This was ruined by the decision of the Turkish government to convert it into a mosque. This government’s decision would have affected the peace and harmony that many peace-loving people of both religions have established among these religions for many decades.
 Hagia Sophia/Wikimedia Commons
----
The conversion of a symbolic world heritage to a mosque amid widespread international protest is an insensitive act by President Erdogan and reveals Turkey's lack of respect for its international obligations. The decision would turn millions of Christians around the world against Islam, which is not expected from both religions. This also goes against the wish of the document “Human Fraternity for World Peace and Living Together,” signed by His Holiness Pope Francis and the Grand Imam of Al-Azhar Ahamad al-Tayyib, which states, "In the name of human fraternity, which embraces all human beings, unites them and renders them equal.” The call is to respect the human sentiments, which cultivate peace and harmony on earth. 
Fr. Midhun J Francis, SJ is a Jesuit Priest and a Theologian, working in Christian-Muslim Relationship for the South Asian Conference.

A Nationalist Takeover of Hagia Sophia is not What the Muslim World Needed Now


By Arshad Alam, New Age Islam
12 July 2020
Hagia Sophia has been one of the most enduring symbols of eastern Christendom since it was built in the sixth century. The Ottomans took Constantinople in 1453 and converted Hagia Sophia into a mosque. The triumph of Islam over Christianity was complete with a new name for the city, Istanbul. Hagia Sophia remained a mosque till 1935 when it was declared a museum under the secularising zeal of Mustafa Kemal. The museum has now given way to a mosque under a judicial decree backed by the popular demand of Turkish people. To be sure, this time, it has not been converted into a mosque by an executive decision. Rather, it is the decision of the Court which revisited the state decree of 1935 and made it null and void. Erdogan can now legitimately argue that his government was bound by the decision of the Court and that he was only following the ‘rule of law’. The only real comparison of such judicial rescue of the executive is the Indian case where the land of a centuries old mosque was given for constructing a temple.
 
The Covenant of Prophet Muhammad with the Monks of Mount Sinai, also called the Ashtiname of Muhammad.  A copy of this document is kept at the Saint Catherine's Monastery.
-----
In most of such cases, judicial decisions are in fact political in nature. There was a growing campaign in Turkey to convert the museum into a mosque, with repeated polls showing overwhelming support for such a move. Erdogan, the Turkish president, heads a party, one of whose important aims is to re-Islamize Turkish society. Hagia Sophia had become a symbol of this desire and the ruling party had cultivated this sentiment amongst the people for long. Any argument against the move meant going against the popular mood of the people. It is no surprise that the main opposition parties did nothing to mobilise a counter opinion.
 In all probability, this move will further boost the popularity of Erdogan within Turkey, but internationally, Muslims will face renewed questioning over the nature of their faith. One of the first to be questioned will be Muslim minorities throughout the world. In Europe and in parts of Asia, Muslims have been petitioning various governments for securing their religious rights. What Turkey has done will make their situation difficult in terms of positioning their argument. Recently, Muslims were elated when they heard the azan for the first time from mosques across Germany. The three million Turkish minority in Germany will now have tough time to explain this symbolic action to the German people. At a time when Islamophobia is on the rise in Europe and elsewhere, this action will be exploited by far-right parties to further stigmatise Muslims.
The Hagia Sophia is an enormous architectural marvel in Istanbul, Turkey
------
Christians who follow the Eastern Orthodox Church will be most hurt by this decision. For centuries, the Hagia Sophia has been the symbol of their devotion and pride. It is important to realise that there are Christian minorities living in different parts of the Middle-East. With the rise of radical Islam, there position has become precarious. Hundreds of them have already been killed, many dispossessed of their homes. At a time when they need re-assurance regarding their safety and security, this move by Turkish government will have the opposite impact of making their position all the more vulnerable.
The USA and Russia, along with other countries have already denounced the move and have asked Turkey to learn from the shared values of Islam and Christianity. However, it is time that their hypocrisy is called out. If they really believed in the philosophy of shared values, then Spain should ideally allow prayers in the mosque of Cordoba which is now a Cathedral. And Greece should apologise to the Muslim world for demolishing mosques built by the Ottomans. More importantly, recognising Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, which much of the western world did recently, is hardly a strategy rooted in mutual respect and sharing between the two religions. The Christian world seems to remember religious tolerance and pluralism only when their sacred monuments come under threat.
The real impact of this move will be felt by Muslims themselves. Due to a number of reasons, Islam has earned a bad name through its association with terrorism, intolerance and anti-pluralistic theology. What signal is Erdogan sending to jihadis and other radicals who want to convert and control the whole world? Today, they must be the most vocal supporters of Erdogan. This highly symbolic move reeks of Islamist supremacy which Muslims, especially those who are in minority, will find hard to justify. Erdogan might argue that the issue is one of Turkish sovereignty, but even he knows fully well that its reverberations will be felt beyond national boundaries.
Erdogan had a choice to let Hagia Sophia be as it is, a museum of international importance which was accessible to members of all religious faith. Or, the same space could have been used for both Islamic and Christian practices with some creative solutions. After all, Muslims also have strong claim to the site since they have prayed there for almost five hundred years and their religious sentiment should also be taken into consideration. Many would say that this is utopic, but then if both religions pray to the same God, then why is it that they cannot share the same ritual space?
In the early years of Islam, caliph Umar refused to pray at the Christian site of Holy Sepulchre after the bloodless conquest of Jerusalem, stating that it might become a precedent for later Muslims to convert Churches into mosques. A few centuries later, the Ayyubids would build a mosque where Umar had prayed, just a short distance from Christianity’s holiest church, thus making the fears of the caliph almost prophetic. Even earlier, the prophet of Islam had granted safety and security to monks of Mount Sinai, stating in no uncertain terms that the holy places of Christians must be protected. Muhammad’s Testament of assurance is still preserved within the four walls of Saint Catherine’s monastery. Erdogan could have looked to these traditions within Islam and made tolerance and co-existence the present credo of Islam. In choosing the obverse, he has made the claims of Islamic pluralism sound hollow.
Arshad Alam is a NewAgeIslam.com columnist.

Sunday, July 19, 2020

Zakir Naik Showcases the Rot within Islamic Theology


By Arshad Alam, New Age Islam
18 July 2020
For the Rwala Bedouins of Northern Arabia, heaven was a place below the earth, with abundant rain and lush greenery. Hell was above the ground with a scorching sun, making life miserable. Heaven was reserved for the Rwala; all non-Rwalas were to be consigned to hell. The Rwala had no regard for the dominant religion of the area, Islam. Like all non-Rwala, Muslims also were destined for a ‘life of hell’ above the ground.
The peculiar Rwala belief can surprise many but it is certainly not uncommon. Most religions and faith systems have a way of announcing to the wider world that they are the chosen people of God. Especially within the Semitic traditions, this leads to the division of the world between believers and non-believers. The theology that develops consequently also divides the afterlife into heaven and hell. Heaven is where believers will rejoice and hell is where non-believers will rot. Most of us progressive Muslims tend to think that such primitive ways of thinking is characteristic of simple or tribal societies. But we are wrong. Dominant religions of the world today hold a view which is not very different from the Rwala.
In order that we see this clearly, we need someone like Zakir Naik to remind us that our religions, including Islam, still define themselves in opposition to others. Notion of reward and punishment, heaven and hell continue to be the most important features of religions.
 Zakir Naik arriving during the opening ceremony of the Kuala Lumpur Summit 2019 on 19 December, 2019. (AFP Photo)
-----
Recently, Zakir Naik was asked whether ‘good non-Muslims’ would find a place in heaven. The context of question was Ravish Kumar, the popular news presenter on Indian television and one of the few journalists who still believes in speaking truth to power. Zakir Naik showered abundant praise on the likes of Ravish Kumar who are dutiful in their profession and even acknowledged that they will be rewarded in this world, but certainly they will not find a place in heaven. Naik argued, and perhaps rightly so, that in the eyes of Allah, shirk (associating partners to Allah) was the gravest crime. So even if a person is of good character but does not believe in the oneness of Allah (Tauheed), then all his good deeds will be cancelled and he will be consigned to hellfire after death. Progressive Muslims were aghast at his statement. It was as if Zakir Naik was articulating something which was not part of Islamic theology or which contradicted the verses of the Quran. On the contrary, what he said is part of Islamic theology, taught to Muslims since generations with mild variations. In popular Muslim understanding, heaven is reserved for them while hell is for those who do not believe in Allah. Such confidence comes from the Quran itself which calls Islam as the perfection of all religions:
 “This day I have perfected your religion for you and completed my favour upon you and have chosen for you Islam as religion” (5: 3).
The implication is very clear: since Islam is chosen by God, everyone should follow this religion. Islamic supremacy derives from such clear verses of the Quran which forbid Muslims to reflect on any other path to salvation. This understanding of Islam is the reason why in another video, Zakir Naik criticises the Pakistani government’s efforts to construct a Hindu temple in Islamabad. After all, if Islam is the perfect religion, then what is the need of other religions in the world? [See the video here  For Muslims, no one can match the character of Abu Talib, the paternal uncle of Muhammad. He loved Muhammad more than his own progeny, and protected him from the rage of Quraysh till the time he was alive. It was only after Abu Talib’s death, that the prophet migrated to Medina, completely divested of any support within Mecca. Abu Talib was a polytheist and he died as one despite Muhammad entreating him to accept Islam.
For Muslims, if there is any non-Muslim who should find a place in heaven, then it should ideally be Abu Talib. And yet the Sunni theology is completely convinced that because he did not die a Muslim, he cannot be in heaven. Even after his death, Muhamad pleaded with Allah to forgive the sins of Abu Talib only to be reprimanded by the verse:
“It is not for the prophet and those who believe, to pray for the forgiveness of polytheists even if they were their relatives, after it has become clear to them that they are the people of hell” (9:113).
The Shias have laboured hard to prove that Abu Talib had in fact recited the shahada but the intent behind this has been to rescue the family of Ali rather than being a search for salvation of non-Muslims within the Islamic doctrine. Certainly, there have been attempts to differentiate between non-Muslims and Kafirs; and some have argued that Kafirs refer to only those who are ungrateful of God’s mercy. Stressing that Allah is al-Rahman (the Merciful), some theologians have also argued that only God, in his divine wisdom, knows who will eventually go to heaven and who to hell. This however, remains a minority opinion within both Shia and Sunni theology. 
Theologians like Ghazali have argued that true to His nature, God will eventually rescue all of humanity, including those non-Muslims who never heard of Islam. Nearly two centuries later, Ibn Taimiyya would spend much of his life arguing for the subjugation and humiliation of non-Muslims so that they accept Islam. Towards the end of his life, locked up in a prison in Damascus, he would write that God will save everyone from hell and indeed hellfire itself will be extinguished. However, neither Ghazali nor ibn Taimiyya could ever argue against the very idea of a ‘good non-Muslim’ going to hell.  
This is certainly not a problem which is unique to Islam. Judaism and Christianity suffer from the same problem. If the Quran itself is making it abundantly clear that those who do not believe in Allah are ‘people of hell’, then why are we surprised when Zakir Naik is saying the same thing? People like him are only the reflection of a deep rot within Islamic theology. Till the time we do not understand that there can be multiple paths to the same truth and that Islam is just one of those paths, we will keep condemning ‘good non-Muslims’ like Ravish Kumar to hell. 
Arshad Alam is a NewAgeIslam.com columnist.