WHAT IS ISLAM?
By: Kassim Ahmad
24 June, 2006
Although the question jars on some Muslims ears, to pose it in the context of the current international situation is both valid and acutely relevant. Not only Muslims, but the West, and therefore the world, for different reasons, of course, are confused as to what Islam is.
To put the answer first, succinctly, the answer is this: We must clearly distinguish the Islam as taught and propagated by the prophets, at least from the time Prophet Abraham right down to the last of the prophets, Muhammad, solely represented by the last perfected of God’s scriptures to mankind, the Quran. This is the true Islam. The other ‘Islam’ that most Muslims inherited from their great-grand fathers, is codified and falsely sanctified in the tombs of traditional theology and jurisprudence, from around three hundred years after Prophet Muhammad’s death. Simply put, it is the Islam of the Prophets versus the ‘Islam’ of the theologians.
What are the major differences between the two? It is extremely important that Muslims and the West understand this now in order to avoid further pain and disasters for both.
Firstly, the first and true Islam is first and foremost inclusive, whereas the second practices exclusivity. This is because Islam recognizes and acknowledges all the prophets and messengers of God, from Adam to Muhammad, including Moses and Jesus, to whom God gave the Old and the New Testaments. Verse 62 of Surah Al-Baqarah (2) of the Quran acknolwledges, among many other similar verses, the original monotheism of the Jews, Christians and other religions, whose adherents are promised salvation, as revealed in these verses.
Secondly, the first and true Islam accepts and practices toleration of other religions, whereas the second does not.. The verse “To you your religion; to me my religion.” ( Quran, 109: 6) unequivocally testifies to this.
Thirdly, the first and true Islam accords perfect and absolute freedom of belief, whereas the second does not. This is because the second ‘Islam’ interprets the Quran by the Hadith, the so-called Prophetic Traditions, made compulsory on Muslims after Imam Shafie so enunciated it in his book, Al-Risala, two hundred and fifty years after Prophet Muhammad’s death.
Fourthly, the first and true Islam proclaims itself the Religion of Truth (Quran, 48: 28; 9: 33; 41: 53 & 61: 9) and the Religion of God (Quran, 110: 2), which will naturally prevail over all false religions in the future. This will come about, not through force, but through the inevitable but natural triumph of truth over falsehood.
Fifthly, the first and true Islam propagates a world legal system based on justice and compassion, whereas the second’s legal system, the so-called Shariah is arbitrarily based on many mistaken perceptions by traditional legal practitioners, as witness the so-called fixed Hudud laws. The Arabic word ‘hudud’ (sing. ‘had’) actually means ‘boundary’. It has nothing to do with law. The word clearly refers to the parameters of the Islamic worldview, or in today’s terminology, ‘paradigm’.
Sixthly, the first and true Islam places human welfare as the highest priority on par with obedience to God, as witness God’s elevation of the human being to a status of His vicegerent in the Cosmos. Whereas the ‘Islam’ of the theologians almost crashes the human being beneath the weight of Divine Omnipotence, of course, under their self-proclaimed tutelage.
Seventhly, the first and true Islam has no priesthood, whereas the second has, giving themselves the false title of ‘Guardians of the Faith’. In the first and true Islam, the individual approaches God directly without any intermediary, for the very idea of intermediary automatically nullifies monotheism.
Eightly, the first and true Islam teaches and propagates democratic governance as opposed to a theocracy as propagated by the second ‘Islam’, as witness Iran under the mullah. Moreover, the first Islam teaches and propagates a humanistic and moral governance. It also advocates a just and fair economic and financial system, free from blood-sucking usury, the bane of the present bankrupt Anglo-American system. In Medina, Prophet Muhammad set up the first city-state (later to become the first nation-state to cover the whole of the Arabian Peninsula), with a written constitution in the history of the world. This nation-state is not to be counter-posed to the idea of either a universal Ummah or an international society, just as nationalism is not contradictory to internationalism.
Ninthly, the first and true Islam allows pluralism in religion, culture, politics and law, as it believes firmly in the triumph of truth, justice and compassion in the end, as this is actually the Grand Divine Plan for mankind. So the likes of George W. Bush, Tony Blair and the rest of their criminal gang of fascists, who are presently strutting the world presuming to police it, will soon disappear.
Tenthly, the first and true Islam, seeks, works towards and struggles for a just world, where as the second ‘Islam’ is a hotch-potch of confusion, leading mankind to nowhere. It also envisions an unending moral and spiritual ascent for Man. The first and true Islam had been that way at the time of the prophets and it has been that way since. It shall be realized, as this is God’s Grand Plan for His Humanity. None can frustrate it.
It is obvious that corrections must now be made to bring forth the first and true Islam to Muslims themselves and to the world. This clearly cannot be done by the detractors of Islam, the enemy from without and from within. The Muslims themselves must reclaim this Islam of the Prophets from the theologians who have falsely arrogated the power of God unto themselves. Muslims must also realize that there exist true believers in the One God in other religions and we must work closely with them to bring about a better and just world for our children and for posterity.
Kassim Ahmad is a Malaysian free-lance writer based in Penang. He can be contacted at kasmad172@yahoo.com.my. His website is www.kassimahmad.blopgspot.com
Showing posts sorted by relevance for query TRUE ISLAM. Sort by date Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by relevance for query TRUE ISLAM. Sort by date Show all posts
Thursday, June 29, 2006
Wednesday, January 31, 2007
ON RELIGIOUS CLARIFICATION –
ISLAM AS IT SHOULD BE
By: Kassim Ahmad
20 January, 2007
A month ago, we wrote an essay entitled “On Religious Confusion”, seeing that for one whole year we suffered from that disease. [1] The recent outspoken but reasonable views of the Dr. Mohd. Asri Zainal Abidin, the 35-year old Perlis mufti and of two other state muftis who seem to represent the new enlightened face of Islam in our media [2] naturally raise hopes of a better understanding of the true Islam in our country. Therefore, it occurs to us to write another essay to be titled “On Religious Clarification – Islam As It Should Be”, in which we intend to explain major issues pertaining to religion in the hope that Islam will bring us out of darkness into light, as it should do. [3]
It must be admitted that religion that is supposed to lead men to lead pure, ethical and happy lives have, in history, actually contributed to wars and much unhappiness.[4] Sad to say, a very, very few people indeed can think and act rationally in a religious discussion, because religion involves deep emotions and in religion people are faced with fear of the unknowns of death and of afterlife. Such being the case, we shall tread our ground very carefully, while strictly avoiding being apologetic.
Although conceding that reason is weak in the face in religious dogmatism, we cannot abandon reason or reasoned religious discourse. This is because Life itself is meaningless without reason. There is reason to Life and that our lives in this world and in other worlds related to this world have to be meaningful. [5] In the absolute terms, the world, i.e. the universe, is knowable and therefore subject to willful change by Man’s lawful activity. [6]
It is said that Man cannot live by bread alone. Bread only satisfies his physical needs. His moral and spiritual needs require different nourishments. Religion, or a set of beliefs or what we can call a worldview, provide these nourishments. However, here is the snag: religion, or set of beliefs, or worldview – its truth cannot be verified, at least directly. [7] All civilizations and religions have at some time or other existed on myths or partial myths. [8]
Man’s problem is therefore to have a faith that is congruent with the truth.[9] He needs to believe and to act morally in his mortal life-span, but that belief and the moral imperative must be true, in the sense of its congruence with the lawful creation of the Creator God, in short, with the Truth, written with a capital T. This truth will, of course, be apparent to him progressively, as he makes the discovery, covering the span of immortal Man, that is Eternity. His problem is that the mortal man needs this religion or belief system to live out his mortal span. He therefore needs faith, but a faith consistent with reason.
Therefore, this religion, this worldview, this belief system has to be truthful and consequently simple. That is what the Religion of Truth [10], the Creator-God’s religion [11] is. If Islam is its name, that is because “Islam” simply means “peace” or “to totally surrender oneself” to the lawful working of the Creator’s universe. Thus, it is practical, universal, just, harmonious and compassionate.
The Quran states: “The true religion with God is Islam.” [12] Islam is strictly monotheistic: “There is no god, but God” is its simple credo. [13] It is simple and practical, and to live by Islam, one simply has to believe in God, to do good and be accountable for one’s actions.[14] Since Islam is the true religion of the human family, its development or manifestation is through historical stages that are suited to the development of human societies. From the earliest times of Adam through many generations and climes up to the times of Prophets Abraham, Moses and Jesus and, ending the series of prophet-messengers, Prophet Muhammad whose message was final and addressed to the whole of mankind, [15] the religion of Islam developed stage by stage until it was completed and perfected with the teachings of Prophet Muhammad in the Quran.[16]
Every thesis brings an anti-thesis. At every stage, Islam encountered its opposite, its enemy. [17] It is through its successful struggle with the enemy that Islam triumphed and developed. What Moses brought to the Israelites was, of course, Islam of that time, but it broke up, one to become a “new” religion, Judaism, and the other to pass on as Islam of the new stage, into Jesus, who brought the New Testament, the Islam of his times. This later broke up again into a “new” religion, Christianity [18], while the true Islam passed on into the last stage when Muhammad arose in Arabia to bring Islam into completion and perfection, in the last sacred Book of God, the Noble Quran.[19]
Even with Prophet Muhammad’s teachings, the inevitable natural process of thesis-anti-thesis cannot be avoided.[20] After 250-300 years, the perfected Islam of the Quran broke into many sects and schools of thought, ending with us today at the beginning of the 21st Century, an “Islam” almost beyond recognition, contributing not only to confusion, but total disaster.[21] Yet, the true Islam remains, since the true teachings of Prophet Muhammad are perfectly preserved in the the Quran, and the Quran is protected from corruption by God Himself. [22]
To return to the beginning of human society, the Adams of mankind, about a million years ago, primitive men and women living in caves, what ideas of a Creator-God did they have? We do not know for certain. Such ideas must be elementary, vague and unformed. Although testimony from the Quran suggest that they already have a belief in God, it was not until the time of Prophet Abraham, in the valley of Ur, present-day Iraq, about 4,000 years ago, that the first definite community of monotheists, Abraham and his followers, [23] lived. Muhammad himself declared that he was a follower of the religion of Abraham. [24]
The anti-thesis of monotheism is polytheism, the belief in many gods. Polytheism has many forms. It may even have developed or rather degenerated from a belief in one God, as Judaism and Christianity did, on the testimony of the Bible itself. [25] Polytheism self-destructs as it leads to rivalries and fights among the gods, leading to chaos and self-destruction.
There is no priesthood in Islam. A person or a community deals directly with his or its Creator. Neither Muhammad, nor his immediate successors were priests, or had any priests with them. No intermediary can intervene. How then a priesthood arises in all religions, including post-Muhammad Islam, is an intriguing question. It must have happened something like this: ordinary members of a community regard religion as something sacred and they need a knowledgeable person in the religion to act on his or their behalf. Because this class of people, whatever their name is, is in charge of an important area of their life, they become very influential. Thus, today, in all Muslim countries, we see this religious class, the Ulama, the so-called religious scholars, have become very powerful. It is they who teach and interprete the religion as well as issue religious rulings. In Islam this should not be so. Every member of the society is responsible for the affairs of Islam. It is the society who rules.[26] Of course, there must be those who study and teach the religion, but they are no means its custodians. The whole community is its custodian.
The priesthood is an interested party. The religion becomes their means of livelihood. The development of Muslim religious education, through the pondok and the madrasah, ending in the University of Al-Azhar in Cairo, has helped to preserve religious doctrines, albeit in distorted forms, in Muslim lands throughout the times when they were under foreign domination. In those days it is these religious institutions that produced the religious teachers, the imams, the kadhis and the muftis. After independence, they have been absorbed into or taken over by the state educational system. Thus, the system is a dualism: state policy is in the hands of the secular elite; religious policy in the hands of the religious elite. However, both are united in Government.
Thus, revelation, which should give us the truth from our God-Creator, has turned into its opposite -- falsehood. In this incessant struggle between truth and falsehood, the faithful believe that truth will triumph. In the broad sweep of history, from the beginning of human society until now, we can discern the lines of advance, in spite of the many regressions. Let us name the points of advance: government through participation of the people, as opposed to government by a small oppressive elite; more humane laws under enlightened governments (including abolition of slavery), as opposed to severe cruel laws under oppressive regimes; better conditions and quality of life for more and more people; advance of knowledge, science and technology; better control of the forces of nature through science and technology; better food, improved medicine, better health and longevity.
The agnostics and pessimists will cite other aspects of our present-day life to make their case, such as the real danger of nuclear war that will destroy civilization, the current phenomenon of global warming that can lead to the same thing, and the so-called problem of over-population and scarce resources. Our answer to them is simple and straightforward: Being the vicegerent of God Himself, Man is destined for a great destiny – eternal happiness in this world – in the Abode of the Blessed.[27] We shall achieve this sooner or later. Time is immaterial, since with God, time does not exist. With Him, time is Eternal Now. What has prevented us from achieving this sooner is our own inclination to the earth, as the Quran puts it. [28] We fail to struggle hard enough to reach this Abode of the Blessed.
So, revelation is a double-edged sword. It can give you success and happiness; turned into its opposite, it can lead you to arrogance and destruction.
The polytheists may be in the category of what the Quran classifies as “The People of the Book” In the Quran, this term properly refers to the Jews and Christians, as people who have received scripture from God. The Hindus and Buddhists also possess scriptures. Therefore, they may correctly be also so-termed. Although, the Hindus believe in many gods, they also believe in the idea of a Supreme Being, the Brahman. Similarly, one might argue about the Buddhists (not properly professing a belief in God, but impliedly so) and a few other religious followers. But polytheism is opposed to monotheism in the sense that its philosophical and moral relativism undermines a belief in absolute truth. A belief in absolute truth is the basal strength of monotheism. Truth is but another name for God.[29] God therefore wants the truth to prevail. [30]
As in the case of all books, the Quran has to be understood scientifically. There must a scientific methodology of interpretation; otherwise our understanding of it will be defective. In my personal experience with Islam, before I came to accept it fully, I had to resolve my doubts about a few matters. These were: the position of women, the so-called fixed punishments, slavery and the division of property. It took me many years, 36 to be exact, from the time when I was debating religion with my Christian and Buddhist classmates when I was about 16 years old till 1985 before I could resolve all these questions and was happy to accept Islam fully as my freely-chosen religion.[31]
After so much reading and research and reflection, I wrote a tentative essay titled “A Scientific Methodology of Tafsir”, which I included as Addendum in the English translation of my book, Hadith – A Re-evaluation. [32] While the teachings of the Quran are addressed to the whole of mankind and are universal in nature, there are those that are historical in nature and apply to circumstance of that historical time or similar historical times. The historically-bound teachings need to be re-interpreted in accordance with the universal principles behind them. The position of women illustrate this clearly. Due to the economic dependence of women on the men and their lack of education and experience in affairs outside the home, their status in Arabia of that time is inferior to men. This explains general unlimited polygamy, before it was limited to four under strict conditions, political and social leadership assumed by the men, as well as their getting half of what the men get at the division of property. These are stipulated in clear enough verses. But over and above these verses, there are those verses which stipulate the equality of women to men.[33] Many of such verses must have just escaped the notice and understanding of our ancient scholars! We cannot blame them too much. Had we been in their shoes, we would most probably have done the same thing. The blame is on those scholars who came later and who should adopt a critical attitude towards their heritage. Instead these scholars elected to follow them blindly and thus continued and perpetuated the mistakes they have made.
The so-called fixed punishments or Hudud laws may be placed in the same category of historically-bound teachings, but they are really a hotch-potch of a mixed-up. Firstly, the Arabic word hudud (singular had meaning ‘boundary’) does not refer to punishment at all; it refers to a figurative boundary line which one should not cross for one’s good. [34] Secondly, there is no and cannot be such a thing as a fixed punishment. A judge has to take into account many factors and considerations before deciding on a punishment for any crime. Thirdly, although capital punishment for rebellion, cutting off the hand for theft and a hundred stripes for adultery are stipulated in the Quran (to be interpreted in the historical context), [35] cutting off the head for apostasy is out of the question, since this punishment taken from a hadith is clearly contradicted by the teaching of the Quran, which unequivocally gives absolute freedom of religion.[36]
For any problem, the Quran usually gives more than one answer. Take the five daily prayers, for instance. In normal circumstances, one can perform them in the normal way. But under abnormal circumstances, one is allowed to adapt to the demands of the circumstances.
The beauty and easy practicability of Quranic teachings is that when confronted with a emergency situation one is allowed to do what under normal conditions one is not allowed to. Pork under normal circumstances cannot be eaten by a Muslim, but if circumstances are such that without his eating the pork, he can die of hunger, then pork is allowed to him.[37]
Further, it is Islam’s teachings that God wishes to bring into being a just and happy world for us. He is bringing this about through our human struggles. [38] Moreover, in the Quran, we find the strongest endorsement for the triumph of truth and justice and for the triumph of the oppressed.[39]
What about Islam and modernity? Is modernity consistent with Islam? We shall take the questions of secularism, democracy, human rights and nationalism. Islam should and must take a critical attitude towards all legacies, ancient, medieval and modern, including its own. This is because the true Islamic worldview is scientific, critical, life-affirming, death-defying and optimistic. In the first place, Islam considers the world as a unified whole. The two departments of life (the secular and religious, the worldy and other-worldy) are interconnected. One cannot be totally divorced from the other. Other-worldy simply means a higher rung in the ladder of life.
Therefore, one cannot say that Islam rejects secularism. In his famous Medina Charter, Prophet Muhammad stipulated autonomy to the various religious communities on matters of their rituals and worship. [40] This autonomy is indeed derived from a teaching of the Quran.[41] Of course, Islam does not condone a secularism which means a separation of state policy from morality and ethics. Islam does not envisage a politics and an economics that are not ethical. In fact, it should be well noted that the Medina Charter is the only constitution in the world that forbids injustice.
As to democratic forms of government, the last three centuries have witnessed many forms. Plato in his famous dialogue, The Statesman, has already pointed out the weaknesses of democratic rule. Although modern Muslim countries are still experimenting with Western democracy, Islam stipulates a few principles of good government: governmental power is delegated by God to the society as a trust and responsibility; a participatory form of government whereby the people are involved; that a government should rule justly; that deliberations and discussion should be part of governmental procedures; that certain matters particular to a community should be autonomously administered by that community on behalf of the state. [42]
Under this head comes the question of human rights and the rights of minorities in Muslim countries. It goes without saying that the above principles govern these questions. We would say that the 1948 U.N. Declaration of Human Rights is fully consistent with and endorsed by the teachings of the Quran.
As to nationalism, there seems to be some confusion among Muslims whether they should accept nationalism or not. The Quranic teaching on this is very clear. Let us have a close look at the verse. “O people, we created you from the same male and female, and rendered you distinct peoples and tribes that you may recognize one another. The best among you in the sight of God is the most righteous. God is Omniscient, Cognizant.” [43] Races, tribes and nations are natural categories and we should recognize them as such, but no nation is superior to another. Each is equal to the other. Thus national chauvinism or superior race status is wrong and to be condemned. The only quality that makes a nation superior to other nations is in its righteous doings. Therefore, the love of one’s country or patriotism is not wrong; in fact, it is good and natural. But the concepts of the “Chosen People”, as claimed by the Jews, the “Master Race”, as claimed by the Nazis, and “Superior Civilization”, as claimed by the West are nothing but racist and to be condemned.
Islam stipulated three relationships to other religions. Firstly, tolerance and peaceful co-existence. [44] It must be pointed out that this is a very beautiful idea of how different religious communities can live side by side. No religious community should consider itself superior to the other, the truth being left to God to prove. [45] Secondly, a relationship of dialogues and discussions in order to call one another to goodness and to the truth. [46] Thirdly and lastly, of course, in the end it is God Who decides which religious community is on the right path. [47]
It is clear that the goodness of religion, of all religions, have been offset by its or their manipulation by vested interests within and without the religion. But also without the Religion of Truth we are landed on the waste land of amoral and immoral secularism that is the undoing of the modern civilization. It is high time we correct ourselves. It is clear that we have to do this quickly, as great forces of destruction, unleashed into the world within the last three decades, must be resolutely curbed and defeated.
We do not want to conclude this essay without making a special appeal to enlightened Muslim leaders and intelligentsia. You must act quickly and resolutely to bring the Muslim ummah back on the right track. It is your bounden duty to do so. Rise above the petty issues of mazhab and past bitterness. The future, the immediate future, is important. True Islam, the Religion of Truth, can save the world and everything that is good in modern civilization. You owe it to yourselves, to your peoples, to humanity and to God to do this. Not only the enlightened Muslim peoples will support you. The entire enlightened mankind will support you, and we shall win.
Kassim Ahmad is a Malaysian free-lance writer. He can be contacted at kasmad172@yahoo.com.my His website is http://www.kassimahmad.blogspot.com/
[1] See http://www.kassimahmad.blogspot.com/
[2] See New Sunday Times, 10 December, 2006 and Mingguan Malaysia, 7 January, 2007.
[3] See Quran, 65: 11.
[4] In Christendom, the Crusades (11th - 13th centuries), the Thirty Years’ War (1618-48), the Spanish Inquisition ; and Western colonialism and forced conversion; in Islamic history, the breach and formation of the Shi’ah sect after several battles in the early years after Prophet Muhammad’s death, including the massacre of al-Husayn and his 200 supporters at Karbala, Iraq in 680 and in modern times, the Iran-Iraq War (1980-88)
[5] See Kassim Ahmad, “The Meaningfulness of Life”, http://www.stormloader.com/qsmjam/
[6] Through Man’s knowledge of natural laws, he has been able to harness natural forces to serve his purposes. This abililty of Man is alluded to in the Quran by God’s elevation of him to the status of vicegerency (Quran, 2: 30-34) and by God’s affirmation of his ability to bend natural and social forces to his purposes. (Quran, 31: 20)
[7] We can argue reasonably and logically against polytheism, pointing to the perfect harmony of the Universe as proving the existence of a single Creator. Many and therefore competing creators would result in chaos and destruction.
[8] For the Muslims, we have the myths of the doctrines of Prophet Muhammad’s superiority to other prophets of God, Muhammad’s infallibility and Muhammad’s power of intercession on Judgement Day. For the Jews, the myth of the “Chosen People”, and for the Christians, the myths of the Trinity, the Sonship of Christ, the risen Christ and Christ’s Second Coming.
[9] This congruence is implied in this Quranic verse: “No one can believe except with God’s leave, and He bars those who refuse to reason.” (10: 100)
[10] “He it is Who has sent His messenger with the guidance and the Religion of Truth that He may make it prevail over all religions, though the polytheists are averse.” (Quran, 9: 33)
[11] See Quran, 110: 2. The Arabic phrase is din’ul-Lah = God’s religion. Note that in both phrases, the name “Islam” is not used. The divine promise of the triumph of the Religion of Truth or the Religion of God (note not Islam) was given five times (9:33, 48:28, 61:9 & 110:2).
[12] Quran, 3: 19.
[13] Quran, 3: 18 and also 37: 35 & 47: 19 where this simple confession of faith is strictly enunciated.
[14] See Quran, 2: 62.
[15] “Say, ‘O mankind, I am God’s messenger to all of you.’ ” (Quran, 7: 158)
[16] “Then We revealed to you this scripture truthfully, conforming all previous scriptures and superceding them.” (Quran, 5: 48)
[17] We thus set up against every prophet enemies from among the guilty. Your Lord suffices as a guide and master.” (Quran, 25: 31)
[18] “Christian theology, however, was shaped principally by the work of St. Paul. Jesus presented a spiritual message; Paul added to that the worship of Christ.” Michael H. Hart, The 100 – A Ranking of the Most Influential Persons in History, Golden Books Centre, Kuala Lumpur, 1989; p.47.
[19] It is to be noted that the advent of Prophet Muhammad was foretold both in the Old and the New Testaments. This is what Jesus said: “I have yet many things to say unto you, but you cannot bear them now. Howbeit when he, the Spirit of the truth is come, he will guide you into all truth; for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak; and he will shew you things to come. He shall glorify me.” John, 16: 12-14.
[20] This does not mean it was predetermined. Had post-Muhammad Muslims kept vigilant guard against deviations, they would have avoided the deviations that occurred. God gave them ample warnings in the Quran, but those warnings passed them by.
[21] The confusion is caused by the extra-Quranic teachings that have crept into Islam 300 years after the Prophet’s death through the so-called Prophetic traditions as well as through the teachings of the so-called great ulama whom the Muslims have idolized. The disaster is of course the downfall of the Muslims.
[22] “Surely, We have revealed the Reminder, and surely We are its Guardian.” (Quran, 15: 9) “This is an honourable Quran. In a protected book. None can grasp it except the sincere. A revelation from the Lord of the universe ” The manner in which the Quran is protected has been explained in detail by Dr. Rashad Khalifa in his book, The Computer Speaks: God’s Message to the World, Renaissance Productions International, Tuscon, 1981. See also his English translation of the Quran, The Final Testament, Authorised English Version with Arabic Text, Revised Edition II, Universal Unity, U.S.A., 2000.
[23] “Abraham was indeed an exemplary vanguard in his submission to God, a monotheist who never worshiped idols.” (Quran, 16: 120)
[24] “Then We inspired you (Muhammad) to follow the religion of Abraham, the monotheist; he never was an idol worshiper.” (Quran, 16: 123)
[25] In both the Old and the New Testaments, the monotheistic teaching of belief in One God is more than clear (see Deutronomy, 6: 4-5; Mark, 12: 29-30), proving that the polytheistic elements are extraneous.
[26] “Their affairs are decided through consultation among themselves.” (Quran,42: 38)
[27] In religious terminology, Paradise. Men must struggle to achieve this Paradise. “God has bought from the believers their lives and their money in exchange for Paradise. Thus they fight in the cause of God, willing to kill and get killed. Such is His truthful pledge in the Torah, the Gospel and the Quran – and who fulfils his pledge better than God? You shall rejoice in making such an exchange. This is the greatest triumph.” (Quran, 9: 111)
[28] “O you who believe, when you are told: ‘Mobilize in the cause of God,’ why do you become heavily attached to the ground? Have you chosen this worldly life in place of the Hereafter? The materials of this world compared to the Hereafter are nil.” (Quran, 9: 38)
[29] “That is because Allah, He is the Truth, and He gives life to the dead and He is possessor of power over all things.” (Quran, 22: 6)
[30] See Quran, 21: 16-18 and 17: 81.
[31] That was when I wrote Hadis – Satu Penilaian Semula.
[32] Later this Addendum was expanded into a chapter and included in my Hadis – Jawapan Kepada Pengkritik, Media Indah, Kuala Lumpur, 1992. Unfortunately, I have not seen any review of this book, particularly any comment on my attempt at a scientific methodology of tafsir.
[33] “O people, observe your Lord, the One Who created you from one being, and created from it its mate, then spread from the two many men and women.” (Quran, 4: 1) What is stated here that mankind is created from one being is a profound truth. It also means that men and women are equal. The historical differences are due to historical circumstances which are temporary. Regarding division of proper, please see verse 7 of Surah 4 which does not state the share, meaning that it is open to decision by state authorities.
[34] See Kassim Ahmad, Kontroversi Hukum Hudud, Forum Iqra’ Bhd., Pulau Pinang, 2002.
[35] Even these verses give a way out for lighter punishments, incuding pardon. See Quran, 5: 38-39 (for punishment against thieves) and 24: 2-5 (for punishment against adultery). Why these have been ignored by our anciet scholars is truly a wonder!
[36] “There is no compulsion in religion: the right way in now distinct from the wrong ay. Anyone who denounces the devil and believes in God has grasped the strongest bond; one that never breaks.” (Quran, 2: 256) It should be noted that this very important verse on men’s freedom to believe comes immediately after the Throne Verse which majestically proclaims God’s immense and awesome power over His creation, indicating to us the extreme importance of this God-given freedom.
[37] See Quran, 2: 173.
[38] The concept of Man’s vicegerency (Quran, 2: 30-34) alludes to this role. Verse 111 of Surah 9 places the struggle to build a just and happy world on the shoulders of believers.
[39] See Quran, 17: 81 dan 28: 4-6.
[40] See the writer’s article: “A Short Note on the Medina Charter”, http://www.stormloader.com/qsmjam
[41] See Quran, 22: 67.
[42] These principles of government have been cited and referred to in several places in this essay.
[43] 49: 13.
[44] “To you is your religion, and to me is my religion. (Quran, 109: 6)
[45] It must be conceded that Muslims in Malaysia, for the last 20 years or more since their religious re-awakening , have not lived up to this excellent precept of peaceful co-existence. The Muslims themselves may have complaints against their co-religionists. That is why this writer thinks that an Inter-Religious Council, where every religious group is represented should be set up to have regular dialogues and discussions whereby communal inter-religious problems can be civilly discussed and resolved.
[46] See Quran, 16: 125.
[47] See Quran, 3: 61-64.
ISLAM AS IT SHOULD BE
By: Kassim Ahmad
20 January, 2007
A month ago, we wrote an essay entitled “On Religious Confusion”, seeing that for one whole year we suffered from that disease. [1] The recent outspoken but reasonable views of the Dr. Mohd. Asri Zainal Abidin, the 35-year old Perlis mufti and of two other state muftis who seem to represent the new enlightened face of Islam in our media [2] naturally raise hopes of a better understanding of the true Islam in our country. Therefore, it occurs to us to write another essay to be titled “On Religious Clarification – Islam As It Should Be”, in which we intend to explain major issues pertaining to religion in the hope that Islam will bring us out of darkness into light, as it should do. [3]
It must be admitted that religion that is supposed to lead men to lead pure, ethical and happy lives have, in history, actually contributed to wars and much unhappiness.[4] Sad to say, a very, very few people indeed can think and act rationally in a religious discussion, because religion involves deep emotions and in religion people are faced with fear of the unknowns of death and of afterlife. Such being the case, we shall tread our ground very carefully, while strictly avoiding being apologetic.
Although conceding that reason is weak in the face in religious dogmatism, we cannot abandon reason or reasoned religious discourse. This is because Life itself is meaningless without reason. There is reason to Life and that our lives in this world and in other worlds related to this world have to be meaningful. [5] In the absolute terms, the world, i.e. the universe, is knowable and therefore subject to willful change by Man’s lawful activity. [6]
It is said that Man cannot live by bread alone. Bread only satisfies his physical needs. His moral and spiritual needs require different nourishments. Religion, or a set of beliefs or what we can call a worldview, provide these nourishments. However, here is the snag: religion, or set of beliefs, or worldview – its truth cannot be verified, at least directly. [7] All civilizations and religions have at some time or other existed on myths or partial myths. [8]
Man’s problem is therefore to have a faith that is congruent with the truth.[9] He needs to believe and to act morally in his mortal life-span, but that belief and the moral imperative must be true, in the sense of its congruence with the lawful creation of the Creator God, in short, with the Truth, written with a capital T. This truth will, of course, be apparent to him progressively, as he makes the discovery, covering the span of immortal Man, that is Eternity. His problem is that the mortal man needs this religion or belief system to live out his mortal span. He therefore needs faith, but a faith consistent with reason.
Therefore, this religion, this worldview, this belief system has to be truthful and consequently simple. That is what the Religion of Truth [10], the Creator-God’s religion [11] is. If Islam is its name, that is because “Islam” simply means “peace” or “to totally surrender oneself” to the lawful working of the Creator’s universe. Thus, it is practical, universal, just, harmonious and compassionate.
The Quran states: “The true religion with God is Islam.” [12] Islam is strictly monotheistic: “There is no god, but God” is its simple credo. [13] It is simple and practical, and to live by Islam, one simply has to believe in God, to do good and be accountable for one’s actions.[14] Since Islam is the true religion of the human family, its development or manifestation is through historical stages that are suited to the development of human societies. From the earliest times of Adam through many generations and climes up to the times of Prophets Abraham, Moses and Jesus and, ending the series of prophet-messengers, Prophet Muhammad whose message was final and addressed to the whole of mankind, [15] the religion of Islam developed stage by stage until it was completed and perfected with the teachings of Prophet Muhammad in the Quran.[16]
Every thesis brings an anti-thesis. At every stage, Islam encountered its opposite, its enemy. [17] It is through its successful struggle with the enemy that Islam triumphed and developed. What Moses brought to the Israelites was, of course, Islam of that time, but it broke up, one to become a “new” religion, Judaism, and the other to pass on as Islam of the new stage, into Jesus, who brought the New Testament, the Islam of his times. This later broke up again into a “new” religion, Christianity [18], while the true Islam passed on into the last stage when Muhammad arose in Arabia to bring Islam into completion and perfection, in the last sacred Book of God, the Noble Quran.[19]
Even with Prophet Muhammad’s teachings, the inevitable natural process of thesis-anti-thesis cannot be avoided.[20] After 250-300 years, the perfected Islam of the Quran broke into many sects and schools of thought, ending with us today at the beginning of the 21st Century, an “Islam” almost beyond recognition, contributing not only to confusion, but total disaster.[21] Yet, the true Islam remains, since the true teachings of Prophet Muhammad are perfectly preserved in the the Quran, and the Quran is protected from corruption by God Himself. [22]
To return to the beginning of human society, the Adams of mankind, about a million years ago, primitive men and women living in caves, what ideas of a Creator-God did they have? We do not know for certain. Such ideas must be elementary, vague and unformed. Although testimony from the Quran suggest that they already have a belief in God, it was not until the time of Prophet Abraham, in the valley of Ur, present-day Iraq, about 4,000 years ago, that the first definite community of monotheists, Abraham and his followers, [23] lived. Muhammad himself declared that he was a follower of the religion of Abraham. [24]
The anti-thesis of monotheism is polytheism, the belief in many gods. Polytheism has many forms. It may even have developed or rather degenerated from a belief in one God, as Judaism and Christianity did, on the testimony of the Bible itself. [25] Polytheism self-destructs as it leads to rivalries and fights among the gods, leading to chaos and self-destruction.
There is no priesthood in Islam. A person or a community deals directly with his or its Creator. Neither Muhammad, nor his immediate successors were priests, or had any priests with them. No intermediary can intervene. How then a priesthood arises in all religions, including post-Muhammad Islam, is an intriguing question. It must have happened something like this: ordinary members of a community regard religion as something sacred and they need a knowledgeable person in the religion to act on his or their behalf. Because this class of people, whatever their name is, is in charge of an important area of their life, they become very influential. Thus, today, in all Muslim countries, we see this religious class, the Ulama, the so-called religious scholars, have become very powerful. It is they who teach and interprete the religion as well as issue religious rulings. In Islam this should not be so. Every member of the society is responsible for the affairs of Islam. It is the society who rules.[26] Of course, there must be those who study and teach the religion, but they are no means its custodians. The whole community is its custodian.
The priesthood is an interested party. The religion becomes their means of livelihood. The development of Muslim religious education, through the pondok and the madrasah, ending in the University of Al-Azhar in Cairo, has helped to preserve religious doctrines, albeit in distorted forms, in Muslim lands throughout the times when they were under foreign domination. In those days it is these religious institutions that produced the religious teachers, the imams, the kadhis and the muftis. After independence, they have been absorbed into or taken over by the state educational system. Thus, the system is a dualism: state policy is in the hands of the secular elite; religious policy in the hands of the religious elite. However, both are united in Government.
Thus, revelation, which should give us the truth from our God-Creator, has turned into its opposite -- falsehood. In this incessant struggle between truth and falsehood, the faithful believe that truth will triumph. In the broad sweep of history, from the beginning of human society until now, we can discern the lines of advance, in spite of the many regressions. Let us name the points of advance: government through participation of the people, as opposed to government by a small oppressive elite; more humane laws under enlightened governments (including abolition of slavery), as opposed to severe cruel laws under oppressive regimes; better conditions and quality of life for more and more people; advance of knowledge, science and technology; better control of the forces of nature through science and technology; better food, improved medicine, better health and longevity.
The agnostics and pessimists will cite other aspects of our present-day life to make their case, such as the real danger of nuclear war that will destroy civilization, the current phenomenon of global warming that can lead to the same thing, and the so-called problem of over-population and scarce resources. Our answer to them is simple and straightforward: Being the vicegerent of God Himself, Man is destined for a great destiny – eternal happiness in this world – in the Abode of the Blessed.[27] We shall achieve this sooner or later. Time is immaterial, since with God, time does not exist. With Him, time is Eternal Now. What has prevented us from achieving this sooner is our own inclination to the earth, as the Quran puts it. [28] We fail to struggle hard enough to reach this Abode of the Blessed.
So, revelation is a double-edged sword. It can give you success and happiness; turned into its opposite, it can lead you to arrogance and destruction.
The polytheists may be in the category of what the Quran classifies as “The People of the Book” In the Quran, this term properly refers to the Jews and Christians, as people who have received scripture from God. The Hindus and Buddhists also possess scriptures. Therefore, they may correctly be also so-termed. Although, the Hindus believe in many gods, they also believe in the idea of a Supreme Being, the Brahman. Similarly, one might argue about the Buddhists (not properly professing a belief in God, but impliedly so) and a few other religious followers. But polytheism is opposed to monotheism in the sense that its philosophical and moral relativism undermines a belief in absolute truth. A belief in absolute truth is the basal strength of monotheism. Truth is but another name for God.[29] God therefore wants the truth to prevail. [30]
As in the case of all books, the Quran has to be understood scientifically. There must a scientific methodology of interpretation; otherwise our understanding of it will be defective. In my personal experience with Islam, before I came to accept it fully, I had to resolve my doubts about a few matters. These were: the position of women, the so-called fixed punishments, slavery and the division of property. It took me many years, 36 to be exact, from the time when I was debating religion with my Christian and Buddhist classmates when I was about 16 years old till 1985 before I could resolve all these questions and was happy to accept Islam fully as my freely-chosen religion.[31]
After so much reading and research and reflection, I wrote a tentative essay titled “A Scientific Methodology of Tafsir”, which I included as Addendum in the English translation of my book, Hadith – A Re-evaluation. [32] While the teachings of the Quran are addressed to the whole of mankind and are universal in nature, there are those that are historical in nature and apply to circumstance of that historical time or similar historical times. The historically-bound teachings need to be re-interpreted in accordance with the universal principles behind them. The position of women illustrate this clearly. Due to the economic dependence of women on the men and their lack of education and experience in affairs outside the home, their status in Arabia of that time is inferior to men. This explains general unlimited polygamy, before it was limited to four under strict conditions, political and social leadership assumed by the men, as well as their getting half of what the men get at the division of property. These are stipulated in clear enough verses. But over and above these verses, there are those verses which stipulate the equality of women to men.[33] Many of such verses must have just escaped the notice and understanding of our ancient scholars! We cannot blame them too much. Had we been in their shoes, we would most probably have done the same thing. The blame is on those scholars who came later and who should adopt a critical attitude towards their heritage. Instead these scholars elected to follow them blindly and thus continued and perpetuated the mistakes they have made.
The so-called fixed punishments or Hudud laws may be placed in the same category of historically-bound teachings, but they are really a hotch-potch of a mixed-up. Firstly, the Arabic word hudud (singular had meaning ‘boundary’) does not refer to punishment at all; it refers to a figurative boundary line which one should not cross for one’s good. [34] Secondly, there is no and cannot be such a thing as a fixed punishment. A judge has to take into account many factors and considerations before deciding on a punishment for any crime. Thirdly, although capital punishment for rebellion, cutting off the hand for theft and a hundred stripes for adultery are stipulated in the Quran (to be interpreted in the historical context), [35] cutting off the head for apostasy is out of the question, since this punishment taken from a hadith is clearly contradicted by the teaching of the Quran, which unequivocally gives absolute freedom of religion.[36]
For any problem, the Quran usually gives more than one answer. Take the five daily prayers, for instance. In normal circumstances, one can perform them in the normal way. But under abnormal circumstances, one is allowed to adapt to the demands of the circumstances.
The beauty and easy practicability of Quranic teachings is that when confronted with a emergency situation one is allowed to do what under normal conditions one is not allowed to. Pork under normal circumstances cannot be eaten by a Muslim, but if circumstances are such that without his eating the pork, he can die of hunger, then pork is allowed to him.[37]
Further, it is Islam’s teachings that God wishes to bring into being a just and happy world for us. He is bringing this about through our human struggles. [38] Moreover, in the Quran, we find the strongest endorsement for the triumph of truth and justice and for the triumph of the oppressed.[39]
What about Islam and modernity? Is modernity consistent with Islam? We shall take the questions of secularism, democracy, human rights and nationalism. Islam should and must take a critical attitude towards all legacies, ancient, medieval and modern, including its own. This is because the true Islamic worldview is scientific, critical, life-affirming, death-defying and optimistic. In the first place, Islam considers the world as a unified whole. The two departments of life (the secular and religious, the worldy and other-worldy) are interconnected. One cannot be totally divorced from the other. Other-worldy simply means a higher rung in the ladder of life.
Therefore, one cannot say that Islam rejects secularism. In his famous Medina Charter, Prophet Muhammad stipulated autonomy to the various religious communities on matters of their rituals and worship. [40] This autonomy is indeed derived from a teaching of the Quran.[41] Of course, Islam does not condone a secularism which means a separation of state policy from morality and ethics. Islam does not envisage a politics and an economics that are not ethical. In fact, it should be well noted that the Medina Charter is the only constitution in the world that forbids injustice.
As to democratic forms of government, the last three centuries have witnessed many forms. Plato in his famous dialogue, The Statesman, has already pointed out the weaknesses of democratic rule. Although modern Muslim countries are still experimenting with Western democracy, Islam stipulates a few principles of good government: governmental power is delegated by God to the society as a trust and responsibility; a participatory form of government whereby the people are involved; that a government should rule justly; that deliberations and discussion should be part of governmental procedures; that certain matters particular to a community should be autonomously administered by that community on behalf of the state. [42]
Under this head comes the question of human rights and the rights of minorities in Muslim countries. It goes without saying that the above principles govern these questions. We would say that the 1948 U.N. Declaration of Human Rights is fully consistent with and endorsed by the teachings of the Quran.
As to nationalism, there seems to be some confusion among Muslims whether they should accept nationalism or not. The Quranic teaching on this is very clear. Let us have a close look at the verse. “O people, we created you from the same male and female, and rendered you distinct peoples and tribes that you may recognize one another. The best among you in the sight of God is the most righteous. God is Omniscient, Cognizant.” [43] Races, tribes and nations are natural categories and we should recognize them as such, but no nation is superior to another. Each is equal to the other. Thus national chauvinism or superior race status is wrong and to be condemned. The only quality that makes a nation superior to other nations is in its righteous doings. Therefore, the love of one’s country or patriotism is not wrong; in fact, it is good and natural. But the concepts of the “Chosen People”, as claimed by the Jews, the “Master Race”, as claimed by the Nazis, and “Superior Civilization”, as claimed by the West are nothing but racist and to be condemned.
Islam stipulated three relationships to other religions. Firstly, tolerance and peaceful co-existence. [44] It must be pointed out that this is a very beautiful idea of how different religious communities can live side by side. No religious community should consider itself superior to the other, the truth being left to God to prove. [45] Secondly, a relationship of dialogues and discussions in order to call one another to goodness and to the truth. [46] Thirdly and lastly, of course, in the end it is God Who decides which religious community is on the right path. [47]
It is clear that the goodness of religion, of all religions, have been offset by its or their manipulation by vested interests within and without the religion. But also without the Religion of Truth we are landed on the waste land of amoral and immoral secularism that is the undoing of the modern civilization. It is high time we correct ourselves. It is clear that we have to do this quickly, as great forces of destruction, unleashed into the world within the last three decades, must be resolutely curbed and defeated.
We do not want to conclude this essay without making a special appeal to enlightened Muslim leaders and intelligentsia. You must act quickly and resolutely to bring the Muslim ummah back on the right track. It is your bounden duty to do so. Rise above the petty issues of mazhab and past bitterness. The future, the immediate future, is important. True Islam, the Religion of Truth, can save the world and everything that is good in modern civilization. You owe it to yourselves, to your peoples, to humanity and to God to do this. Not only the enlightened Muslim peoples will support you. The entire enlightened mankind will support you, and we shall win.
Kassim Ahmad is a Malaysian free-lance writer. He can be contacted at kasmad172@yahoo.com.my His website is http://www.kassimahmad.blogspot.com/
[1] See http://www.kassimahmad.blogspot.com/
[2] See New Sunday Times, 10 December, 2006 and Mingguan Malaysia, 7 January, 2007.
[3] See Quran, 65: 11.
[4] In Christendom, the Crusades (11th - 13th centuries), the Thirty Years’ War (1618-48), the Spanish Inquisition ; and Western colonialism and forced conversion; in Islamic history, the breach and formation of the Shi’ah sect after several battles in the early years after Prophet Muhammad’s death, including the massacre of al-Husayn and his 200 supporters at Karbala, Iraq in 680 and in modern times, the Iran-Iraq War (1980-88)
[5] See Kassim Ahmad, “The Meaningfulness of Life”, http://www.stormloader.com/qsmjam/
[6] Through Man’s knowledge of natural laws, he has been able to harness natural forces to serve his purposes. This abililty of Man is alluded to in the Quran by God’s elevation of him to the status of vicegerency (Quran, 2: 30-34) and by God’s affirmation of his ability to bend natural and social forces to his purposes. (Quran, 31: 20)
[7] We can argue reasonably and logically against polytheism, pointing to the perfect harmony of the Universe as proving the existence of a single Creator. Many and therefore competing creators would result in chaos and destruction.
[8] For the Muslims, we have the myths of the doctrines of Prophet Muhammad’s superiority to other prophets of God, Muhammad’s infallibility and Muhammad’s power of intercession on Judgement Day. For the Jews, the myth of the “Chosen People”, and for the Christians, the myths of the Trinity, the Sonship of Christ, the risen Christ and Christ’s Second Coming.
[9] This congruence is implied in this Quranic verse: “No one can believe except with God’s leave, and He bars those who refuse to reason.” (10: 100)
[10] “He it is Who has sent His messenger with the guidance and the Religion of Truth that He may make it prevail over all religions, though the polytheists are averse.” (Quran, 9: 33)
[11] See Quran, 110: 2. The Arabic phrase is din’ul-Lah = God’s religion. Note that in both phrases, the name “Islam” is not used. The divine promise of the triumph of the Religion of Truth or the Religion of God (note not Islam) was given five times (9:33, 48:28, 61:9 & 110:2).
[12] Quran, 3: 19.
[13] Quran, 3: 18 and also 37: 35 & 47: 19 where this simple confession of faith is strictly enunciated.
[14] See Quran, 2: 62.
[15] “Say, ‘O mankind, I am God’s messenger to all of you.’ ” (Quran, 7: 158)
[16] “Then We revealed to you this scripture truthfully, conforming all previous scriptures and superceding them.” (Quran, 5: 48)
[17] We thus set up against every prophet enemies from among the guilty. Your Lord suffices as a guide and master.” (Quran, 25: 31)
[18] “Christian theology, however, was shaped principally by the work of St. Paul. Jesus presented a spiritual message; Paul added to that the worship of Christ.” Michael H. Hart, The 100 – A Ranking of the Most Influential Persons in History, Golden Books Centre, Kuala Lumpur, 1989; p.47.
[19] It is to be noted that the advent of Prophet Muhammad was foretold both in the Old and the New Testaments. This is what Jesus said: “I have yet many things to say unto you, but you cannot bear them now. Howbeit when he, the Spirit of the truth is come, he will guide you into all truth; for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak; and he will shew you things to come. He shall glorify me.” John, 16: 12-14.
[20] This does not mean it was predetermined. Had post-Muhammad Muslims kept vigilant guard against deviations, they would have avoided the deviations that occurred. God gave them ample warnings in the Quran, but those warnings passed them by.
[21] The confusion is caused by the extra-Quranic teachings that have crept into Islam 300 years after the Prophet’s death through the so-called Prophetic traditions as well as through the teachings of the so-called great ulama whom the Muslims have idolized. The disaster is of course the downfall of the Muslims.
[22] “Surely, We have revealed the Reminder, and surely We are its Guardian.” (Quran, 15: 9) “This is an honourable Quran. In a protected book. None can grasp it except the sincere. A revelation from the Lord of the universe ” The manner in which the Quran is protected has been explained in detail by Dr. Rashad Khalifa in his book, The Computer Speaks: God’s Message to the World, Renaissance Productions International, Tuscon, 1981. See also his English translation of the Quran, The Final Testament, Authorised English Version with Arabic Text, Revised Edition II, Universal Unity, U.S.A., 2000.
[23] “Abraham was indeed an exemplary vanguard in his submission to God, a monotheist who never worshiped idols.” (Quran, 16: 120)
[24] “Then We inspired you (Muhammad) to follow the religion of Abraham, the monotheist; he never was an idol worshiper.” (Quran, 16: 123)
[25] In both the Old and the New Testaments, the monotheistic teaching of belief in One God is more than clear (see Deutronomy, 6: 4-5; Mark, 12: 29-30), proving that the polytheistic elements are extraneous.
[26] “Their affairs are decided through consultation among themselves.” (Quran,42: 38)
[27] In religious terminology, Paradise. Men must struggle to achieve this Paradise. “God has bought from the believers their lives and their money in exchange for Paradise. Thus they fight in the cause of God, willing to kill and get killed. Such is His truthful pledge in the Torah, the Gospel and the Quran – and who fulfils his pledge better than God? You shall rejoice in making such an exchange. This is the greatest triumph.” (Quran, 9: 111)
[28] “O you who believe, when you are told: ‘Mobilize in the cause of God,’ why do you become heavily attached to the ground? Have you chosen this worldly life in place of the Hereafter? The materials of this world compared to the Hereafter are nil.” (Quran, 9: 38)
[29] “That is because Allah, He is the Truth, and He gives life to the dead and He is possessor of power over all things.” (Quran, 22: 6)
[30] See Quran, 21: 16-18 and 17: 81.
[31] That was when I wrote Hadis – Satu Penilaian Semula.
[32] Later this Addendum was expanded into a chapter and included in my Hadis – Jawapan Kepada Pengkritik, Media Indah, Kuala Lumpur, 1992. Unfortunately, I have not seen any review of this book, particularly any comment on my attempt at a scientific methodology of tafsir.
[33] “O people, observe your Lord, the One Who created you from one being, and created from it its mate, then spread from the two many men and women.” (Quran, 4: 1) What is stated here that mankind is created from one being is a profound truth. It also means that men and women are equal. The historical differences are due to historical circumstances which are temporary. Regarding division of proper, please see verse 7 of Surah 4 which does not state the share, meaning that it is open to decision by state authorities.
[34] See Kassim Ahmad, Kontroversi Hukum Hudud, Forum Iqra’ Bhd., Pulau Pinang, 2002.
[35] Even these verses give a way out for lighter punishments, incuding pardon. See Quran, 5: 38-39 (for punishment against thieves) and 24: 2-5 (for punishment against adultery). Why these have been ignored by our anciet scholars is truly a wonder!
[36] “There is no compulsion in religion: the right way in now distinct from the wrong ay. Anyone who denounces the devil and believes in God has grasped the strongest bond; one that never breaks.” (Quran, 2: 256) It should be noted that this very important verse on men’s freedom to believe comes immediately after the Throne Verse which majestically proclaims God’s immense and awesome power over His creation, indicating to us the extreme importance of this God-given freedom.
[37] See Quran, 2: 173.
[38] The concept of Man’s vicegerency (Quran, 2: 30-34) alludes to this role. Verse 111 of Surah 9 places the struggle to build a just and happy world on the shoulders of believers.
[39] See Quran, 17: 81 dan 28: 4-6.
[40] See the writer’s article: “A Short Note on the Medina Charter”, http://www.stormloader.com/qsmjam
[41] See Quran, 22: 67.
[42] These principles of government have been cited and referred to in several places in this essay.
[43] 49: 13.
[44] “To you is your religion, and to me is my religion. (Quran, 109: 6)
[45] It must be conceded that Muslims in Malaysia, for the last 20 years or more since their religious re-awakening , have not lived up to this excellent precept of peaceful co-existence. The Muslims themselves may have complaints against their co-religionists. That is why this writer thinks that an Inter-Religious Council, where every religious group is represented should be set up to have regular dialogues and discussions whereby communal inter-religious problems can be civilly discussed and resolved.
[46] See Quran, 16: 125.
[47] See Quran, 3: 61-64.
Wednesday, February 22, 2006
TAKING UP DR MAHATHIR’S CHALLENGE*
Our [former] Prime Minister Datuk Seri Dr Mahathir Mohamad is among the few modern Muslim leaders who are also thinkers. Over the last few years he has made many important speeches at national as well as international fora on Islam. Most people would remember his excellent speech at the Oxford Centre for Islamic Studies on April 15, 1996 where he called upon Muslims to go back to the fundamentals of their religion, reject the outdated classical interpretations and reinterpret those fundamentals in the light of modern conditions.
Last week, he spoke in London on the future of Muslims in the new century. Although he has always been critical of present-day Muslims, his London speech shows a gloomy pessimism that was not so obvious before and that will not sit easily with the essential optimistic world-view of Islam. Listen to this : ‘I try very hard to be optimistic about the Muslims in the 21st century of the third millennium of the Christian Era. But I must admit that it is very difficult for me to be optimistic. …I find few Muslims understand reality. They live in a make-believe world where weakness is regarded as strength, where failures are regarded as success…. I am sorry I am unable to see the renaissance of the Muslim Civilisation in the 21st Century…
“We have not yet awakened to the realities of the Industrial Age, much less the Information Age. A few of us have, but we are too few and are not in a position to do much. These few will effectively live in exile. More will be joining them with the passage of time.”
The last paragraph of his speech throws a challenge to those Muslims who think otherwise and lets in an opening of hope. He said : “I hope there are others who can show positively that the 21st Century will see the beginning of the return of the great Muslim Civilisation. I would like to be convinced by them, so I and other Muslims may contribute whatever we can to the revival.” In the limited space here, I would like to take up Dr. Mahathir’s challenge.
The deplorable conditions of the Muslim ummah that he paints are sadly true. His call that Muslims go back to the religion’s fundamentals and interpret them in the light of modern conditions is also correct. What is needed is a methodology whereby this transformation can be carried out. Under the right conditions, I believe this transformation can be carried out within one, or at most two, generations.
Before discussing this, I would like to return to the question of pessimism. It can be seen that gloom presently engulfs not only the Muslim ummah. It embraces the whole modern civilisation. After the collapse of Soviet communism in 1989-90, now it is the turn of the Anglo-American liberalism to go under. Francis Fukuyama was premature in declaring liberalism’s triumph. There is the threat of a general war, including thermo-nuclear war, breaking out from various fire-storms that are raging on all the continents: Middle-East, Europe, Central Asia, South Asia and South America. The Anglo-American financier oligarchy is gripped by panic at the looming inevitable collapse of their system that they are prepared to risk a Third World War to stop the collapse.
Yet, as Muslims, we are told by God not to despair. Surah 12, Verse 87 states “Do not despair of God’s mercy, None despairs of God’s mercy except the disbelieving people.” Again : “Say, ‘O My servants who have exceeded limits, never despair of God’s mercy. God forgives all sins. He is the Forgiver, Most Merciful.’” (Quran, 39:53) Being the best group of people ever to be raised among mankind, as God describes believers in Him to be (see Quran, 3:110), we should work very, very hard to build a new civilisation from the ruins of multiple civilisations of the old world: the materialist civilisation of liberalism and communism and the ascetic civilisation of clerical Islam. As we know, the brilliant Muslim civilisation of the 7th through to 13th centuries was brought down by the class of theologian-clerics, who taught Muslims to disregard the present world and concentrate on the Hereafter, who took over the religion from that time onwards.
In his brave speech at Oxford, Dr. Mahathir correctly diagnosed the disease. He had said: “The people who are usually described as fundamentalists are far from following the fundamentals of the Islamic religion. On the contrary, they are people who reject the teachings of Islam or who deviate from them. Most of them have seemingly reverted to the pre-Islamic Jahilliah ways of extreme loyalty to their group, to fanaticism or ta’asub.”
In his London speech, Dr. Mahathir points out that the class of theologian-clerics are currently advancing in Malaysia. Lest we think that they will last, we should remember one thing that the theologian-clerics do not have is the truth. The religion that they are preaching is based on myth and falsehood. The myth is that they are the heirs of the Prophet and they are infallible. The falsehood is that those who support them will go to heaven. Both myth and falsehood will be cleared up soon by the emergence of truth, and truth, God has assured us, will triumph over falsehood. (See Quran, 17:81)
We must debunk their propaganda that it is only they who can speak about religion. In Islam there is no priesthood, as in Christianity. Everyone has the right to speak and every concerned one must speak up. We must uphold only the truth. Falsehood must be totally rejected. The Islam that all prophets from Adam to Muhammad taught us is simple: “Believe in God and do good.” Numerous verses of the Quran declare this. (See for instance 2:25, 82:112, 46:13 and 98:7-8)
The Quran also details for us the good that is to be done, and the bad that is to be avoided, and they are not very many. The theologian-clerics have invented a new religion that is almost impossible to practise and that has nothing to do with the true Islam. That is why their brand of Islam is not progressing. A futuristic dialogue reported in the Quran goes like this: “The day they are thrown into hell, they will say, “Oh, we wished we had obeyed God and we had obeyed the messenger.” They will also say, “ Our Lord, we had obeyed our masters and leaders, but they had led us astray.” (33:66-67)
Those among us who care for the true Islam must stand up and expose these hawkers of religion so that our people can be saved from the divine destruction that awaits us, if we do not.
The new world system that must emerge from the ruins cannot but be other than the system of truth. That is what true Islam is: the truth, embodied in God’s Word. The Quran has declared, “He it is Who sent His messenger with guidance and the religion of truth that he may cause it to prevail over all religions, though the idolaters are averse.” (9:33) It also states, “God speaks the truth and He shows the way.” (33:4) Belief in God also means belief in the truth of Islam and in the truth of God’s word.
As Dr Mahathir has also pointed out, the Quran is not as easy to understand as it seems at first. This has led to differing classical interpretations. One of the verses that has been misinterpreted to favour the theologians is the famous verse on the question of loyalty.
The verse (without interpolation) goes: ‘O you who believe, you shall obey God and you shall obey the messenger and those in charge among you. If you dispute in any matter, you shall refer it to God and the messenger, if you believe in God and the Last Day. This is better for you and provides you with the best solution.” (4:59).
Traditional interpretation points to three authorities, i.e. God, meaning the Quran, the messenger, meaning the Sunnah/Hadith of the Prophet, (note that this is an interpolation) and ulil-amr, meaning the religious authority (note that this is an arbitrary subjective interpretation). The real meaning of the verse, taking Quranic teachings as a whole, is that basic loyalty is due to God and His messenger (i.e. the Quran) and secondary loyalty is due to whoever is in authority in the particular text. In the national context, it refers to the Government. This secondary authority can make additional laws to carry out God’s commands, but no law can countermand God’s commands.
The difficulties in understanding the Quran is not so much due to its Arabic language, but rather to its multi-layered contexts. The Quran is both historical and universal. It is also meant for people of differing levels of social and moral development. The Quran is also couched in metaphor and in allegorical language, which can only be understood in reference to the Quran’s total teachings as well as in reference to many branches of knowledge. The classifical interpreters naturally interpreted the Quran according to the knowledge of their times and in accordance with their historically-bound understanding. We cannot blame them for the mistakes they may have made. Being human and historically-bound, they probably had no choice but to act the way they did. The blame is on those who came after and followed them blindly.
We are today a thousand or seven hundred years away from them. It is only natural and logical that we should review their interpretations so as to keep abreast with the development of knowledge, social development and the development of moral consciousness. It is the failure to do so (due to the so-called closing of the door of ijtihad) that Muslims now find themselves left behind, confused and lost.
To solve this problem of interpretation, we have to work out, from the teachings of the Quran itself, a scientific method of Quranic interpretation. The Egyptian scholar and reformer, Muhammad Abduh, was the first to point out to the principle of self-interpretation of the Quran. This writer has tried to work out such a methology in his 1992 book, Hadis – Jawapan Kepada Pengkritik.
Let us go to Prophet Muhammad’s example to gain some insight as to how to run a Muslim administration. As we know, he promulgated the Medina Charter to run the city-state of Medina. He in fact set up the first nation-state in history, structured as a federation with a central government with himself as head, with equal rights for its plural society citizens, consisting of Muslims, Jews and pagans, with complete religious freedom, with religion rites and customary matters administered by each autonomous province, but with questions of war and peace, security and justice directly under the central government. It should be noted that he separated religion, interpreted as rites of worship, from state matters. Thus his concept of government is secular in the sense that religion, as rights of worship, are regarded as particular to a community, not in the sense of politics being divorced from morality.
This is in line with Quranic taching enshrined in 22:67 which states : “For each community, We institute rites of worship which they follow. Do not let yourself be drawn into dispute in this matter. Call to your Lord, for surely you are on the right path.”
Muhammad completed his mission of transforming pagan Arabia into a united submitting people, who were swiftly to conquer the then world, in 23 years ! The miracle can, of course, be repeated, but it has to be done by believers who are capable of acting as masters of their own destiny (being vicegerents of God on Earth), striving hard to bring about a just world, fearing none, and submitting only to God.
* New Straits Times , 12 October, 2002.
Our [former] Prime Minister Datuk Seri Dr Mahathir Mohamad is among the few modern Muslim leaders who are also thinkers. Over the last few years he has made many important speeches at national as well as international fora on Islam. Most people would remember his excellent speech at the Oxford Centre for Islamic Studies on April 15, 1996 where he called upon Muslims to go back to the fundamentals of their religion, reject the outdated classical interpretations and reinterpret those fundamentals in the light of modern conditions.
Last week, he spoke in London on the future of Muslims in the new century. Although he has always been critical of present-day Muslims, his London speech shows a gloomy pessimism that was not so obvious before and that will not sit easily with the essential optimistic world-view of Islam. Listen to this : ‘I try very hard to be optimistic about the Muslims in the 21st century of the third millennium of the Christian Era. But I must admit that it is very difficult for me to be optimistic. …I find few Muslims understand reality. They live in a make-believe world where weakness is regarded as strength, where failures are regarded as success…. I am sorry I am unable to see the renaissance of the Muslim Civilisation in the 21st Century…
“We have not yet awakened to the realities of the Industrial Age, much less the Information Age. A few of us have, but we are too few and are not in a position to do much. These few will effectively live in exile. More will be joining them with the passage of time.”
The last paragraph of his speech throws a challenge to those Muslims who think otherwise and lets in an opening of hope. He said : “I hope there are others who can show positively that the 21st Century will see the beginning of the return of the great Muslim Civilisation. I would like to be convinced by them, so I and other Muslims may contribute whatever we can to the revival.” In the limited space here, I would like to take up Dr. Mahathir’s challenge.
The deplorable conditions of the Muslim ummah that he paints are sadly true. His call that Muslims go back to the religion’s fundamentals and interpret them in the light of modern conditions is also correct. What is needed is a methodology whereby this transformation can be carried out. Under the right conditions, I believe this transformation can be carried out within one, or at most two, generations.
Before discussing this, I would like to return to the question of pessimism. It can be seen that gloom presently engulfs not only the Muslim ummah. It embraces the whole modern civilisation. After the collapse of Soviet communism in 1989-90, now it is the turn of the Anglo-American liberalism to go under. Francis Fukuyama was premature in declaring liberalism’s triumph. There is the threat of a general war, including thermo-nuclear war, breaking out from various fire-storms that are raging on all the continents: Middle-East, Europe, Central Asia, South Asia and South America. The Anglo-American financier oligarchy is gripped by panic at the looming inevitable collapse of their system that they are prepared to risk a Third World War to stop the collapse.
Yet, as Muslims, we are told by God not to despair. Surah 12, Verse 87 states “Do not despair of God’s mercy, None despairs of God’s mercy except the disbelieving people.” Again : “Say, ‘O My servants who have exceeded limits, never despair of God’s mercy. God forgives all sins. He is the Forgiver, Most Merciful.’” (Quran, 39:53) Being the best group of people ever to be raised among mankind, as God describes believers in Him to be (see Quran, 3:110), we should work very, very hard to build a new civilisation from the ruins of multiple civilisations of the old world: the materialist civilisation of liberalism and communism and the ascetic civilisation of clerical Islam. As we know, the brilliant Muslim civilisation of the 7th through to 13th centuries was brought down by the class of theologian-clerics, who taught Muslims to disregard the present world and concentrate on the Hereafter, who took over the religion from that time onwards.
In his brave speech at Oxford, Dr. Mahathir correctly diagnosed the disease. He had said: “The people who are usually described as fundamentalists are far from following the fundamentals of the Islamic religion. On the contrary, they are people who reject the teachings of Islam or who deviate from them. Most of them have seemingly reverted to the pre-Islamic Jahilliah ways of extreme loyalty to their group, to fanaticism or ta’asub.”
In his London speech, Dr. Mahathir points out that the class of theologian-clerics are currently advancing in Malaysia. Lest we think that they will last, we should remember one thing that the theologian-clerics do not have is the truth. The religion that they are preaching is based on myth and falsehood. The myth is that they are the heirs of the Prophet and they are infallible. The falsehood is that those who support them will go to heaven. Both myth and falsehood will be cleared up soon by the emergence of truth, and truth, God has assured us, will triumph over falsehood. (See Quran, 17:81)
We must debunk their propaganda that it is only they who can speak about religion. In Islam there is no priesthood, as in Christianity. Everyone has the right to speak and every concerned one must speak up. We must uphold only the truth. Falsehood must be totally rejected. The Islam that all prophets from Adam to Muhammad taught us is simple: “Believe in God and do good.” Numerous verses of the Quran declare this. (See for instance 2:25, 82:112, 46:13 and 98:7-8)
The Quran also details for us the good that is to be done, and the bad that is to be avoided, and they are not very many. The theologian-clerics have invented a new religion that is almost impossible to practise and that has nothing to do with the true Islam. That is why their brand of Islam is not progressing. A futuristic dialogue reported in the Quran goes like this: “The day they are thrown into hell, they will say, “Oh, we wished we had obeyed God and we had obeyed the messenger.” They will also say, “ Our Lord, we had obeyed our masters and leaders, but they had led us astray.” (33:66-67)
Those among us who care for the true Islam must stand up and expose these hawkers of religion so that our people can be saved from the divine destruction that awaits us, if we do not.
The new world system that must emerge from the ruins cannot but be other than the system of truth. That is what true Islam is: the truth, embodied in God’s Word. The Quran has declared, “He it is Who sent His messenger with guidance and the religion of truth that he may cause it to prevail over all religions, though the idolaters are averse.” (9:33) It also states, “God speaks the truth and He shows the way.” (33:4) Belief in God also means belief in the truth of Islam and in the truth of God’s word.
As Dr Mahathir has also pointed out, the Quran is not as easy to understand as it seems at first. This has led to differing classical interpretations. One of the verses that has been misinterpreted to favour the theologians is the famous verse on the question of loyalty.
The verse (without interpolation) goes: ‘O you who believe, you shall obey God and you shall obey the messenger and those in charge among you. If you dispute in any matter, you shall refer it to God and the messenger, if you believe in God and the Last Day. This is better for you and provides you with the best solution.” (4:59).
Traditional interpretation points to three authorities, i.e. God, meaning the Quran, the messenger, meaning the Sunnah/Hadith of the Prophet, (note that this is an interpolation) and ulil-amr, meaning the religious authority (note that this is an arbitrary subjective interpretation). The real meaning of the verse, taking Quranic teachings as a whole, is that basic loyalty is due to God and His messenger (i.e. the Quran) and secondary loyalty is due to whoever is in authority in the particular text. In the national context, it refers to the Government. This secondary authority can make additional laws to carry out God’s commands, but no law can countermand God’s commands.
The difficulties in understanding the Quran is not so much due to its Arabic language, but rather to its multi-layered contexts. The Quran is both historical and universal. It is also meant for people of differing levels of social and moral development. The Quran is also couched in metaphor and in allegorical language, which can only be understood in reference to the Quran’s total teachings as well as in reference to many branches of knowledge. The classifical interpreters naturally interpreted the Quran according to the knowledge of their times and in accordance with their historically-bound understanding. We cannot blame them for the mistakes they may have made. Being human and historically-bound, they probably had no choice but to act the way they did. The blame is on those who came after and followed them blindly.
We are today a thousand or seven hundred years away from them. It is only natural and logical that we should review their interpretations so as to keep abreast with the development of knowledge, social development and the development of moral consciousness. It is the failure to do so (due to the so-called closing of the door of ijtihad) that Muslims now find themselves left behind, confused and lost.
To solve this problem of interpretation, we have to work out, from the teachings of the Quran itself, a scientific method of Quranic interpretation. The Egyptian scholar and reformer, Muhammad Abduh, was the first to point out to the principle of self-interpretation of the Quran. This writer has tried to work out such a methology in his 1992 book, Hadis – Jawapan Kepada Pengkritik.
Let us go to Prophet Muhammad’s example to gain some insight as to how to run a Muslim administration. As we know, he promulgated the Medina Charter to run the city-state of Medina. He in fact set up the first nation-state in history, structured as a federation with a central government with himself as head, with equal rights for its plural society citizens, consisting of Muslims, Jews and pagans, with complete religious freedom, with religion rites and customary matters administered by each autonomous province, but with questions of war and peace, security and justice directly under the central government. It should be noted that he separated religion, interpreted as rites of worship, from state matters. Thus his concept of government is secular in the sense that religion, as rights of worship, are regarded as particular to a community, not in the sense of politics being divorced from morality.
This is in line with Quranic taching enshrined in 22:67 which states : “For each community, We institute rites of worship which they follow. Do not let yourself be drawn into dispute in this matter. Call to your Lord, for surely you are on the right path.”
Muhammad completed his mission of transforming pagan Arabia into a united submitting people, who were swiftly to conquer the then world, in 23 years ! The miracle can, of course, be repeated, but it has to be done by believers who are capable of acting as masters of their own destiny (being vicegerents of God on Earth), striving hard to bring about a just world, fearing none, and submitting only to God.
* New Straits Times , 12 October, 2002.
Thursday, June 08, 2017
TWO TYPES OF ISLAM
TWO TYPES OF ISLAM
By: Kassim Ahmad
9th June, 2017
Do not be mistaken. There are two types of Islam, one that we inherited
from our ancestors, and the true one that is taught in God's final
scripture, the protected Quran. No scripture could be protected before
this -- man's scientific,knowledge has not attained that stage as yet.
Therefore all scriptures before the Quran have been tempered with.
Even the Quran has been tempered with! See how the Devil works? Surah Al-Bara'ah (9)
originally has 127 verses. During the time Uthman (third califh), a
commision was set up to check the Quran, his order being that two or
more witnesses must confirm each verse. One of the commission's members,
Khuzaimah, suggested to credit the Prophet by adding two more verses to
this Surah, i.e. 128 and 129. The original Quran ended at verse 127.
This is confirmed by history. Hafsah's copy of the Prophet's own
manuscript that he wrote himself was ordered to be burnt by later
caliph, Marwan! If the revised copy was the same as the Prophet's copy,
why was the order made? Note that Surah 9, does not begin with the usual
basmallah . The All-knowing
God knew that this chapter was going to be tempered with; He therefore
withheld His stamp of approval. This was not to be known for centuries
until Dr. Rashad Khalifa discovered the awesome Code 19. The discovery
of this code contained in Surah 74, verse 30 so encouraged Dr. Kalifa
that he claimed himself to be messenger of the covenant, which was to be
Prophet Muhammad. The context of verse proves this.
I happened to know Dr. Khalifa and I dissuaded him from making the
claim, telling him over the phone. if that were true, to let God Himself
show it. He failed to take my advice, leading him to be stabbed to
death! I happend to see that Dr Khalifa was prone be egoistical. So in
my prayers I always pray that I am protected from that weakness.
The other Islam is the true Islam to be found in the Quran. The Prophet
was strongly warned by God not to initiate any other teaching than the
Quran. (See Surah 69, verses 38-48), thus rendering the so-called
hadiths as fabrications tied to the great name of the Prophet.
Strangely, of late someone has began a movement called the Quran-hour.
Although I should welcome it, I am a bit scaptical. I would rather begin
a Quran academy, training hundreds of students the methodology of Quran
study so that in a few years we may have many, many proficient students
of the Quran. The students must of course study classical Arabic. I
studied Arabic at the university as a subsidiary subject..
It has been said that Islam is the fastest growing religion in the
world. Yet all over the world, the call to prayers is made, although
there is no need to now since we know the times of prayers. Worse they
repeat the so-called second syahadah against the clear prohibition in
the Quran (see Surah 63, verses 1-2). Prophet Muhammad, the last prophet
bringing the last divine scripture to the world, was only one of 25
prophets mentioned in the Quran. The ones that are not mentioned must
number thousands, since every community was sent a prophet-messenger to
deliver God's teachings. .
.
____________________________
KASSIM AHMAD is a Malaysian author. His website is .
Tuesday, August 31, 2010
Silly Arguments over "Secular" Versus "Religious"
In an “open” letter to Prime Minister Najib posted in Malaysiakini.com (July 20, 2007) lawyer Haris Ibrahim chastised the Prime Minister over his declaration that Malaysia is an “Islamic state.”
This is my comment on Haris’s letter. His original communication follows. Kassim Ahmad.
Dear En. Haris Ibrahim:
Peace to you!
Here is my respond to your “Open Letter” to Prime Minister Najib. I will be brief because I have not the time to go into details for now.
My first question is: Why this quarrel between what is secular and what is religious or Islamic? In principle, the values of this world and the hereafter should not be set at odds. They are not contradictory but complementary. (Quran, 2: 201). Although in Verse 67, Surah 8, God recommends attention to the higher values of the hereafter over the values of this lower world.
In this overall context one needs to distinguish clearly what is meant by this world and the hereafter. Clearly this world here refers to materialism per se, while the hereafter refers to the higher world of morality. The two (secularism and true religiosity) need not be contradictory. We need both material wealth and a high state of morality.
Scholars and political philosophers need to study this vexed question in the light of the teachings of true Islam (as opposed to politicized Islam). Especially, they should study Prophet Muhammad’s seminal constitutional-political document, the “Medina Charter.”
Some politicians in our country want to set up a theocratic state in Malaysia, like Iran. This is dangerous because theocracy manipulates the name of God to rationalize and legitimize their theological-political-intellectual dictatorship.
Lastly, as an afterthought, it is highly unfair of you, or for anybody for that matter, to threaten Prime Minister Najib with the terrible curse of God if he does not bring “proof.” This is not a light matter, and no one should trifle with it! The context of this fearful verse refers to the establishment of an extremely important matter of truth and falsehood: the establishment of not an easily seen truth, as the refutation of the Doctrine of the Trinity.
May God bless Malaysia and the good people of Malaysia!
Yours sincerely,
Kassim Ahmad,
1504, Jalan Kulim Height 3,
Kulim Golf & Country Resort.
Kulim, Kedah, Malaysia.
Tel. 604- 4031871/012-4291152.
Haris Ibrahim’s Open Letter.
Open Letter to PM Najib on Islamic State: Bring Forth YOUR Proof?
By Haris Ibrahim
Dear [Prime Minister] Najib:
Salamunalaika.
A Malaysiakini report entitled “This is an Islamic state: Najib” reports that YOU made the following statements:
“Malaysia is an Islamic state and not a secular one. Islam is the official religion and we are an Islamic state. We have NEVER been secular ….”
Like you, I too believe in Islam. And like me, I am sure that YOU know full well that God commands the truth and nothing but the truth. I am therefore first obliged to ask IF YOU DID INDEED make these claims?
If so, let me state categorically that YOUR claims are UNTRUE.
THIS IS THE TRUTH as I discern from the materials that abound.
YOUR late father, according to history, was part of the 1956 delegation that went to London to secure our independence. Truly, this nation is indebted to YOUR late father, the late Tunku and every freedom fighter of the era for securing independence for our nation. And a SECULAR Federal Constitution.
Yes, SECULAR.
Have YOU not read the Reid Commission report, that document that bears testimony to the selfless work of our leaders of days gone by?
Tun Salleh Abas (former Lord President of the Supreme Court) did, in extenso, in the case of Che Omar Che Soh. I have referred to this in an earlier post entitled “Historical and Constitutional Position of Islam Judicially Examined.”
Let me reproduce for YOU here the relevant excerpt from Tun Salleh's judgment. “…[W]e have to set aside our personal feelings because the law in this country is still what it is today, SECULAR law, where morality NOT accepted by the law is NOT enjoying the status of LAW.
Perhaps that argument should be addressed at other forums or at seminars and, perhaps, to politicians and Parliament. Until the law and the system is changed, we have NO choice but to proceed as we are doing TODAY.”
Do YOU know what Tunku’s view was on this secular / Islamic state issue?
See what Tunku said on the occasion of his 80th birthday as reported by the Star in February, 1983. Tunku said: “The country has a multi-racial population with various beliefs. Malaysia MUST continue as a secular State with Islam as the official religion.”
Tunku was NOT alone.
This is what the Star reported:
“Former Prime Minister Tun Hussein Onn has supported Tunku Abdul Rahman’s view that Malaysia should NOT be turned into an Islamic state …. ‘The nation can still be functional as a SECULAR state with Islam as the official religion,’ he said.”
What were YOU thinking of when YOU made what appear to me to be unfounded claims?
Aside from being untrue, they also amount to a slur on Tunku and Tun Hussein.
These two great statesmen got it wrong?
As one who, like you, professes a belief in Islam, I must ask that you DESIST in these UNFOUNDED contentions.
As you also well know, God in the Holy Qur’an commands that when there is a dispute on an issue, it is proper to call in the evidence of the respective parties.
You say Islamic state. I say secular. I have produced my proof.
“Have you any knowledge with you? If so, bring it forth.” Surah 6 verse 148 of the Holy Qur’an.
Please note that I have refrained from invoking the last part of the verse above. At this juncture, I shall assume you were merely mistaken.
I am obliged to say here that IF YOU insist on continuing to make these assertions without bringing forth your proof, I shall invoke the curse of God as commanded in Surah 3 verse 61 of the Holy Qur’an.
Wassalam,
Haris Ibrahim
In an “open” letter to Prime Minister Najib posted in Malaysiakini.com (July 20, 2007) lawyer Haris Ibrahim chastised the Prime Minister over his declaration that Malaysia is an “Islamic state.”
This is my comment on Haris’s letter. His original communication follows. Kassim Ahmad.
Dear En. Haris Ibrahim:
Peace to you!
Here is my respond to your “Open Letter” to Prime Minister Najib. I will be brief because I have not the time to go into details for now.
My first question is: Why this quarrel between what is secular and what is religious or Islamic? In principle, the values of this world and the hereafter should not be set at odds. They are not contradictory but complementary. (Quran, 2: 201). Although in Verse 67, Surah 8, God recommends attention to the higher values of the hereafter over the values of this lower world.
In this overall context one needs to distinguish clearly what is meant by this world and the hereafter. Clearly this world here refers to materialism per se, while the hereafter refers to the higher world of morality. The two (secularism and true religiosity) need not be contradictory. We need both material wealth and a high state of morality.
Scholars and political philosophers need to study this vexed question in the light of the teachings of true Islam (as opposed to politicized Islam). Especially, they should study Prophet Muhammad’s seminal constitutional-political document, the “Medina Charter.”
Some politicians in our country want to set up a theocratic state in Malaysia, like Iran. This is dangerous because theocracy manipulates the name of God to rationalize and legitimize their theological-political-intellectual dictatorship.
Lastly, as an afterthought, it is highly unfair of you, or for anybody for that matter, to threaten Prime Minister Najib with the terrible curse of God if he does not bring “proof.” This is not a light matter, and no one should trifle with it! The context of this fearful verse refers to the establishment of an extremely important matter of truth and falsehood: the establishment of not an easily seen truth, as the refutation of the Doctrine of the Trinity.
May God bless Malaysia and the good people of Malaysia!
Yours sincerely,
Kassim Ahmad,
1504, Jalan Kulim Height 3,
Kulim Golf & Country Resort.
Kulim, Kedah, Malaysia.
Tel. 604- 4031871/012-4291152.
Haris Ibrahim’s Open Letter.
Open Letter to PM Najib on Islamic State: Bring Forth YOUR Proof?
By Haris Ibrahim
Dear [Prime Minister] Najib:
Salamunalaika.
A Malaysiakini report entitled “This is an Islamic state: Najib” reports that YOU made the following statements:
“Malaysia is an Islamic state and not a secular one. Islam is the official religion and we are an Islamic state. We have NEVER been secular ….”
Like you, I too believe in Islam. And like me, I am sure that YOU know full well that God commands the truth and nothing but the truth. I am therefore first obliged to ask IF YOU DID INDEED make these claims?
If so, let me state categorically that YOUR claims are UNTRUE.
THIS IS THE TRUTH as I discern from the materials that abound.
YOUR late father, according to history, was part of the 1956 delegation that went to London to secure our independence. Truly, this nation is indebted to YOUR late father, the late Tunku and every freedom fighter of the era for securing independence for our nation. And a SECULAR Federal Constitution.
Yes, SECULAR.
Have YOU not read the Reid Commission report, that document that bears testimony to the selfless work of our leaders of days gone by?
Tun Salleh Abas (former Lord President of the Supreme Court) did, in extenso, in the case of Che Omar Che Soh. I have referred to this in an earlier post entitled “Historical and Constitutional Position of Islam Judicially Examined.”
Let me reproduce for YOU here the relevant excerpt from Tun Salleh's judgment. “…[W]e have to set aside our personal feelings because the law in this country is still what it is today, SECULAR law, where morality NOT accepted by the law is NOT enjoying the status of LAW.
Perhaps that argument should be addressed at other forums or at seminars and, perhaps, to politicians and Parliament. Until the law and the system is changed, we have NO choice but to proceed as we are doing TODAY.”
Do YOU know what Tunku’s view was on this secular / Islamic state issue?
See what Tunku said on the occasion of his 80th birthday as reported by the Star in February, 1983. Tunku said: “The country has a multi-racial population with various beliefs. Malaysia MUST continue as a secular State with Islam as the official religion.”
Tunku was NOT alone.
This is what the Star reported:
“Former Prime Minister Tun Hussein Onn has supported Tunku Abdul Rahman’s view that Malaysia should NOT be turned into an Islamic state …. ‘The nation can still be functional as a SECULAR state with Islam as the official religion,’ he said.”
What were YOU thinking of when YOU made what appear to me to be unfounded claims?
Aside from being untrue, they also amount to a slur on Tunku and Tun Hussein.
These two great statesmen got it wrong?
As one who, like you, professes a belief in Islam, I must ask that you DESIST in these UNFOUNDED contentions.
As you also well know, God in the Holy Qur’an commands that when there is a dispute on an issue, it is proper to call in the evidence of the respective parties.
You say Islamic state. I say secular. I have produced my proof.
“Have you any knowledge with you? If so, bring it forth.” Surah 6 verse 148 of the Holy Qur’an.
Please note that I have refrained from invoking the last part of the verse above. At this juncture, I shall assume you were merely mistaken.
I am obliged to say here that IF YOU insist on continuing to make these assertions without bringing forth your proof, I shall invoke the curse of God as commanded in Surah 3 verse 61 of the Holy Qur’an.
Wassalam,
Haris Ibrahim
Tuesday, December 26, 2006
ON RELIGIOUS CONFUSION
By: Kassim Ahmad
22 December, 2006
As we are closing 2006 and entering the New Year, we would like, of course, to resolve whatever old problems we have and tackle the new ones with greater vigour and resolve. But this is not to be.
With the Government’s new approach to Islamic teachings, the famous “Islam Hadhari” or “Civilizational Islam” or “Progressive Islam”, which, do not forget, won Pak Lah’s B.N. Government a huge mandate in 2004, one would have thought the young Perlis Mufti’s views on Islam ( Please see NST , 10 December, 2006) would have been welcomed by the UMNO Supreme Council and the Government. As it turned out, a number of State Islamic Religious Councils came out against the young mufti’s reasonable views on raids on hotel rooms suspected of housing unmarried couples committing sins. (Please see SundayStar , 17 December, 2006)
By now the UMNO leadership and the B.N. Government must know that they have left the administration of Islamic religion in the hands of difficult orthodox religious groups under State administrations. The Malays, belonging as they do in religion to the meticulous orthodox Shafi’e legal school, are easy prey to PAS political propaganda. This is PAS’s constituency. Our Prime Minister knows that such things cannot go on forever. UMNO as a whole, not only the top leadership, knows that it cannot go on. I anxiously wait for the day when UMNO takes a resolute stand on this matter. I shall be the first to congratulate it.
What is the matter with Islam? Before the 1980-s we did not see Muslim women covering their heads or Muslim men in government departments wearing their scalp caps in Malaysia. It is a sign, so it is claimed, of the “Re-awakening of Islam”. The process began in Malaysia in the 1970-s with the youth Islamic movement led by ABIM and, in the wider world, it reached its climax with the anti-Shah “Islamic Revolution” in Iran in 1979 when the religious theocratic group took over power.
The matter of Islam in Malaysia is that when Islam reached and secured its foothold in the Malay Archipelago in the 14th and 15th Centuries, it was the Islam that had ossified around a rigid Asha’arite theology and Shafi’ite jurisprudence, including the corpus of Prophetic traditions and exegeses, said to be pronounced closed and perfected by the four Great Imams (Malik, Shafi’e, Hanafi and Ahmad Ibni Hambal). Not to be forgotten is the Shi’ite group, also with its own immamate theology and likewise, Prophetic traditions, jurisprudence and exegeses. It is not precisely known whose idea was it that a way of life can be pronounced closed and perfected. It was not taught by Prophet Muhammad. Neither is it taught in the Quran. Nor is it precisely known how a class of clerics (the custodians of religion), forbidden in Islam, arose to oversee the religion on behalf of the Community.
Thus the matter of Islam is that it has changed from its pure original teachings in the Quran to contain all manner of national customs and traditions, admitted into it especially under the rubric of Prophet traditions or Hadith/Sunnah, as well as under the near sacrosanct teachings of the “Great Scholars”, more than half of which are contrary to the teachings of the Quran. How does this differ from the then teachings of the Jewish and Christian priesthoods that Islam latterly came to correct and rectify?
That being the case, it behoves us to retrace our steps back to the beginning, to the time of Prophet Muhammad, when his only guidance was God’s revelations to him and, of course, his own intellect and discernment. That was what he followed when he promulgated the famous Medina Charter when he and his small band of followers migrated to Medina in 11th Year of Call. So, the question is being posed, can we not just go back to the Quran, the basic source, which Prophet Muhammad himself followed?
At this point, the poser of the question will be bombarded will all types of abuses, starting with “anti-Islam” “modernist”, “Orientalist”, “Liberal Islam”, “anti-Hadith”, “apostate” and he or she will be boycotted by the Muslim community!
In matters of religion, a very, very few people indeed can think and act rationally. Of all religions, Islam (as taught in the Quran, that is) is the most rational. The Quran endlessly appeals to reason. This is because reason is a very important criterion of true knowledge. Inspiration or, for that matter, revelation, is not contrary to reason, as many scientists suppose; it is simply a higher type of reason, accessible, unfortunately, only to a few. God’s existence cannot be proved by sensory evidence, although it can be by a type of logical evidence (“God exists because He creates the world, although He Himself is not created.”) Revelation, being the third higher type of reason, is reason through direct knowledge of Reality without the first and second intermediaries (sensory and logical). The Quran states: “No person can believe without God’s leave. He places uncleanness on those who refuse to use reason.” (Quran, 10: 100) This puts reason on par with revelation.
So the post-Muhammad Muslim community has blocked itself out of the Quran! What a tragedy! The Quran is read melodiously every hour of the day and night throughout the Muslim world, but not principally to understand its meanings or implement its teachings. It is to get spiritual rewards just from mere reading!
Take the four or five cases of tussle over the right of burial of dead bodies by our Muslim religious authorities and their non-Muslim families this year. Apart from the fact that evidence is not completely clear as to the religious status of the dead persons at the time of their death (and this can easily be corrected), Muslim religious authorities hold to their unreasonable view that once a person becomes Muslim, he or she, cannot apostatize, or apostatize only on pain of death, following a so-called Prophetic tradition or hadith. This hadith obviously is weak, because its meaning runs counter to the clear teachings of the Quran that an adult is completely free to choose whether to believe or not to believe. No one should force anyone into any religion. Religion is completely free. (See Quran, 2: 256)
I should mention that this compulsory belief in the Hadith was added later by the teaching of Imam Shafi’e. The hadith stating that Muhammad left two books, instead of one, came with the promulgation of the Official Hadith Collections, 250 years after the Prophet’s death. It should be noted that Ashaarite theology teaches six pillars of faith (Enam Rukun Iman) and belief in Hadith is not one of them!
So, I repeat: Why cannot Muslims go back to the Quran?
Kassim Ahmad is a free-lance writer. He can be contacted at kasmad172@yahoo.com.my His website is at
Wednesday, March 30, 2016
THE CAUSES OF "ISLAMIC STATE " VIOLENCE
THE CAUSES OF “ISLAMIC STATE” VIOLENCE
THE RESOLUTION OF
WHICH LEADS TO A NEW WORLD ORDER
By: Kassim Ahmad
27th March, 2016
I looked up all references and
listened to all expert commentators on the subject, yet I failed to get a
satisfactory answer. In this essay, I shall try to probe the matter.
There are some telling clues. Firstly, the perpetrators claim
to represent Islam. Secondly, the targets are all Western countries whose
populations are mostly Christians (United States, France and Brussels ),
Thirdly, the latest targets were the Christian minority community in Pakistan.
Fourthly, look at present-day Iraq. It is chaos-in-chief,
consequent upon three American-led coalition of 33 countries’ invasions of that
country, thanks to the inducement by British Empire-created Irael (in the midst of Arab countries) and imperial
Iran. Remember Iraq was the home of the first human civilization, dating from
Prophet Abraham in Ur of 5000 years ago.
Iraq and Syria, two ancient civilizations, is said to be the
home of “Islamic State”, carrying the banner of Allah and Muhammad, a clearly mistaken
banner. The true banner of Islam is that
of One True God, the God of all the peoples, Jews, Christians, Muslims and others -- all believers in monotheism,
openly declared or kept secret.
All these clues point to a long conflict extending from 15th
Century up to the present between Muslims and Christians.
Further, do not forget the Western crusades against Islam.
There were nine crusades altogether, extending from 1095 of the first crusade,
to 1271 of the ninth crusade. The crusades were ordered by the various popes
who were then also kings sitting on the thrones of Medieval Europe.
The crusaders’ purpose was to retake the holy city of
Jerusalem, which the Muslims conquered from the Byzantine Empire. Jerusalem is known as Baitul-Maqdis to the Muslims, also one of their holy cities.
All these acts of Muslim violence against the Christian West,
starting from the 9/11 attack on the New York World Trade Centre, through
Paris, Brussels and the Christian community in Pakistan, must be looked upon as a
whole as Muslim revolt against the Christians. As can be seen, it has a long
history, from 16th Century colonization of the Malay World,
including the Philippines, most of which it has christianised, up to the 18th
Century. In the 18th Century
European colonialism awakened Asian nationalism, resulting in new independent
nation-states. But nation-states cannot unite the world that has become
interconnected into a Global Village.
We need a philosophy, a new world-view for our interconnected
world. As Islam is a “revolutionary, life-affirming and death-defying”
world-view, as I have defined it in another location, that must have been the basis
and reason for the rise of the “Islamic State” movement.
That being so, what solution can we offer to resolve this
deep psychological-cum-physical conflict? Let us ask ourselves what type of
world we want to see emerge for our and for future generations. Surely a peaceful, secure and just world.
What type of world do we have now?
Firstly, it a non-Muslim dominated world. It is ruled by two
non-Muslim blocs led by two self-appointed superpowers, the United States of
America and the Russian Federation. Be it noted that they are both Christian. It
is neither peaceful, nor secure, nor just. The Sword of Democles hangs over us.
It is imperative the justice-loving peoples of the world must change it before
we commit ourselves to a mutually-assured self-destruction!
The West for all its physical and apparent mental might – can
it face this this challenge of “insane’ violence? Certainly it cannot. But the West is too proud to admit defeat, although defeated it will be. “Islamic
State” violence in increasing by the day, as all can see. But even Muslims
cannot tolerate this violence commited in the name of Islam. It is not Islam’s
solution. (When I speak of Islam I means the Islam of all prophet-messengers
from Adam to Muhammad, including Abraham, Moses and Jesus.
Thus both the Christian West and the Muslims must come to an
amicable agreement in order to bring about a peaceful, secure and just world. Firstly, the Christian West must openly
apologize for their colonization of the world and pay token compensation. (Who
has evaluated the costs in lives and property of colonialism and imperialism?) Secondly,
all countries, Muslim and non-Muslim, which have been the victims of
colonialism must openly forgive their colonisers and agree to live in peace
with the countries that had colonized them. Thirdly, the non-Muslim superpower
blocs, including and especially the so-called U.N. self-appointed Security
Council must be democratized. Fourthly, all countries must renounce and destroy all
weapons of mass destruction. Fifthly, the “Islamic State” violence and terror must cease immediately. Sixthly, all
countries, big and small, must undertake to live in peace with one another,
solve all their differences and conflicts peacefully, and cooperate and help
one another to progress in all fields of human endeavour.
All these must be in the United Nations Charter, among others
that are universal human rights.
Then a peaceful, secure and just
world will come into being, and a new chapter in human life in this Universe
will begin.
Sunday, October 22, 2006
INTER-RELIGIOUS DIALOGUE
By: Kassim Ahmad
19 October, 2006
After the 9/11’s attack on the United States and George W. Bush proclaimed his long “War on Terror” and after Pope Benedict XVI’s lecture at the University of Regensburg on 12 September, 2006 where, quoting a 14th century Byzantine Emperor Manuel Paleologus’s lie about Islam and Muhammad without refuting him that Islam was evil and spread through violence, not to mention Samuel Huntington’s provocation of “Clash of Civilizations”, it does seem that inter-religious dialogue, leading to better inter-religious understanding, especially between Islam and the Judeo-Christian West, is extremely important.
Such a dialogue has been consciously undertaken towards the end of this century. Whether these dialogues have produced beneficial results or not, are not definitely known. One hopes that they have been beneficial.
It is important to clarify the aims of such a dialogue, because unattainable aims would sour the dialogue and relations between the religious communities, in this case, between he Western and the Muslim Worlds. The aims must therefore be practical and realizable.
The lowest common denominator for two peoples to co-exist side by side is respect and tolerance of each other’s different religions and cultures within which both work for the common good in terms of economic, social, political, intellectual and cultural developments. Differences in religions, cultures and languages need not bar nations from working for the common good. As the Quran says, these differences should lead to more knowledge of each other and consequently better understanding, tolerance and even appreciation.
To achieve respect and tolerance of one another’s religions and way of life -- this is the true aim of religious dialogue. The aim is not to find which is the better religion, yours or mine. Given man’s parochial tendencies, such an aim is virtually impossible to achieve. The true aim of dialogue is for the various religions to co-exist peacefully. The Quran has expressed this manner of relations between believers and disbelievers in the short and pithy Surah 109, thus:-
O you disbelivers, I do not worship what you worship. Nor do you
worship what I worship. Nor will I ever worship what you worship. Nor will I
ever worship what you worship. Nor will you ever worship what I worship.
To you is your religion and to me is my religion.
This is perfect respect and tolerance for the other’s religious beliefs and practices. This teaching became the policy of Muslims administrations towards Christians, Jews and other non-Muslim communities living under them for centuries. There has never been any forced conversion into Islam, as there had been into Christianity.
However, the Jews and the Christians, described as “the People of the Book” in the Quran, out of sheer jealousy, had never accepted Muhammad when he appeared, even though the coming of Muhammad was foretold in the Torah and the Gospel. They distorted the words referring to Muhammad’s advent in order to make them mean something else. This is due to their parochialism. Each of them, Jews and Christians (Jesus, a Jew, was not responsible for this; he foretold Muhammad’s coming), could not accept the fact that other people than them (in this case the Arabs) could be the recipient of a new revelation. This primordial jealousy against Muhammad and against Islam resulted in their centuries-old prejudice, distortions and lies about Muhammad and Islam, bringing about misunderstandings and conflicts, including the long crusades.
However, the Jews’ and the Christians’ persistent attempts at thwarting and killing Islam failed. Islam has a reputation for conquering its conqurers. Today it is the fastest growing religion in Europe and the United States. It is not impossible to visualize a Muslim America and a Muslim Europe in the next thirty years! Lest some people accuse us with parochialism too for wanting to see Islam (“my” religion) triumph in the world, I would quickly disabuse them that this is not the case. We are not automatically enamoured with what we have. In fact, we have severely criticized traditional Islam or the theologians’ Islam. Islam, for us, is the religion approved by God. Its basic teachings are represented in the Quran and the Quran alone. It is God’s Truth. It is comprehensive, simple, practical, logical, rational, beautiful, just and merciful. It is what a noble soul desires from God. That is the only reason we want to see it triumph in the world.
Only in the Twentieth Century did the Judeo-Christian West, in the fullness of its colonialist carrier, become aware that many other cultures, civilizations and religions as great and old, if not greater and older than theirs exist. From that point, they came to realize that they have to co-exist with them. Thus the dialogue of religions and civilizations begin to be consciously pursued.
For Muslims, their sacred book, the Quran, has already taught them this: respect and toleration of others’ religions. They have also been taught that God created differences in peoples in order that they may know one another. They therefore readily accept dialogue. I have, however, to report an exception. In my country Malaysia, there is a standing proposal for an Inter-faith Commission aimed to advise the Government in matters relating religious and ethnic conflicts and relations. Main stream Muslim groups refused to take part in deliberations to form this Commission and when it was proposed to the Government, it refused to consider the proposal. The reason main stream Muslim groups boycotted the earlier deliberations is their presumed fear that the Commission may be used to interfere in the affairs of Islam. It must be stated that such a negative attitude finds no support in the Quran.
Although conscious dialogue through rational argument to establish the truth is supported by the Quran , the Quran also informs us that for most people the truth is not what they want or seek. What they want or seek is comfort with their presuppositions. In other words, they are comfortable with their beliefs, whether those beliefs conform to the truth or not. That is the reason why the Quran advises respect and toleration for others’ religions.
In spite of obstacles in finding the truth in consciously-planned dialogues, there is another dialogue, not consciously planned, that goes on ceaselessly. This is part of the long historical process. This process goes on through human activity in establishing the truth (e.g through divine revelations, through inspired writings like Plato’s dialogues and through inspired scientific discoveries) and through inter-cultural and inter-civilizational contacts between different societies.
There is another way of establishing the truth apart from the rational and historical way. We might call it the spiritual way, that is, through a vow solemnly undertaken, invoking God as our witness. The Quran mentions this method in order to establish the truth regarding Jesus Christ’s death. After giving a brief account of Jesus’s birth, his life-work and his death, around the first and the third of which there is much controversy, the Quran throws out a terrifying challenge to the Christians. Let us hear the Quran’s own words on the matter.
If anyone argues with you, despite the knowledge you have received,
Then say, “Let us summon our children and your children, our women
And your women, ourselves and yourselves, then let us invoke God’s
Curse upon the liars.” Absolutely, this is the narration of the truth.
Absolutely, there is no god except God. Absolutely, God is the
Almighty, Most Wise. If they turn away, then God is fully aware of
The evildoers. Say, “O followers of the scripture, let us come to a logical
Agreement between us and you: that we shall not worship except God;
That we never set up idols besides Him, nor set up any human beings
As lords besides God.” If they turn away, say,”Bear witness that we are
Muslims.”
However, this challenge was never accepted by the Christians, to whom it was addressed, either in Prophet Muhammad’s time or in later times. I wonder whether the Muslims of today would dare throw the challenge to the Christians of today. I say this because, the Muslims having broken into sects, in violation of the teachings of the Quran, and having elevated Prophet Muhammad to a position higher that other prophets of God, again in violation of the teachings of the Quran, the Muslims themselves cannot claim that they have not committed the same errors as the Christians or the other religious communities!
Any inter-religious dialogue today would have to deal with two major questions. The first question is one regarding monotheism and polytheism. Under this rubric, we have to deal with subsidiary questions of the Christian belief in the Trinity and related Christian beliefs, and perhaps atheism too. No one can guarantee that such topics can be argued rationally and bear fruit.
The second major question is the practical one, i.e. how the various world communities, religions and civilizations can co-exist peacefully and cooperate to build a just world, without colonialism, without imperialism and without any form of oppression. Two attempts have been made to achieve this aim or part of this aim under Western leadership, i.e. the League of Nations of 1920 and its successor the United Nations of 1945. The first, of course, has failed, to be replaced by the second. By the end of the 20th Century, the second seems to have failed also.
We are now living in a very precarious world of the beginning of the 21st Century, without any mechanism to protect the weak from the strong and without any mechanism to prevent a new World War. Some voices have already proclaimed that we are already in World War IV (the so-called War on Terror, the third being the Cold War). There are at present more than enough fuses to ignite a new World War – North Korea and Iran, not to mention the issue of the long-suffering Palestinians and the newer problems of Western aggressions in Afghanistan and Iraq.
Another, perhaps more serious problem, that is seldom mentioned, is the utter bankruptcy of the American economy and its serious consequences for the world as a whole. The resurgence of fascism in the U.S. and in Europe during the last decade is a reflection of this deep world financial crisis.
What is going to happen? What can concerned ordinary citizens do? Can inter-religious dialogue help? Inter-religious dialogue, helpful though it is, obviously cannot decide the fate of the world. The fate of the world lies in the hands of its peoples, fighting to promote good and prevent evil. Where is the current world evil? The Bush-defined axis of evil of Iraq-North Korea-Iran is a camouflage to hide the true axis of evil, i.e. U.S.-British-Zionist world hegemony. Many ordinary people worldwide already have knowledge of this hegemony and they have formed resistance movements against it. What Bush and his ilk call terrorists are resistance fighters against this triad hegemony. The failures of the League of Nations and the present United Nations are precisely due to their being manipulated by this imperialist triad.
So, our solution lies in our unflinching resistance to this neo-colonialist triad. But this resistance must also be based on a new philosophy of democratic humanism or republican humanism that can lead the world into a new era of justice and happiness for all mankind.
Kassim Ahmad is a Malaysian freelance writer. He can be contacted at kasmad@yahoo.co.my. His website is www.kassimahmad.blogspot.com.
By: Kassim Ahmad
19 October, 2006
After the 9/11’s attack on the United States and George W. Bush proclaimed his long “War on Terror” and after Pope Benedict XVI’s lecture at the University of Regensburg on 12 September, 2006 where, quoting a 14th century Byzantine Emperor Manuel Paleologus’s lie about Islam and Muhammad without refuting him that Islam was evil and spread through violence, not to mention Samuel Huntington’s provocation of “Clash of Civilizations”, it does seem that inter-religious dialogue, leading to better inter-religious understanding, especially between Islam and the Judeo-Christian West, is extremely important.
Such a dialogue has been consciously undertaken towards the end of this century. Whether these dialogues have produced beneficial results or not, are not definitely known. One hopes that they have been beneficial.
It is important to clarify the aims of such a dialogue, because unattainable aims would sour the dialogue and relations between the religious communities, in this case, between he Western and the Muslim Worlds. The aims must therefore be practical and realizable.
The lowest common denominator for two peoples to co-exist side by side is respect and tolerance of each other’s different religions and cultures within which both work for the common good in terms of economic, social, political, intellectual and cultural developments. Differences in religions, cultures and languages need not bar nations from working for the common good. As the Quran says, these differences should lead to more knowledge of each other and consequently better understanding, tolerance and even appreciation.
To achieve respect and tolerance of one another’s religions and way of life -- this is the true aim of religious dialogue. The aim is not to find which is the better religion, yours or mine. Given man’s parochial tendencies, such an aim is virtually impossible to achieve. The true aim of dialogue is for the various religions to co-exist peacefully. The Quran has expressed this manner of relations between believers and disbelievers in the short and pithy Surah 109, thus:-
O you disbelivers, I do not worship what you worship. Nor do you
worship what I worship. Nor will I ever worship what you worship. Nor will I
ever worship what you worship. Nor will you ever worship what I worship.
To you is your religion and to me is my religion.
This is perfect respect and tolerance for the other’s religious beliefs and practices. This teaching became the policy of Muslims administrations towards Christians, Jews and other non-Muslim communities living under them for centuries. There has never been any forced conversion into Islam, as there had been into Christianity.
However, the Jews and the Christians, described as “the People of the Book” in the Quran, out of sheer jealousy, had never accepted Muhammad when he appeared, even though the coming of Muhammad was foretold in the Torah and the Gospel. They distorted the words referring to Muhammad’s advent in order to make them mean something else. This is due to their parochialism. Each of them, Jews and Christians (Jesus, a Jew, was not responsible for this; he foretold Muhammad’s coming), could not accept the fact that other people than them (in this case the Arabs) could be the recipient of a new revelation. This primordial jealousy against Muhammad and against Islam resulted in their centuries-old prejudice, distortions and lies about Muhammad and Islam, bringing about misunderstandings and conflicts, including the long crusades.
However, the Jews’ and the Christians’ persistent attempts at thwarting and killing Islam failed. Islam has a reputation for conquering its conqurers. Today it is the fastest growing religion in Europe and the United States. It is not impossible to visualize a Muslim America and a Muslim Europe in the next thirty years! Lest some people accuse us with parochialism too for wanting to see Islam (“my” religion) triumph in the world, I would quickly disabuse them that this is not the case. We are not automatically enamoured with what we have. In fact, we have severely criticized traditional Islam or the theologians’ Islam. Islam, for us, is the religion approved by God. Its basic teachings are represented in the Quran and the Quran alone. It is God’s Truth. It is comprehensive, simple, practical, logical, rational, beautiful, just and merciful. It is what a noble soul desires from God. That is the only reason we want to see it triumph in the world.
Only in the Twentieth Century did the Judeo-Christian West, in the fullness of its colonialist carrier, become aware that many other cultures, civilizations and religions as great and old, if not greater and older than theirs exist. From that point, they came to realize that they have to co-exist with them. Thus the dialogue of religions and civilizations begin to be consciously pursued.
For Muslims, their sacred book, the Quran, has already taught them this: respect and toleration of others’ religions. They have also been taught that God created differences in peoples in order that they may know one another. They therefore readily accept dialogue. I have, however, to report an exception. In my country Malaysia, there is a standing proposal for an Inter-faith Commission aimed to advise the Government in matters relating religious and ethnic conflicts and relations. Main stream Muslim groups refused to take part in deliberations to form this Commission and when it was proposed to the Government, it refused to consider the proposal. The reason main stream Muslim groups boycotted the earlier deliberations is their presumed fear that the Commission may be used to interfere in the affairs of Islam. It must be stated that such a negative attitude finds no support in the Quran.
Although conscious dialogue through rational argument to establish the truth is supported by the Quran , the Quran also informs us that for most people the truth is not what they want or seek. What they want or seek is comfort with their presuppositions. In other words, they are comfortable with their beliefs, whether those beliefs conform to the truth or not. That is the reason why the Quran advises respect and toleration for others’ religions.
In spite of obstacles in finding the truth in consciously-planned dialogues, there is another dialogue, not consciously planned, that goes on ceaselessly. This is part of the long historical process. This process goes on through human activity in establishing the truth (e.g through divine revelations, through inspired writings like Plato’s dialogues and through inspired scientific discoveries) and through inter-cultural and inter-civilizational contacts between different societies.
There is another way of establishing the truth apart from the rational and historical way. We might call it the spiritual way, that is, through a vow solemnly undertaken, invoking God as our witness. The Quran mentions this method in order to establish the truth regarding Jesus Christ’s death. After giving a brief account of Jesus’s birth, his life-work and his death, around the first and the third of which there is much controversy, the Quran throws out a terrifying challenge to the Christians. Let us hear the Quran’s own words on the matter.
If anyone argues with you, despite the knowledge you have received,
Then say, “Let us summon our children and your children, our women
And your women, ourselves and yourselves, then let us invoke God’s
Curse upon the liars.” Absolutely, this is the narration of the truth.
Absolutely, there is no god except God. Absolutely, God is the
Almighty, Most Wise. If they turn away, then God is fully aware of
The evildoers. Say, “O followers of the scripture, let us come to a logical
Agreement between us and you: that we shall not worship except God;
That we never set up idols besides Him, nor set up any human beings
As lords besides God.” If they turn away, say,”Bear witness that we are
Muslims.”
However, this challenge was never accepted by the Christians, to whom it was addressed, either in Prophet Muhammad’s time or in later times. I wonder whether the Muslims of today would dare throw the challenge to the Christians of today. I say this because, the Muslims having broken into sects, in violation of the teachings of the Quran, and having elevated Prophet Muhammad to a position higher that other prophets of God, again in violation of the teachings of the Quran, the Muslims themselves cannot claim that they have not committed the same errors as the Christians or the other religious communities!
Any inter-religious dialogue today would have to deal with two major questions. The first question is one regarding monotheism and polytheism. Under this rubric, we have to deal with subsidiary questions of the Christian belief in the Trinity and related Christian beliefs, and perhaps atheism too. No one can guarantee that such topics can be argued rationally and bear fruit.
The second major question is the practical one, i.e. how the various world communities, religions and civilizations can co-exist peacefully and cooperate to build a just world, without colonialism, without imperialism and without any form of oppression. Two attempts have been made to achieve this aim or part of this aim under Western leadership, i.e. the League of Nations of 1920 and its successor the United Nations of 1945. The first, of course, has failed, to be replaced by the second. By the end of the 20th Century, the second seems to have failed also.
We are now living in a very precarious world of the beginning of the 21st Century, without any mechanism to protect the weak from the strong and without any mechanism to prevent a new World War. Some voices have already proclaimed that we are already in World War IV (the so-called War on Terror, the third being the Cold War). There are at present more than enough fuses to ignite a new World War – North Korea and Iran, not to mention the issue of the long-suffering Palestinians and the newer problems of Western aggressions in Afghanistan and Iraq.
Another, perhaps more serious problem, that is seldom mentioned, is the utter bankruptcy of the American economy and its serious consequences for the world as a whole. The resurgence of fascism in the U.S. and in Europe during the last decade is a reflection of this deep world financial crisis.
What is going to happen? What can concerned ordinary citizens do? Can inter-religious dialogue help? Inter-religious dialogue, helpful though it is, obviously cannot decide the fate of the world. The fate of the world lies in the hands of its peoples, fighting to promote good and prevent evil. Where is the current world evil? The Bush-defined axis of evil of Iraq-North Korea-Iran is a camouflage to hide the true axis of evil, i.e. U.S.-British-Zionist world hegemony. Many ordinary people worldwide already have knowledge of this hegemony and they have formed resistance movements against it. What Bush and his ilk call terrorists are resistance fighters against this triad hegemony. The failures of the League of Nations and the present United Nations are precisely due to their being manipulated by this imperialist triad.
So, our solution lies in our unflinching resistance to this neo-colonialist triad. But this resistance must also be based on a new philosophy of democratic humanism or republican humanism that can lead the world into a new era of justice and happiness for all mankind.
Kassim Ahmad is a Malaysian freelance writer. He can be contacted at kasmad@yahoo.co.my. His website is www.kassimahmad.blogspot.com.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)