Muslims! Who are you!!!

Why are you Muslim?

‘Why are you Muslim?’ It may sound like an obvious question, but often many of us don’t have a clear answer to it. I remember being asked this question by my elder brother when I was fourteen years of age, my initial answer was ‘Well, our family is Muslim’, his reply to this made me think, he said, ‘If your family were Hindu or Christian, would you be as well?’. I replied with a strong ‘No, Islam is the truth’, the discussion that followed made me question the basis of my life and changed my life for ever. He triggered me to think about how to prove that Islam is the truth rather than just believing it emotionally or blindly. In fact Allah (swt) has condemned people for imitating their forefathers and adopting their belief without clear evidence.

In the Holy Qur’an, He (swt) says:

“And verily guess is no substitute for the truth.”

[TMQ 53:28]

“They have no (certain) knowledge. They follow nothing but conjecture. For surely; they killed him not (‘Isa).”

[TMQ 4:157]

"These are nothing but names which you have devised, you and your fathers, for which Allah has sent down no authority. They follow nothing but conjecture and what their Nafs desire. Even though there has already come to them the Guidance from their Rabb"

[TMQ 53:23]

"Do you have Ilm (knowledge) for that which you claim so that you provide us with? You follow nothing but conjecture (Zann)."

[TMQ 6:148]

The followers of other religions have no decisive proof for their belief, therefore they believe in their religions emotionally or through imitation. Some of them think that you just have to have faith without clear proof. However when it comes to normal things in life people apply a lot of thought such as buying a car, house, choosing a University course or which bank to join, so how can it be that when it comes to the most important questions about life; which define the purpose of our lives that we should just have ‘faith’ without being convinced absolutely.

It is therefore vital for a Muslim to believe in the existence of Allah (swt) without any doubt whatsoever and to believe in the Prophethood of Muhammad (saw) and that the Qur’an is the final revelation sent by Allah (swt) to humanity. Islam is unlike all the other religions as it has a decisive proof that convinces the mind.

Proof of the existence of Allah (swt)

Let us begin by discussing the proof of the existence of Allah (swt). Although we are taught theories regarding the origin of the Universe and origin of the Man such as the big bang theory and the theory of evolution, we should realise that they contradict the clear reality which everyone can sense.

The fundamental proof that God exists is that everything that we sense around us whether it is the mountains, the trees, the sun, the moon, the stars or animals and fellow human beings are limited things and are not eternal. By limited we mean that they have restrictions, a starting point and an ending point, and they have definable attributes i.e. they are all finite. Human beings are born and die. There is no-one alive who will not die. During their life span, they will grow to a certain height, weight and volume.

It is true that there are differences between the things that exist in the Universe however all of them share the quality of being limited and finite, the earth may be huge but it still has a certain shape, weight, volume by which it is limited, this applies to all planets, stars, solar systems and galaxies. Even though a galaxy may look huge to us as the earth looks huge to us and it is not eternal. Even if all of the galaxies and elements of the Universe are added together they do not become unlimited and therefore require an origin. No scientist could ever prove using hard facts that the universe has no bounds. In fact when they say that the universe arose from the Big Bang and is expanding they inherently admit it is finite in size, otherwise it could not expand! There is nothing in reality which is unlimited. No matter how hard we try, we are unable to find anything unlimited around us. All we can perceive is finite and limited.

It is a simple principle that something cannot come from nothing, therefore, where did the Universe come from? It cannot simply exist without having any cause as this contradicts the clear reality which everyone can sense, for example, if we see a car no one would ever think that it simply exists without any manufacturer, this can be applied to anything around us. The following example demonstrates this point well.

Imam Abu Hanifa was once asked by an atheist, "Is there any proof that God exists?" he replied, "Forget it! At the moment, I am busy thinking about this ship.People tell me there is a big ship; it contains different goods on board. There is no one to steer it, no one maintaining it. Yet, this ship keeps going back and forth; it even traverses big waves on the oceans; it stops at the locations that it is supposed to stop at; it continues in the direction that it is supposed to head. This ship has no captain and no one planning its trips." The atheist who posed the question interrupted and exclaimed, "What kind of strange and silly thought is this? How can any intelligent person think that some thing like this can occur?"

Imam Abu Hanifa said, "I feel sorry about your state! You cannot imagine one ship running without some one looking after its affairs. Yet you think that for this whole world, which runs exactly and precisely, there is no one who looks after it, and no one owns it."

The attribute of everything around us is that they are all needy and dependent in order to continue existing. They are not self-sustaining or independent. Man has needs he has to satisfy in order to survive. He has organic needs for example he must eat and drink if he is to survive. If he does not he will die. We see the need and dependency in plants and animals. They depend on other parts of the food chain for their existence. The water cycle is dependent on the sun, which is dependent on the laws of the galaxies and of burning mass, and so on... Nothing we can perceive is self-subsistent. So things exist, but do not have the power of existence. They cannot control when they die or when other bodies die. Thus what we see is that everything around us is limited and finite. Everything that is limited and finite is dependant and everything that is dependant is dependant upon something greater than itself. Applying this to everything we see will bring us to a conclusion. If everything in the universe is dependant because it has not the power of being in existence on its own accord, and is also finite and limited, then what is everything dependant upon for its existence? It must be an unlimited and independent creator.

Today the various theories that exist about the origin of the Universe such as the ‘Big bang theory’, ‘Big bang – Big crunch theory’ or ‘dialectic materialism’ they contradict the simple fact of the need for an unlimited creator.

One example that highlights this is that of the origin of life. Living things like plants, animals and human beings are different from inanimate or dead things as they have certain features such as independent growth, motion and reproduction. If people believe that the Universe has existed forever or that it evolved from single blast etc, this means that they believe that life also evolved from inanimate or dead matter such as gases, liquids or solids. If this is the case, then they should be able to show us one example at least of non-living things producing life, no such example exists. In fact some of them say that this happened by coincidence millions of years ago when certain amino acids and chemicals mixed together to produce the first life. If this is the case, then they should be able to reproduce this ‘coincidence’ with their billions of dollars worth of technology. But they are unable even to produce the most basic life form; an amoeba, which is a single celled organism. What scientists can do is manipulate the attributes that exist within living cells such as in genetic cloning; however this does not mean that they are creating life from dead matter. They are simply manipulating the attributes that Allah (swt) has placed within life, just as we manipulate metal to produce knives and cars.

Therefore, it is a simple fact that this universe must have a creator. The question remains is this creator like the universe i.e. limited or is the creator unlimited and eternal. If the creator was limited like the universe then He would also require a creator as this is the case with every limited thing. So if the universe was caused by a big bang as they claim, what was before the big bang? If it was something else like another universe then what was before that? This chain would continue until there would be a beginning or origin, this could only be caused by something which is uncaused or eternal, which we call Allah (swt).

Furthermore the amazing design of every part of the universe, man and life are testament to the fact that Allah (swt) exists. Imam Shaa'fi explained this when he said, "The leaves of Toot (berries) are all but one. Each leaf tastes exactly the same. Insects, honey bees, cows, goats, and deer live off of it. After eating these the insects produce silk; bees produce honey; deer give musk (a special kind of scent), cows and goats deliver off-springs. Is this not clear evidence that one kind of leaf has so many qualities, and who created these qualities? It is the Khaliq (Creator) who we call Allah (swt)) Who is the Inventor and the Creator."

We see that the Qur’an draws attention to everything around us and to conclude from this pondering the existence of Allah. There are hundreds of Qur’anic ayat expressing this meaning. Such as,

إنَّ فِي خَلْقِ ألسَمَاوَاتِ وَالأرْضِ وَاخْتِلافِ ألَّيْلِ وَالنَّهــارِ لأََيــاتٍ لِأُوْلـــىالْبــَابِ

Behold! In the creation of the heavens and the earth and the alteration of night and day, these are indeed signs for men of understanding."

[TMQ Al-Imran: 190]

وَمِنْ آيَاتِهِ خَلْقُ السَّمَاوَاتِ وَالأَرْضِ وَاخْتِلاَفُ أَلْسِنَتِكُمْ وَأَلْوَانِكُمْ إِنَّ فِي ذلِكَ لآيَاتٍ لِّلْعَالَمِينَ

And of His signs is the creation of the heavens and the earth, and the difference of your languages and colours. Behold! herein indeed are signs for men of knowledge."

[TMQ Ar-Rum: 22]

أَفَلاَ يَنظُرُونَ إِلَى الإِبْلِ كَيْفَ خُلِقَتْ وَإِلَى السَّمَآءِ كَيْفَ رُفِعَتْ وَإِلَى الْجِبَالِ كَيْفَ نُصِبَتْ وَإِلَى الأَرْضِ كَيْفَ سُطِحَتْ

Will they not look at the camels, how they are created! And the heaven, how it is raised! And the mountains, how they are set up! And the earth, how it is spread!"

[TMQ Al-Ghashiya: 17-20]

فَلْيَنظُرِ الإِنسَانُ مِمَّ خُلِقَ خُلِقَ مِن مَّآءٍ دَافِقٍ يَخْرُجُ مِن بَيْنِ الصُّلْبِ وَالتَّرَآئِبِ

So let man reflect, from what he is created. He is created fom a gushing fluid, that is issued from between the loins and ribs."

[TMQ At-Tariq: 5-7]

إِنَّ فِي خَلْقِ السَّمَاوَاتِ وَالأَرْضِ وَاخْتِلاَفِ اللَّيْلِ وَالنَّهَارِ وَالْفُلْكِ الَّتِي تَجْرِي فِي الْبَحْرِ بِمَا يَنفَعُ النَّاسَ وَمَآ أَنزَلَ اللَّهُ مِنَ السَّمَآءِ مِن مَّآءٍ فَأَحْيَا بِهِ الأَرْضَ بَعْدَ مَوْتِهَا وَبَثَّ فِيهَا مِن كُلِّ دَآبَّةٍ وَتَصْرِيفِ الرِّيَاحِ وَالسَّحَابِ الْمُسَخَّرِ بَيْنَ السَّمَآءِ وَالأَرْضِ لآيَاتٍ لِّقَوْمٍ يَعْقِلُونَ

Behold! in the creation of the heavens and the earth and the difference of night and day, and the ships which run upon the sea with that which is of use to men, and the water which Allah sends down from the sky, thereby reviving the earth after its death, and dispersing all kinds of beasts therein, and in the ordinance of the winds, and the clouds obedient between heaven and earth are signs (of Allah's sovereignty) for people who have sense."

[TMQ Al-Baqarah: 164]

"Were they created of nothing, or were they themselves the creators? Or did they create the heavens and the earth? Nay they have not firm belief."

[TMQ At-Tur 35-36]

Proof of the Qur’an

Once we have concluded definitively that Allah (swt) exists the next obvious question that arises is that has Allah (swt) sent a revelation for us to follow. It is clear that we are not able to communicate with God and therefore we are unable to know what He wants us to do, how He wants us to worship Him and how we should solve the problems we face in life. All of these questions would remain unresolved unless there the creator has communicated with us and given us a guidance to follow.

As Muslims we believe that throughout history, there have been messengers and prophets, men sent from the Creator, bringing laws or revelation on how man should conduct his life. They were given miracles which proved to mankind that they had a communication with God and a revelation from Him. A miracle is something which goes against the laws of nature which is impossible for anyone else to do; by miracles the Prophet’s were able to prove their direct relationship with God. For example prophet Musa (as) had a stick which parted the Red Sea, Prophet Isa (as) had the ability to cure the sick by just touching them.

But how do we know if these messengers existed? The miracles performed by the above prophets were only miracles for that specific period of time. But how do we know that they were not just legends or fables? So what miracle do we have right now to convince us and guide us through our lives?

The Qur’an itself is the main miracle that the Prophet (saw) brought which is different to the physical miracles of the other Prophet’s as they were limited to their times only. The Qur’an is an intellectual miracle that proves Islam. It was revealed to Muhammad (saw) in the 6th Century, it exists today and has been revealed for all times.

It is an established fact that the Qur’an was proclaimed by Muhammad (saw) in Arabia over fourteen hundred years ago. In order for us to prove decisively that it is from Allah (swt), we must first consider the possible sources of the Qur’an and then eliminate these to arrive at its true origin.

The only possible sources for the Qur’an are:

a) The Arabs

b) Muhammad (saw) himself

c) Allah (swt)

At the time it was revealed, the pagan Arabs were deeply into poetry. It was an indication of nobility in society. People used to go to the desert for days just to write poetry. The Arabic language has great fluidity and depth of expression, so it was held high in esteem by the Arabs. Allah (swt) in the Qur’an challenged the Arabs to produce something comparable to it in language and they failed to do so.

Initially Allah (swt) challenged them to produce ten chapters (surah’s) similar to it:

"They may say: He forged it (the Qur’an). Say: "Bring you then ten forged surah (chapters) like unto it, and call whomsoever you can, other than Allah (to your help), if you speak the truth!"

[TMQ 11:13]

They failed to do so. Allah (swt) then reduced the challenge to something that at first glance may sound easy, He (swt) said:

“If you are in doubt of what we have revealed to our messenger, then produce one chapter like it. Call upon all your helpers, besides Allah, if you are truthful”

[TMQ 2:23]

The smallest chapter in the Qur’an, Surah al-Kauthar is only three sentences long, surely someone in history must have matched this challenge? The Arabs at the time of Muhammad (saw) failed to do so, although they were the best in the Arabic language. Furthermore no piece of Arabic literature before them or after them until today has even come close to matching the language of the Qur’an.

For non-Arabs sometimes this may be difficult to perceive as they do not appreciate the language of the Qur’an directly. However, everyone can agree that any piece of literature written by human beings can be matched; people can copy its style and produce something comparable to it in quality. If we look at great English authors like Shakespear no one would claim that they were Prophet’s and that their works are miraculous in nature. Even though they may have been geniuses in language, people can easily write something similar in excellence to three sentences from their books. Despite having the Arabic language, its letters, grammar, syntax and dictionaries available today, the Arabic linguists cannot construct any piece of language that is comparable to the Qur’an. Therefore, it is impossible that the Qur’an was written by any of the Arabs.

It is also inconceivable that the Qur’an is the speech of Muhammad (saw). After all he was one of the Arabs. Also, whatever level of genius people may assign to him, he was still a human being and one of his tribe and nation. Since the Arabs failed to bring the like of the Qur’an, this equally applies to Muhammad (saw). Moreover, Muhammad (saw) has left saheeh ahaadeeth (sound narrations) and mutawaatir ahaadeeth (definitive narrations) whose authenticity is beyond doubt. If any of these ahaadeeth were to be compared with any verse of the Qur'an, there would be no similarity between them in style. He (saw) used to utter the revealed verse and say the hadeeth at the same time and yet there is a difference between them in style. Whenever any man attempts to diversify his speech, it will remain similar in style, because it is a part of him. Since there is no similarity between the hadeeth and the verse in style, the Qur'an is absolutely not Muhammad’s speech. It is important to point out that none of the Arabs, who despised Muhammad (saw), particularly at that time, were the most acquainted with the styles of Arabic speech yet never claimed that the Qur’an was Muhammad’s (saw) speech, or even similar to his speech.

Since it is proved that the Qur'an is neither the speech of the Arabs nor the speech of Muhammad (saw), it is definitely the speech of Allah as this is the only rational possibility we are left with.

The Qur’anic challenge is unique because the Creator, Allah (swt), pushes man to use his ability to undermine the authenticity of the Qur’an. It is such a profound yet simple challenge. Imagine throughout the history of Islam, all her enemies needed to defeat this challenge to destroy the whole basis of Islam. Yet not one, non-Muslim Arab or non-Arab has been able to do this even though all the tools of the Arabic language are at their disposal. The Western government’s hatred of Islam is well known. All they have to do in order to defeat Islam and to make over one billion Muslims apostatise from it, is not to spend billions of dollars in invading Afghanistan, Iraq and launching a mythical ‘war on terror’. They simply have to produce one chapter similar to the Qur’an.

To this day Muslim and non-Muslim scholars have not been able to find any contradiction or mistake in the Qur’an. Moreover, if one was to compare word by word a copy of the Qur’an published today to one of the first copies of the Qur’an available then one would find that not a single word has been omitted or added. Copies of the Qur’an dating back to the first century of Islam can be found in Istanbul and Tashkent. Allah (swt) says:

"Do they not ponder about the Qur’an? If it had come from God they would surely have found therein much contradictions."

[T.M.Q 4:82]

There are many texts available today claiming divine status from God, like the Bible of the Christians and the Torah of the Jews etc. However, they have no proof that they have been revealed by God, if they are not miraculous in nature then there is no reason to believe in them.

As Muslims we believe that Allah (swt) revealed different books through history such as the original Injeel (Bible) and Torah, Allah (swt) informed us of this in the Qur’an this is why we believe these. However, we have also been informed that these books have been altered and therefore the versions that exist today are not that which was revealed by Allah (swt). Besides this, the Qur’an is the final revelation from Allah (swt) which abrogates all others.

Allah (swt) says,

"Say ye: "We believe in Allah, and the revelation given to us, and to Abraham, Isma'il, Isaac, Jacob, and the Tribes, and that given to Moses and Jesus, and that given to (all) Prophets from their Lord: we make no difference between one and another of them: and we bow to Allah (in Islam)."

[TMQ Al-Baqarah:136]

Once we have established through rational proof that Allah (Swt) exists and that the Qur’an is the Word of Allah, we must believe in everything that the Qur’an informs us of and commands us with, whether we can perceive them or not. Therefore, we must have Iman (belief) in the Day of Resurrection, in paradise (jannah) and hell, in reckoning and punishment, in angels, in jinn, in Shayaateen and all others that the Qur'an or hadeeth mutawaatir (definitive narrations) have mentioned. To believe in these things is therefore not irrational just because we cannot see them or sense them physically as we have conclusively proved the Qur’an being from Allah (swt) which informs us about all of these.

يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُواْ آمِنُواْ بِاللَّهِ وَرَسُولِهِ وَالْكِتَابِ الَّذِي نَزَّلَ عَلَى رَسُولِهِ وَالْكِتَابِ الَّذِي أَنَزلَ مِن قَبْلُ وَمَن يَكْفُرْ بِاللَّهِ وَمَلآئِكَتِهِ وَكُتُبِهِ وَرُسُلِهِ وَالْيَوْمِ الآخِرِ فَقَدْ ضَلَّ ضَلاَلاً بَعِيداً

O you who believe! Believe in Allah and His messenger, and the Book which He sent to His Messenger and the Book which He sent to those before (him). Any who denies Allah, His Angels, His Books, His Messengers, and the Day of Judgement, has gone far, far astray."

[An-Nisa: 136]

Once the Iman in Allah, His Messenger and the Qur’an has been proven, every Muslim is obliged to believe in the Islamic Shari’ah as a whole. We cannot pick and choose as we like. As the Shariah was revealed in the glorious Qur'an, and the Messenger (saw) conveyed it. If someone disbelieves in this he would be a (disbeliever) Kafir. Therefore, it is disbelief (Kufr) to deny the shariah rules as a whole, or any definite detailed rule amongst them. This is the case whether these ahkam (rules) are connected with worships (ibadaat), transactions (mu'amalaat), punishments (uqoobat), food, etc. So the rejection of the verse:

وَأَقِيمُواْ الصَّلاَةَ

So establish regular prayer"

[Al-Baqarah: 43]

Is the same as rejecting the following verses:

وَأَحَلَّ اللَّهُ الْبَيْعَ وَحَرَّمَ الرِّبَا

But Allah has permitted trade and forbidden usury,"

[Al-Baqarah: 275]

وَالسَّارِقُ وَالسَّارِقَةُ فَاقْطَعُواْ أَيْدِيَهُمَا

As to the thief, male or female, cut off his or her hands,"

[Al-Ma’idah: 38]

حُرِّمَتْ عَلَيْكُمُ الْمَيْتَةُ وَالْدَّمُ وَلَحْمُ الْخِنْزِيرِ وَمَآ أُهِلَّ لِغَيْرِ اللَّهِ بِهِ

"Forbidden to you (for food) are dead meat, blood, the flesh of swine, and that on which has been invoked the name of any other than Allah."

[Al-Ma’idah: 3]

We must completely surrender to all the rules revealed by Allah (swt) whether we see rational reasons for them or not.

فَلاَ وَرَبِّكَ لاَ يُؤْمِنُونَ حَتَّى يُحَكِّمُوكَ فِيمَا شَجَرَ بَيْنَهُمْ ثُمَّ لاَ يَجِدُواْ فِي أَنْفُسِهِمْ حَرَجاً مِّمَّا قَضَيْتَ وَيُسَلِّمُواْ تَسْلِيماً

But no, by your Lord, they can have no (real) faith, until they make you judge in all the disputes between them, and find in their souls no resistance against your decisions, but accept them with the fullest submission."

[An-Nisa: 65]

Ramadhan And the Qur'an

Month of the Quran & its affect upon us

The graceful month of Ramadhan has set in; the month during which the gates of Mercy are wide open, the gates of Hell are shut and the Shayateen are chained up. It is a month chosen by Allah (swt) as a month of fasting; an act of Ibadat that Allah (swt) made special to Him. He (swt) favoured this month over all other months by making it the month of mercy and reverence for all the believers.

¨ Also, in this month were revealed the scriptures of Ibrahim (as) and Musa (as), as well as the Zabuur and the Injeel. Indeed, this month is the most superior of months in which Allah (swt) revealed His final revelation, the Quran.

¨ So in this month we recite the Quran everyday, we pray the Taraweeh salah in which the Quran is recited. But do we understand and practice this Quran? Aisha (ra) described the Prophet’s (saw) character as being the walking Quran, are we in our characters like the Quran. Do we implement in our lives? Do we feel the weight of the Quran on our shoulders? Do we feel the burden of the Quran? Have we realised the power and might of this Quran which revealed by the one almighty in power?

Allah (swt) says in the Quran in Surah al Hashr:

“Had We sent down this Qur’an on a mountain, you would surely have seen it humbling itself and split asunder (crumbling) by the fear of Allah. Such are the parables that We put forward to mankind that they may reflect.”

[TMQ - Al-Hashr: 21]

¨ Allah (swt) is saying that if He had sent the Quran upon a mountain, imagine the size and magnitude of a mountain. From humbling itself it would split asunder by the fear of Allah.

¨ Let us ask ourselves, the Quran has been revealed to us, not to the mountain! Do we feel humbled by it?

“Such are the parables that We put forward to mankind that they may reflect.”

¨ Is this the impact that the Quran has on our souls and on the lives of this Ummah. Let us look at the impact that this Quran had on the Sahabah and the Muslims in the past, it is known that some of the Sahabah when hearing a verse of the Quran would faint.

¨ So what made Abdullah ibn Masud go out and recite this Quran in front of the Quraysh and endured a beating, fearing none but Allah.

¨ So what made Abu Huraira (ra), one of the stars of the sky cry on his deathbed and he was asked: “What makes you cry?” He replied: “I do not cry for this world of yours, rather I cry over the long journey ahead of me and how few provisions I have with me. I am rising on a runaway to paradise and Hellfire and I do not know which of them it would lead to.”

¨ What made Tariq bin Ziyad, the conqueror of Spain in the month of Ramadhan burn his boats motivating the Muslims that Paradise lay ahead of them and defeat and the sea to the rear, leading to the conquest of Spain in this blessed month. Allah (swt) said:

“Verily Allah hath bought of the believers their lives and their riches for the price that theirs shall be the Garden”

[TMQ 9:111]

Mu’ad ibn Jabal (ra) once called the people of the town and said to them, “Today the reciters of Quran are few but the implementers are many, what of the time when the reciters will be many and the implementers will be few.”

¨ He was describing our time! Today the reciters may be many but the implementers are few.

¨ Why is it that many Muslims come to the mosque and pray taraweeh – so we see the mosques are full but as soon as Eid comes, many people stop coming to the mosque, stop reading the Quran and even stop praying regularly. Today we read the Quran but do we implement it?

Allah (swt) said:

“O mankind! We have created you male and female, and have made you nations and tribes that you may know one another. The noblest of you, in the sight of Allah, is the best in conduct. Allah is the Knower, Aware.”

[TMQ 49:13]

Ibn Abi Hatim al-Razi said that the circumstances in which this Ayah was revealed, the Asbab an Nuzul (circumstances of revelation) was when in the opening of Makkah which occurred in Ramadhan, the Prophet (saw) ordered Bilal (ra) to say the Adhan and Abu Sufyan said can’t you find someone better than this black man to say the Adhan then this verse was revealed. Explaining to us that in Islam no one better on the basis of colour or from what part of the world he has come – rather what distinguishes us in the sight of Allah (swt) is our actions. So the noblest of us is the best of us in our actions.

The Prophet (saw) said:

«إن الله يرفع بهذا الكتاب أقواماً ويضع به آخرين».

“Allah will elevate some nations through this book and degrade others with it”

[Muslim]¨

We know how the Islamic Ummah was elevated in the past through the implementation of the Quran, the Khulafaah in the past through implementing the Shari’ah of Allah (swt) made this Ummah elevate and progress and look how we are degraded today when the Quran is not implemented.

¨ Today the Quran is not implemented in our lands, if we look to the problems in Palestine, Iraq, Afghanistan or others how do our countries deal with them? What solution do these people bring, do they look to the Quran and the Sunnah which tells us to liberate Muslim land and not to take the colonialists as our Allies? No! rather they run to America and the United Nations for solutions.

Ziyad ibn Labid narrated that Allah's Messenger (saw) spoke of something and said:

It will happen when knowledge will be no more. I said: Allah's Messenger, how will knowledge vanish despite the fact that we will be reciting the Qur'an and teaching its recitation to our children and our children will teach its recitation to their children up to the Day of Resurrection? Thereupon he said: Ziyad, may your mother weep over you. I was of the opinion that you were one of those who have greatest understanding of religion in Medina. Do these Jews and Christians not recite the Torah and the Bible but not act according to what is contained in them?

[Transmitted by Ahmad, Ibn Majah, Tirmidhi.]

¨ Today the rulers have become like the aforementioned who may recite the Quran but not implement it, they even attack those who work for the re-establishment of the Khilafah. So we may hear of the beautiful recitation of the Quran in the Haram in Makkah, yet we see that the Quran is not implemented over this land in which the Ka’ba resides. Rather the Americans still have their troops stationed in this land.

¨ Some Muslims have become like those who were chastised by the Prophet (saw) because they recite the Quran but do not act according to it in their lives, so limit the Quran to Ramadhan and not in the rest of their lives.

¨ The leaders of the Muslim lands have made Bush their Mufassir, the Whitehouse their Qibla and hold fast to the rope of Kufr.¨ We need to take the Muhammad (saw) as our Mufassir, restore the Ka’ba as our Qibla and hold fast to the book of Allah. Allah (swt) says:

“And hold fast all together by the rope which Allah and be not divided among yourselves”

[TMQ 3:103]

Ibn Masud said that the rope of Allah in this ayah means the Quran.

¨ We are in the month of reward in which the Quran was revealed, we must hold fast to the rope of Allah, we must recite the Quran, increase our understanding of it and implement it in our lives.

Abdullah ibn Abbas narrated that the Prophet (saw) said:

“He in whose heart there is nothing of the Qur'an is like a house in ruin.”

[Transmitted by Tirmidhi.]

¨ The Quran should never be allowed to left on our shelves gathering dust, we must realise that it is the Guidance that Allah (swt) has sent for humanity.

The Messenger (saw) said

“Learn the Qur’an and recite it, because the example of one who learns the Qur’an, reads it and recites it in Tahajjud is like an open bag full of musk, the fragrance whereof spreads over the entire place, and a person who has learnt the Qur’an but sleeps while the Qur’an is in his heart, is like a bag of musk but with its mouth closed”

[Tirmidhi, Nisaa’i, Ibn Majah, Ibn Hibban]

¨ Let us not allow our hearts to become rusty devoid of the Quran!

The Prophet (saw) said,

"These hearts become rusty just as iron does when water affects it." On being asked what could clear them he replied, "A great amount of remembrance of death and recitation of the Qur'an."

[Bayhaqi transmitted it in Shu'ab al-Iman. Abdullah ibn Umar narrated]

¨ The implementation of the Quran is what the world is in need of today, look at the oppression in every place – In Palestine, Afghanistan, in Iraq as well as in the West.

Allah (swt) says:

" ALIF-LAAM-RAA'. This is a Book we have revealed unto you, O Muhammad, in order that you may lead mankind out of darkness into the light”.

[TMQ Ibrahim:1-2]

¨ So let us make this month of Ramadhan, the month of prayer, the month of worship, the month of recitation of Qur’an, the month of giving Zakah, the month of strengthening the relations between our relatives, the month of generosity and goodness to the needy, the month of being aware of our speech and actions, the month of re-invigorating our Iman and purifying our hearts and the month of engaging in the da’wa to re-establish the Khilafah, the implementation of the Quran on the earth.

¨ I want to end on a Hadith narrated in the Musnad of Imam Ahmad that should motivate us to work to revive this Deen by the Quran.

The Messenger Muhammad (saw) said:

"Some peoples will come on the Day of Judgement and their Iman will be outstanding, it's light will shine from their chests and from their right hands. So it will be said to them, 'glad tidings for you today, Assalaamu alaykum and goodness for you, enter into it (Jannah) forever!’ So the Angels and the Prophets will be jealous of the love of Allah for them". So the Sahabah asked, ' who are they O Messenger of Allah?' He (saw) replied, "They are not from us and they are not from you. You are my companions but they are my beloved. They will come after you and will find the book (the Qur'an) made redundant by the people, and a Sunnah which has been killed by them. So they will grab hold of the book and the Sunnah and revive them. So they will read them and teach them (the Qur'an and the Sunnah) to the people and they will experience in that path a punishment more severe and more ugly than what you (O Sahabah) have experienced. Indeed, the Iman of one of them is equivalent to the Iman of forty of you. The Shaheed of one of them is equivalent to forty of your Shuhadaa'. Because you found a helper towards the truth (the Prophet [saw]) and they will find no helper towards the truth. So they will be surrounded by tyrant rulers in every place, and they will be in the surroundings of Bayt ul-Maqdis (al-Quds). The Nussrah (victorious material support) of Allah will come to them, and they will have the honour of it on their hands". Then he (saw) said "O Allah give them the Nussrah and make them my close friends in Jannah".

[Musnad of Imaam Ahmad, chain no. 77, Hadeeth no. 17561]

¨ O Allah (swt) we ask you to make us of these people and grant us with the Victory.

Hadith

The Science of Hadith

Hadith literature presents the most accurate history of a person and an epoch. No other phase in human history has been as well, and as accurately recorded as the Prophetic: not even the modern. In our times historical accounts are so intricately spun together with fiction that it is impossible to distinguish one from the other. It is only someone armed with the facts who can successfully make the distinction, though he too cannot fully separate one from the other because of the complex expressions. The modern method helps present a picture which is entirely fanciful without earning the author any blame for falsification. He cannot be criticized for lack of facts, since they are there, or for the presence of fiction, the responsibility for which he shrugs off by saying that they are, after all, interpretations, and, therefore, open to dispute. But that is at the scholarly level. Common people have to go with the heavily laced false version, which, once made to rote in school, remain stuck in the mind as facts for the rest of the life. In comparison to Hadith studies, especially when authenticity is the criterion, history of the world, as compiled by the Western historians, is little more than folklore.

The interest in Hadith gave rise to the study of several related disciplines. The question of authenticity, already a point of concern in the earliest stages, assumed urgency two or three generations after the Prophet (saws). In consequence, it gave birth to the Science of Hadith, embodying, apart from other disciplines, the Principles of Hadith Criticism. That in turn gave rise to the study of the lives and times of hundreds of thousands of those who had played their part as narrators, critics, collectors, annotators, copyists or commentators. This new discipline came to be known as Asma’ wa al-Rijal in Arabic.Consequently, Hadith literature has always attracted to itself devotees of all sorts, Muslims and non-Muslims alike. It provides equally rich grounds for study of religion, language, history, culture, spiritualism, psychology, sociology, armed struggle, and several other disciplines. And, because of the authenticity, richness and variety of texts filled with related as well as unrelated details, covering several epochs, Hadith literature has become a text that can be read for pleasure, profit, or intellectual pursuit.

Islam
The Science of HadithHadith literature presents the most accurate history of a person and an epoch. No other phase in human history has been as well, and as accurately recorded as the Prophetic: not even the modern. In our times historical accounts are so intricately spun together with fiction that it is impossible to distinguish one from the other. It is only someone armed with the facts who can successfully make the distinction, though he too cannot fully separate one from the other because of the complex expressions. The modern method helps present a picture which is entirely fanciful without earning the author any blame for falsification. He cannot be criticized for lack of facts, since they are there, or for the presence of fiction, the responsibility for which he shrugs off by saying that they are, after all, interpretations, and, therefore, open to dispute. But that is at the scholarly level. Common people have to go with the heavily laced false version, which, once made to rote in school, remain stuck in the mind as facts for the rest of the life. In comparison to Hadith studies, especially when authenticity is the criterion, history of the world, as compiled by the Western historians, is little more than folklore.
The interest in Hadith gave rise to the study of several related disciplines. The question of authenticity, already a point of concern in the earliest stages, assumed urgency two or three generations after the Prophet (saws). In consequence, it gave birth to the Science of Hadith, embodying, apart from other disciplines, the Principles of Hadith Criticism. That in turn gave rise to the study of the lives and times of hundreds of thousands of those who had played their part as narrators, critics, collectors, annotators, copyists or commentators. This new discipline came to be known as Asma’ wa al-Rijal in Arabic.Consequently, Hadith literature has always attracted to itself devotees of all sorts, Muslims and non-Muslims alike. It provides equally rich grounds for study of religion, language, history, culture, spiritualism, psychology, sociology, armed struggle, and several other disciplines. And, because of the authenticity, richness and variety of texts filled with related as well as unrelated details, covering several epochs, Hadith literature has become a text that can be read for pleasure, profit, or intellectual pursuit.

Older Definition

Earlier we had defined Hadith as a discipline that has the Prophet as its subject. However, this is the definition of the moderns, perhaps in vogue since a few hundred years. In the earliest stages the term Hadith carried a different connotation. Utterances of the Companions were also termed as hadith. Sometimes even utterances of the next generation Followers (Tabe‘iyyun) were referred to as hadith. For example, Imam Malik’s Muwatta’ makes no distinction between the Prophetic word and those of his earliest followers. This explains why there were hundreds of thousands of ahadith in earlier times, but much less in our own. For instance, Bukhari is on record having said that he made his selection from 600,000 hadith (Sharh Qastalani). Imam Ahmed included in his collection around 40,000 ahadith out of a total of 750,000 that he had collected (Dr. Muhammad al-Sabbagh). But, if we put together all the reports found in every hadith collection, we will not arrive at these figures - even if we added the untrustworthy ones to our inventory. So where are the rest? Are they lost? One answer is, yes, some have been lost. Many reliable versions did not find their way into compilations because the collectors thought one or two would do, and the rest – with same text, but different chains of narration – could safely be ignored. But, significantly, the reduction in numbers has something to do with the definition of the term. What was hadith in earlier times is not so any more. Imam Malik, for example, might count a statement of Ibn Mas‘ud as a hadith, but in our times the parameters are different. Many people are given to doubts when they hear that at one time there used to be hundreds of thousands of ahadith in circulation, out of which Hadith collectors chose to record comparatively quite a few. The greater numbers that were dropped out, they erroneously conclude, must have been forged ones.

So far as the non-specialists are concerned, there is another factor that reduces the number of ahadith, although they are still available in books. If an utterance of the Prophet comes to a hadith scholar through say ten different sources, or chains of narration, he counts them as ten ahadith, although to the commoners, the text being one, it is only one. From the point of view of scholars, if a hadith came through several sources, all trustworthy, then, its acceptability for legal purposes were greater than another that had, perhaps, only one or two chain of narrators. Hadith scholars therefore traced various chains of narration to strengthen the reports they already had on their hand. Many collectors prided in tracing as many chains of narration as existed. There were times when going around towns over vast distances was a pastime, and in some cases, an obsession. Siba‘i has noted the words of Ibrahim b. Sa‘id (d. 253 A.H.) who said, “If we could not trace a hundred different chains of narration, we considered ourselves orphans.” The hadith for example, which threatens a fabricator of hadith with Hellfire, is, to the common people, just one report. But experts, who are aware that more than seventy Companions having narrated it, know that there must have been thousands of them (in circulation at one point in time) since thousands of people had taken the narrative from those seventy Companions. We shall discuss this issue a little more in detail later.

Multiple chains of narration not only gave the experts confidence in the hadith they recorded, they also increase the commoner’s faith in the bulk of Hadith. If it is assumed that reports were fabricated, then, how do we explain these scores of chains? Would it have been possible for tens of thousands of people spread across the Muslim world, to agree to the fabrication of so many reports, with so many chains, anyone of which could be checked for its authenticity? How did those who were living in as far wide a world as Tashkent, Khurasan, Persia, Iraq, Syria, Egypt, Hijaz and Yemen, ever meet to agree upon the text of a hadith, so that all of them quoted in the same words, but everyone with a different chain of narration, each of which was checkable? That of course was not possible then, as it is not possible now.

Orientalists (Western non-Muslim scholars of Islam) had to prevent the entry of Islam in Europe. One of the means they employed was to discredit hadith since hadith is a powerful means by which Islamic truths penetrate into human hearts. Until recent times, when it became impossible for them to get away with inaccurate statements, they maintained that the chains were fabricated by the collectors themselves: Imam Malik, Imam Ahmed ibn Hanbal, Bukhari, Muslim and others. But, if accepted as a theory, that would have been more daunting a task. Let us assume that Imam Ahmed ibn Hanbal fabricated the chains he used for his Musnad: a collection of some 40,000 hadith. What he would have had to do was to first list out the names he was going to use, roughly five narrators a hadith, i.e., around 200,000 of them. Removing repetition of the narrators, he would have still needed several thousands of them. While writing down the names, he would have had to be careful to use real names, that is, those who did really exist, either in his time or earlier. He could not err on nicknames either, since he was going to freely use their nicknames rather than real. He would have also to be sure that the Companion he chose to place at top of the chain under fabrication, was really present at the time of the event he was reporting. E.g., if he was reporting a battle, one of the eighty or so that took place during the Prophet’s lifetime, Imam Ahmed would have had to use only such a Companion’s name who had participated in that battle. For, both his contemporaries, as well as later scholars, were going to check on that. Thousands of families boasted of the fact that their father or grandfather had participated in a battle during the Prophet’s time.

Next, he would have had to work out the names of their fathers and grandfathers, in order not to mix up one with others of the same name. Thereafter, he would have had to jot down the dates of birth and death of each person he used to manufacture his chain. In another ledger he might have recorded such details as where each of his thousands of narrators took birth, to what towns they traveled and when and where they died. These exercises done, and a few more that will become obvious as we proceed with this subject, he was ready to sit down and begin to fabricate the chains.

Not yet though. While attempting the above he would have had to be careful to put the names in chronological order. To explain, he would have had to pick up the name of a Companion, then add up the name of the second generation narrator to the chain he was fabricating, and then, that of the third generation narrator, then fourth and fifth. While attempting it, he would have had to take care that he did not place a Companion’s name after a second generation narrator, or the name of a third-generation narrator before that of a second generation narrator, and so on, until the last man in a chain in which there were anywhere between 3-8 names.

There was another factor he would have had to take care of. As he placed names, he would have had to choose (out of the thousands on his list), such a one alone (as a second generation narrator) who had met with the one placed before him. If, for example, he chose a second in line narrator who was Khurasani, who never went to Kufah, where the Companion in the chain spent his life, then his fabrication would fail. He had also to check on the date of the Companions’ death, and the birth of the second generation narrators while linking them. If the second-generation narrator that he chose was born after the death of the Companion he had chosen as the first narrator, then his report was going to be rejected. Or if the Companion died while the second in line was still in his early teens, his fabrication would be discovered. Down the chain he would have had to repeat the exercise of chronology linking every narrator with the one above him and below him (or her) upto the last of the 3-8 men or women. Then there was another exercise he would have had to attempt: check on each of the thousands of names he had chosen to fabricate his chain, concerning the school of thought or sect he belonged to. If, for example, he placed anyone in a chain who was a Khariji, Shi’ee, Mu‘tazili, or anyone of the newly cropped sects, the hadith he was fabricating was going to be rejected.

It should be obvious that without good amount of reliable data, collected by hundreds of men sent across the wide Islamic world, fed into a computer, and, thereafter, without a fairly powerful computer program to sort, select, and fabricate chains that met with the criteria discussed above, (plus a few others that we shall discuss later in this work), it would not have been possible for Ibn Hanbal to “manufacture” chains of narration. Even today, provided the basic data, and a good computer program, fabrication of new chains to match up with the chains the Imam has mentioned, is not a daunting but an impossible task. It is not merely the numerousness of the parameters, but also the subtlety involved, when exactly and where they are applicable to specific cases, that will defy successful results. Computers alone will not be able to do it, without human aid, viz., manual entry of data at right spots. A close parallel is weather predictions, which fail beyond 2-3 days, because of the similar difficulties as we are discussing.

To offer a quick explanation: there being 40,000 ahadith in the Musnad of Imam Ahmed, each hadith with a chain of 3-8 narrators, data running into a million pages, to cover perhaps 250,000 different cases, will have to be entered by experts, for the computer to be able to successfully manufacture artificial chains to match exactly with the chains that, according to the Orientalists’ suggestion, Imam Ahmed forged. We realize that to some this may still be somewhat vague, but perhaps it will get clearer as we proceed with the explanations concerning the criteria that the Hadith Doctors set for themselves for acceptance or rejection of hadith.

To go back to the topic of numerousness of the hadith, what happened, apart from several narrators at the start, (to increase the number of hadith) was that, let us say, the narrator at the top, (usually a Companion), narrated a hadith before some twenty students. His students spread to different parts of the Islamic world. Now, when someone of, let us say, the third generation narrators, who had heard the hadith from his master in the town, learnt that there were others in other towns who narrated the same hadith, he made it a point to travel to those other towns and hear them narrated in person. The consequence was that when he had met the person and had personally heard – say, from three narrators in the town - their versions, he came to possess three more ahadith apart from his own. Then he moved on to another town where he heard, let us say five more. Now he had - one plus three plus five - altogether nine ahadith in his collection. He increased the numbers by traveling to other towns, until he had met all the twenty, to finally posses 20 ahadith. But, to the commoner, and perhaps in truth also, he had only one, since the text was one.

Here is an example from the commentary work of Ibn Jarir. Commenting on verse 121 of Surah Al-Baqara, [“Those whom We gave the Book, recite it in the true manner of its recitation”], he narrates the following reports:

1. Ibn Humayd told us, Jarir reported through Mughira that Mujahid said (with reference to the words), ‘true manner of its recitation’ (that they mean), “they practice it.”

2. Muthanna told me, Suwayd b. Nasr said that Ibn Mubarak reported through ‘Abd Malik b. Abu Sulayman, through ‘Ataa and Qays b. Sa‘d that Mujahid said (with reference to the words), ‘true manner of its recitation’ (that they mean), “they practice it in true manner.”

3. Muthanna told me that ‘Amr b. ‘Awn reported through Hushaym, he through ‘Abd al-Malik, he through Qays b. Sa‘d that Mujahid said, “they follow it in true manner of following.”

4. Muhammad b. ‘Amr narrated to me that Abu ‘Aasim said, ‘Isa narrated through Ibn Abi Nujayh that Mujahid said the same thing.

5. Muthanna told me, he said that Abu Hudhayfa said, Shibl reported, through Ibn Abi Nujayh that Mujahid said (with reference to the words), ‘they recite it in the true manner of recitation,’ (that they mean) “they practice it in the true manner of practice.”

6. ‘Amr b. ‘Ali said that Mu‘ammal b. Isma‘il said, Hammad told us that Ayyub reported Mujahid as saying (with reference to the words), ‘they recite it in the true manner of its recitation,’ that (it means), “they follow it in the true manner of following.”

7. ‘Amr told me, Abu Qutayabah narrated to us, Hasan b. Abi Ja‘far said, Abu Ayyub said, Abu al-Khalil reported Mujahid as saying (with reference to the words), ‘they recite it in the true manner of recitation,’ that (the meaning is), “they follow it in the true manner of following.”

It can be seen in the above that all the narratives report the same opinion voiced by the same authority: Mujahid. These seven narratives, though reporting the same text, but because they had different chains of narration, were counted as so many reports, and not as one.

Another point may be noted here. To a Hadith doctor, one or more of several reports would be trustworthy, while the rest weak, or fabricated. . Further, one know that a hadith termed as weak or forged, may not be weak or forged. These are technical terms coined by the Hadith doctors for classification purposes. A literal meaning has not been intended. A Hadith maybe termed forged. But it might not be forged at all. All that the term is saying is that the report has such defects as deserving of the nomenclature reserved for it in the classification. We shall have more to say on this issue also later in this work.

The above in any case should put us in a better position to appreciate the statements of the sort Bukhari and other collectors made. Bukhari said that he had memorized 100,000 trustworthy hadith and 200,000 untrustworthy ones. Today’s reader does not know that tens of thousands of the hadith that were untrustworthy to Bukhari, would have had the same text as what he considered trustworthy, but their chains of narration were not as trustworthy. The above should also dispel the doubt planted by the Orientalists into the minds of the ignorant Muslims (be they holders of doctorate degrees in profane subjects), that the chains of transmission were manufactured. Fabrication and manufacture are in fact arts in which the Orientalists have excelled. Hadith scholars are high above what the fraudulent suggest.

Ramadhan Mubarak

As-Salam to all my fellow Muslims and Muslimas

Ramadan is the month of Mercy,Patience,Reward,Victory,It is allso the month when the Quran was reveal to all of Mankind.

May Allah(swt) forgive us for our mistakes and guide the Muslims to the right path.

To you Allah(swt) we ask for guidance from Fitna and to you we ask for Victory over oppression that is happening in the Muslims lands, with the re-establishment of the Khalifah.Insha-Allah

May Allah swt shower you all with the good things in this world and in the hereafter(Jannah ul Ferdous).

Ramadhan mubarak to you all and the Muslim Ummah!!!!!

Orientalists (part 1)

Orientalists and Hadiths

The works on Islam and related topics, as produced by Western scholars, over past few centuries, is a dark patch on the face of scholarship. These scholars (who later came to be designated as Orientalists) were always at loggerheads with the Prophet and ill at ease with facts surrounding him. Their efforts, on the one hand, to produce anthropological data on Muslims for the benefit of their colonial governments, and, on the other, a distorted account of Islam and its Prophet for the consumption of their peoples, especially the intellectual class, produced a mass of material that can be safely consigned to the waste box without any significant loss to humanity, but with some possible benefits. To quote Rene Guenon (from his “East and West”), not for any specific reason but to impress upon our readers that we do not stand alone in holding an opinion that we had formed long before we knew who Guenon was: “.. as for the works that have been produced about the East and its doctrines, it would in most cases be better not to know of their existence, for ignorance pure and simple is far preferable to false ideas.” The modification we offer is, “.. ignorance pure and simple is far preferable to prejudice.” And prejudice it was that the Western writers aimed to create.

While it is true that its several internal forces take the major responsibility for ushering the modern West into what Rene Guenon termed elsewhere as its reversion to a new phase of “dark age,” the credit for keeping firmly shut access to the alternative system that could have prevented it from this end – Islam – goes to the Orientalists. It is only since quite recently that their grip has loosened, but not before the reins were handed over to the media, which exceeds them both in vigor as well as in prevarication and disfigurement. Reduction of human existence to the level of insects engaged in material production and consumption with frenzied devotion, resulting in destruction of homes, break-up of families, proliferation of crime, pornography, sexual perversion and drug use, with no relief in the remotest regions of the horizon, is a state for which Orientalists must accept their share in the making.

Creationists

If the Orientalists did not commit errors of judgment in portraying the Messenger and his Message; they were neither short of source material at any time. Many of them knew Arabic better than many Arabs contemporary to them, and had in their possession the necessary Islamic source works. In fact, their libraries boasted of better collection of rare manuscripts, than the libraries of the regions of origin. But, right at the start they had decided on an image that they would create, and therefore applied themselves with full rigor and complete sobriety, modifying their methods in keeping with the changing times and informational possibilities, but not the ultimate ends and objectives. In the words of Rodinson, “Authors bent on systematically running down the Arabs (paradoxically enough, a fairly popular sport with arabists) have described this society (Arab) as barbaric.” (Maxime Rodinson, “Mohammed”, p. 18, Pantheon Books, 1971).

In view of the goals firmly set before the eyes, and although quite a few of the Orientalists translated the Qur’an, as well as brought out hundreds of volumes on what was more difficult and inscrutable, viz., Sufi literature, while some others worked on analyzing and criticizing Fiqh, not many attempted translation of the Hadith, or Qur’anic commentaries that contained – as true sources - authentic Islamic information. Hadith was almost entirely ignored. Obviously, those who were at loggerheads with the Prophet could not be expected to work on his speech. It was also because, while for the layman understanding the Qur’an can be a laborious task, Hadith literature is much easier to comprehend. The Prophet has said thousands of beautiful things that serve the double purposes of softening the heart as well as expounding the message of the Qur’an. This was perhaps considered dangerous for their masses. This writer can recall an Australian buying a collection containing two hundred ahadith. Next day he appeared excited. “Do you know something?” he said, “The book I bought yesterday? Well, it is fantastic.” If the translation of Mishkaat al-Masaabih is an exception, it is perhaps because it is more or less a book on Law.

Instead of translating the Hadith, the Orientalists chose to produce an Index of the Hadith: surely a daunting task. The six canonical works plus Daaraami, Imam Malik’s Muwatta and the voluminous Musnad of Ahmed (a collection of 40,000 hadith) were chosen for indexation! But none of the nine works were translated. Why? It is because they wished to help the scholarly class in research, but would not allow their masses to get a whiff of the message contained in these works.

They were also careful about biographies of the Prophet. Most of them preferred to write their own versions. That allowed them to paint the picture of their desire. Translation of original Arabic works on the Prophet’s life, even the earliest ones, which they carefully preserved in their libraries, was out of scope. Out of hundreds, the one they chose – late in their history - was Ibn Ishaq’s “Life of the Prophet.” Why this particular one? It is because the work speaks less about the Prophet, or his message, than how he overcame resistance – through battle after battle, 39 in all. It is more or less a chronicle of battles. This seems to have influenced the choice. The translation was a successful way to demonstrate that Muhammad (saws) was a warrior Prophet: a theme of relentless harping, once it became clear that neither the physical force of Islam, nor its intellectual integrity could be combated.

The Trend-setters

The trend was set and themes were identified by the earliest Churchmen who labored on generating a gulf between Islam and the flocks in their care. The advantage this class enjoyed was that as godly men, who were supercilious about truth and considered beyond suspicion regarding their motives, they were not required to explain, either to other churchmen or to their parish, the sources of the material they produced. They enjoyed greater freedom at misrepresenting than the modern day Orientalists, the inheritors of their concerns and objectives. (It is a strange phenomenon that to this day what the Church says about other faiths is treated as credible by the Christians, while what it claims for itself is to be treated with skepticism, if not incredulity).

The Making of an ImageGuibet,

Abbot of Nugent of the 11th-12th centuries, admitted to having no written source for his tales, suffered no qualms while claiming that the Prophet of Islam had met with an ignominious death, and that pigs had torn his body after death. He justified his disgusting tale by saying, “it is safe to speak evil of one whose malignity exceeds whatever ill can be spoken.’ (Clinton Bennet, “In Search of Muhammad”, p. 84). He was stating a Church policy. His flock followed his example. The Crusaders of the middle ages reported back to their countrymen after the failed battles in the Middle-east that they had seen a forty foot statue of the Prophet in Damascus to whom the Muslims offered their homage. There was a Bishop who had actually broken an idol that – so the story circulated in Christian Europe - Muslims worshipped. Even as late a visitor as Edward William Lane (d. 1876), had quite a few fascinating but fictitious stories to narrate in his account of the Egyptians. And Flaubert concocted disgusting sexual episodes that he claimed – but too profane for us to reproduce - were performed in the streets of the Muslim world. (Edward W. Said, “Orientalism”, Penguin 1995).

Capitalizing on the lack of access to knowledge on the part of the common people – if access was ever desired - the medieval Christian scholars arrogated freedom to use such superlatives for the Prophet as: “an imposter, robber, murderer, traitor, dupe, deceiver, adulterer, epileptic, possessed by a demon, unclean, bovine, swinish, illiterate, rough and stupid, magician, skilled in letters and mathematics, instructed in the general science, astrologer, whose revelations were said by conjuration of demons, speaking out few truth but many lies, who could not produce miracles to prove his prophethood, base by birth and repute, sick, poor, low class, and a camel-herd.” (Norman Daniel, “Islam and the West”, Oneworld and Oxford publications, 1993). There seem to hardly exist the voice of a sane man to say, “A genuine Muhammad is much less difficult to explain than a fraudulent one.” (Maxime Rodinson, “Mohammad”, p. 77-78).

Not that these sentiments do not echo one way or other in TV and radio sermons of modern-day Christian world, but at least their audience can check the authenticity, if they so wish. Occasionally, one of them does it, reducing, although marginally, the prejudice. But in medieval times, the masses had no access to facts – most were illiterate anyway, as compared to highly literate Muslims of the time – and, consequently, the superlatives had their desired effects.

The prudent among them acted with some caution in choice of adjectives but the purposes were shared. For example, it was thought that a condemned Christian heretic called Sergius had crossed into Arabia “and made such a good impression on the Prophet that he took him as a teacher, sometimes calling him Gabriel the Archangel, hiding what he dare not reveal, that the lunacies which he delivered to those whom he deceived, he had learned from a man.” (Ref. as above).

Another report had it that in the fifteenth year after his death, the Prophet’s Companions met to discuss compilation of a book, to which they found they were not equal to the task, and therefore, took the assistance of Christians and Jews, who found no material of any worth in the life of the Prophet, and hence invented their own stories to be included in the Qur’an.

Audacity

One of the scholars commented on Qur’anic Tawhid in words: “.. Muhammad puts in the Qur’an more than a hundred times, I believe: There is no God except God. For this proposition is true simply of everything: there is no dog except a dog; there is no horse except a horse.” (Daniel, p.65). A few others had other grievances against the Qur’an. In reference to the Qur’anic statement, “Allah knows all,” one of them remarked, “But who is so silly as to doubt that God knows all things.” Yet others were unhappy with the Qur’anic statement that the birds flying in the air are upheld by the power of God: “Really, air supports them just as water does the fish that swim in it.” (Ibid, p.84). These audacious remarks tell us how much ecclesiastic authorities believed in the power of the God in whose defense they articulated such howlers.

Absurdities

The earliest days of the Prophet’s life were accounted in the following manner: “.. as now he could earn his living for himself laboriously by the exercise of his own body, after the manner of poor people, he became the employee of a certain widow woman. He looked after her ass, and he was paid, for her account, by certain travelers whom he guided on the ass to parts of Asia. Soon she committed her camels also to his care, and he was made her agent in neighbouring cities and in towns roundabout, and made a profit. He was admitted to the grace and familiarity of the widow through his service, and all his commerce; and, desiring each other libidinously, they lay together, at first in secret and fornication union; but afterwards the woman contracted matrimony with him publicly, and handed an abundance of money over to him.” (Ibid, p.111)

“Energetic in individual matters and greatly cunning, he was advanced from lowliness and destitution to riches and fame. As, bit by bit, this grew, he spread terror of himself, often pursuing his neighbors, and especially his blood relations, in ambushes, robberies, and forays, and killing as many as he could, either secretly or publicly.” (Ibid, p.113)

“.. he gathered to himself men who were fugitives, pernicious men, corruptors of manners and oppressors of others, and also as many murderers as he could; and he became their prince. He sent them to woodland, by-ways, to hill-tops, to roads frequented by travelers and to every other place, to rob men, both to plunder their goods and kill those who put up opposition; and the fear of Muhammad fell upon all the men of those parts.” (Ibid, p.114,)

If such was his life, what was the kind of death Muhammad deserved? The religious scholars supplied the details: he suffered a shameful death, was eaten by dogs, or suffocated by pigs. This happened when he was in a drunken stupor. He suffered that kind of death, “since he taught uncleanness and shame, it was by pigs which are considered unclean animals, that he was devoured.” Another scholar thought that he was seized by an epileptic fit in the desert, and so was devoured by wild beasts.” According to another pious man, since the Prophet rejected Trinity, “he suffered three ignominies in death: he was handed over to be torn to pieces by the pigs because of threefold agency: drunkenness, poison and epilepsy.” (Ibid, p.127)

Another learned man reconciled several stories: “A cunning Jewess, whom Muhammad desired, insisted that he should come to her alone, by night. When he did so her relatives killed him, cut off his left foot, threw the rest of the body to the pigs, who quickly devoured it. The woman anointed and scented the foot, explaining to people who came to fetch Muhammad that angels had come to carry him off to Heaven. She had pulled him back by the foot, which, after a tug-of-war with the celestial powers, was all of the Prophet that remained.” (Ibid, p.127). One may ask, how could any people cultivate such absurdities? The answer is, prejudice merely blinds the eye; but premeditated dishonesty darkens the soul.

The Perennial

ProblemEvidently, if such were the facts, and principles that the latter day Orientalists inherited from their mentors, how could one expect them to treat the Prophet and His message with any objectivity? What chance was there that they would treat a mass of literature – the Hadith, any small selection of which at once removed misunderstandings and prejudices of decades - with fairness? The opposition of the Orientalists to Hadith was an expected event.

The problem in the West has been of perennial nature. Whether it is the trail-blazers of the yesteryears, or the thorough-bred pundits of the modern era, when it comes to Islam and Muslims, truths and facts are not the primary concern. The nation, race, religion, culture, civilization, and the way of life come first. They constitute the highest possible values at the alters of which moral and intellectual integrity rightly deserve to be sacrificed. The difference between the trail-blazers and their dutiful followers (with the exception of a few, but far in between) is that the former were blunt, while the latter inter-lace their words with skill to yield suggestions and nuances that their predecessors suffered neither qualms nor fear to express. In both cases however, the arrow hit the mark. We will have a few more lines to state on the character of the Orientalists, Allah willing, in the next two articles.

Orientalists (Part 2)

Medieval Legacy and Hadith

Such were the trend-setters for many of the Orientalists who took over from the priestly class after the burst of Renaissance. A great majority of them, right up to our times, wrote – particularly, but not exclusively, if principles and morals happened to be the topic - just as much untruth as was not likely to be discovered. They are, otherwise, excellent workers at the books, manuscripts, and inscriptions, but, sadly, have a penchant eye for the odd word or occurrence, that the lack of their intellectual integrity converts into the conventional.

(Any anthology of Arabic writings prepared by one of them will provide instances – of the freakish portrayed as the norm - on every second page).

In their accounts therefore, facts were marginalized, twisted, and their value reduced with the help of inauthentic insertions at points where good effects were feared – even if legendary material had to be relied upon. Conjectural ideas were freely aired. For example, if ‘Abdullah ibn Ubayy, the arch-hypocrite, (a natural focal point of Orientalists’ sympathies), did not participate in the campaign to Tabuk, he must have had good reasons. Writes the Encyclopedia of Islam, “He took part in the expedition of Hudaybiya, but stayed away from that of Tabuk, doubtless because of ill health, since he died shortly afterwards.” A guess becomes “doubtless” needing no citation of an evidential report, which anyway does not exist.

One of the unresolved problems that the Orientalists have had on their hands for a long time is, how was a false Prophet able to win such absolute following? So, here is an explanation: facts are not what history tells us, but rather, “There were occasional disagreements with Muhammad’s policy even among those Muslims loyal to him, but the sources tend to minimize the disagreement within the community and to suggest that it was more united than in fact it was.” (Montgomery Watt, Muhammad at Medina, Oxford, 1988, p.180). However, since the writer knows that historical records refuse to yield instances of opposition to the Prophet by any section of his followers, he has to create one, if not real then at least verbal. Therefore, “The opponents of Muhammad among those who had formally professed Islam are commonly spoken of as the munafiqun or Hypocrites, and the usage has Qur’anic sanction. A more useful term in the present subject, however, is the ‘Muslim opposition’ since this name distinguishes the object of study from the pagan opposition (just mentioned) and the Jewish opposition (to be dealt with later), and does not restrict the historian to those persons branded as Hypocrites” (Ibid, p. 180). In fact, the portion of this book is crowned with the chapter heading “Muslim Opposition” containing long conjectural passages without the citation from the sources of a single example of Muslim Opposition. But, in the least, the air was created, and a lead given for someone in a Western University to take it up as a PhD Thesis.

To be sure, even thinkers and philosophers, those supposed to be the most rationalists and objective users of datum could not escape the inheritance of methods and purposes. In the words of Norman Daniel,

“The framework of what Voltaire writes is the classic one of the Enlightenment; but his assessment of Islam as a religion is, in its outline, nearly identical with the mediaeval one.”

(Ref. cit. p. 312)

The difference between one Orientalist and another (barring a few) has been in the order of how prejudices and intentional inaccuracies are to be couched and concealed. Modern writers carefully hide facts in complicated sentences that skillfully combine truth with falsehood. A vigilant reader will have to exercise good amount of skill and spend quite some efforts to separate facts from fiction, to discover where, what exactly is the misrepresentation or implication. He will need considerable determination to discover what the author could be relying on to make the statements he does. The works produced by them are well-hemmed, well protected against falsification efforts. The extremely complicated style of presentation is a major barrier to the commission of a fact-finding mission. It is an art of writing, and a specialty of the Western Islamic writers, that has been gradually developed over a length of time, to combat the spread of Islamic knowledge and prepare the defense wall against the likelihood of uncorrupted message being available to the masses.

The Poisoned Cake

Consider the following: In the work already referred to above, Montgomery Watt defends – for all appearances - the Prophet’s character under a chapter entitled, “The Man and His Greatness.” He writes under a sub-heading “The Alleged Moral Failure”:

“Of all the world’s great men none has been so much maligned as Muhammad. It is easy to see how this has come about.” (Montgomery devotes a paragraph to explaining how this came about and then continues): “The aim of the present discussion is to work towards a more objective attitude with regard to the moral criticism inherited from medieval times. The main points are three, Muhammad has been alleged to be insincere, to be sensual, and to be treacherous

“The allegation of insincerity or imposture was vigorously attacked by Thomas Carlyle over a hundred years ago, has been increasingly opposed by scholarly opinion since then, and yet is still sometimes made. The extreme form of the view was that Muhammad did not believe in his revelations and did not in any sense receive them from ‘outside himself’, but deliberately composed them, and then published them in such a way as to deceive people following him, so gaining power to satisfy his ambition and his lust. Such a view is incredible. Above all it gives no satisfying explanation of Muhammad’s readiness to endure hardship in his Meccan days, of the respect in which he was held to by men of high intelligence and upright character, and of his success in founding a world religion which has produced men of undoubted saintliness. These matters can be satisfactorily explained and understood on the assumption that Muhammad was sincere, that is, that he genuinely believed that what we now know as the Qur’an was not the product of his own mind, but came to him from God and was true.

“The conception of Muhammad’s sincerity, however, is open to possible misunderstandings and requires to be made more precise. Thus, to say that Muhammad was sincere does not imply acceptance of the Qur’an as a genuine revelation from God; a man may without contradiction hold that Muhammad truly believed that he was receiving revelations from God but that he was mistaken in this belief. Further, once this point is grasped, it should be clear that, even if true, the alleged fact that the revelation fitted in with Muhammad’s desires and pandered to his selfish pleasure would not prove him insincere; it would merely show him to be capable of self-deception..”

“When we come to the other two allegations, however, namely, that Muhammad was morally defective in that he was treacherous and sensual, the discussion has to embrace not merely factual points, but also the question of the standard by which the acts are to be judged. On the factual side, there is agreement on such acts as his breaking of the treaty of al-Hudaybiyah and his marriage to Zaynab, the divorced wife of his adopted son, but there is ample room for dispute about circumstances and motives. With regard to standards there are two main possibilities: we may ask, ‘Was Muhammad a good man according to the standards of the Arabia of his days?’, or we may ask, ‘Was he a good man according to the standards of, say, the people in Europe about the year 1950?’ Let us begin, then, by trying to answer the first of these questions with special reference to the points of criticism.

“The allegation of treachery may be taken to cover a number of criticisms made by European writers. It applies most clearly to such acts as the breaking of his agreements with the Jews and his one-sided denunciation of the treaty of al-Hudaybiyah with the Meccans. It may also, however, be taken to include infringement either of the sacred month or of the sacred territory on the expedition to Nakhlah when the first Meccan blood was shed, the mass execution of the Jewish clan of Qurayzah, and the orders or encouragement given to his followers to remove dangerous opponents by assassination.

“In all these actions there was nothing which disturbed the conscience of Muhammad’s followers apart from the events of Nakhlah. This may seem incredible to the Europeans, but that is in itself a measure of the remoteness of the moral ideals of ancient Arabia from our own. In some respects the nomadic Arabs had a high ideal of conduct, but they had no idea whatsoever of a minimum standards of decent behavior towards all men, simply because they were men. They had no idea of a universal moral law of the Kantian type...”

(Muhammad at Medina, p.324-327)

Montgomery’s discourse goes on to cover a whole chapter. We can note a few points:

* Watt is defending the Prophet’s character. He is describing the man and his greatness.

* Muhammad has been maligned. He was alleged to be insincere, sensual and treacherous.

* However, insincerity theory does not explain Muhammad’s success. Therefore, the concept needs to be understood more precisely.

* Muhammad was indeed sincere, but mistaken in his belief that he was sincere.

* As for the allegations of the revelations fitting in with Muhammad’s desires, and pandering to his selfish pleasure, well, this can be explained: he was capable of self-deception. That is, the allegation is true, but Muhammad cannot be blamed because he deceived himself without realizing that he was deceiving himself.

* As regards Muhammad’s treachery and sensuality, firstly, treacherous of course he was, but sensual? Well, this needs study of his motives.

* In any case there is another problem. Muhammad must be judged by ancient Bedouin standards. He passes the test. But if judged by the standards of the Europeans of 1950s, he fails the test. A modern critic must know what standards to apply.

* The nomadic Arabs had no idea of the universal morals presented by Kant.

What’s the conclusion then? All allegations are true. And Europeans come on top. They have produced men like Kant, who offered a far superior philosophy than that of Muhammad.

And this is from someone defending the Prophet, under a chapter entitled, “The Man and His Greatness!”

It is ironic to note that Montgomery Watt speaks of men about the year 1950. Incidentally, 1950s happened to be the time when the great men of Europe were wiping their blood-drenched hands on their napkins after a ten year mayhem and beastly murder resulting in the loss of a mere 55 million (55,000,000) souls.

We may also remind ourselves that Kant, the most influential thinker of modern times, was a German, not a nomadic Bedouin and that, far from unanimous following that Muhammad gained lasting to this day, Kant’s own pupil, Johann Fichte, a philosopher in his own right, threw his teacher’s idea of ‘division of the world into objective and subjective parts’ out of the window, and developed an idealistic philosophy of his own.

And, lest Kant is brushed off lightly, the following may evoke interest in a man who - as prototype of the great men of the 1950s – constitutes, according to Watt’s implication, an alternative to Muhammad. It is generally known that Kantian philosophy, particularly as developed by the German philosopher Hegel, was the basis on which the structure of Marxism was built, resulting in a revolution in Europe that wiped out ten million souls and imprisoned for life several millions in concentration camps!

Through Implications and Nuances

At all events, the above was an example of how facts were concealed and twisted, and how cleverly the Prophet’s feared and on-coming influence was worked against. The amount of concealment depended on the chances of exposure of truth. It also depended on how the reader could be tricked through subtleties. To give an example of this the following may be cited. (Although, the Orientalists cannot be implicated, but for our purposes the example will do, and helps us to show how deeply honest methods run in the West). With the surge in interest in religion, publishers of National Geographic magazine brought out a well illustrated 400-page book dealing with world religions entitled “Great Religions of the World” (first published, 1971). The first religion to be taken up is, quite naturally, the oldest: Hinduism. One expects Islam to come last. But it is placed after Judaism and before Christianity. Did Islam appear before Christianity or after? The subtle message is unmistakable: Christianity has the last word.

To cite the example of a one-word misleader, the title of the famous book by Ibn al-‘Arabiyy (the self-proclaimed Seal of Muhammadan Sainthood), entitled “Al-Futuhaat Al-Makkiyyah” (which has been rejected by majority of Muslims as a blasphemous work), is translated as “Meccan Revelations;” while Fat-h in Arabic signifies “opening.” In this particular case the allusion is to “fat-h al-ma‘ani” that is, “opening up of the meanings” (at Makkah); or, perhaps, “illuminations,” referring to the meanings or realities that opened up at Makkah. But, the preferred rendition, and blind following by Western educated Muslim scholars has been, “Revelations.” Is there an insinuation hidden in it?

Although major universities in Europe offered Islamic studies, the spirit of free inquiry was frowned upon. Professors who sat in large chairs, saw to it that any inquirer should be deflected away from true Islam. For example, if a student took a course on Islam in an American University, he was assigned two translations of the Qur’an, both of the seventeenth century, for chosen parts to be compared and analyzed. Both the translations could have been done by obscure half-cooked Western scholars, and both full of errors. The student’s energies thus expended, he was left with no desire to read any further about Islam. He never got a whiff of the true message. Such have been, and are, the clever ways by which the Orientalists deflect a person seriously in search of authentic information.

“You will never cease to discover one treachery (or another) on their part.”

We may ask, once again, could Muslims ever expect the Western scholars to be fair and honest when judging the Prophet’s Traditions?As an aside we may remark that perhaps for many of the Western educated Muslims of the last century, the question of fair or unfair was irrelevant. They were in search of reasons to remove the burden of Islam off their shoulders, and in the rejection of Hadith (on the basis of doubtful authenticity, even on lean grounds), they saw a successful first step towards the ultimate goal: set for them by the masters of their minds and souls.