Addendum to the Thoughts Around the LGBT Issue

This addendum to the LGBT discussion became a separate blog, because its topic also relates to the family life of the straight people.

An indispensable component of family life is sex. In my discussion so far, based on a holistic view of the Quran (part 3 of this series) and hadith (part 4 of this series), I expressed that Islam is not essentially against LGBT people, as long as they are living within the same ethical rules binding the straight people and the society in general. Then, a question arises as a natural consequence of this result: How about the requirements of their sex life?

This question is broadly answered through the previous two episodes, but still, there is one detail that needs clarification. Let's put it more explicitly and straight forward. Is anal sex, be it in the families of straight people or LGBT people, allowed in Islam or not?

Below, I am going to give you different sides of the answer, and express my personal conclusion. But in the end, it is your call to make your own judgment. God knows best.

The widely accepted answer to this question about anal sex is NO. That is, widely accepted view about anal sex is that it is NOT allowed in Islam. And this view almost entirely depends on the hadiths on the issue:

"Whoever has intercourse with a menstruating woman, or with a woman in her rear, or who goes to a fortuneteller and believes what he says, he has disbelieved in that which was revealed to Muhammad." (Grade: good, Ibn Majah, Purification and its Sunnah, 639)

"Allah will not look at a man who has intercourse with his wife in her buttocks." (Grade: sahih, Ibn Majah, Marriage, 1998) 

"The Messenger of Allah (pbuh) said: “Allah is not too shy to tell the truth,” three times. “Do not have intercourse with women in their buttocks.”" (Grade: sahih, Ibn Majah, Marriage, 1999) 

"The Prophet pbuh said: He who has intercourse with his wife through her anus is accursed." (Grade: Good, Abu Davud, Marriage, 2162)

Ibn Abbas narrated that The Messenger of Allah said:“Allah will not look at a man who enters a man or a woman in the behind.” (Grade: good, Tirmidhi, Suckling, 1165)

These narrations are also presented along with a Quranic verse to reach a decision against anal sex. This verse is from chapter Al-Baqara, and is given below. Note that the phrases italicized and underlined are done so to be analyzed further later.

Say "... And when they have purified themselves, then come to them from where Allah has ordained for you. Indeed, Allah loves those who are constantly repentant and loves those who purify themselves." Your wives are a place of sowing of seed for you, so come to your place of cultivation however you wish and put forth [righteousness] for yourselves. And fear Allah and know that you will meet Him. And give good tidings to the believers. (2/222-223)

These hadiths and the verses form the backbone of the position against anal sex. Such opposition resounds with the traditional antagonism against the LGBT people. However, as I presented in the previous episodes of this series, this antagonism is not founded in the core Islamic teachings, if you look critically and holistically. So, there must be another way to see things about anal sex, too. Therefore, from this point on, I would like to give an alternative look at the issue.

First, let's remember from the part 3 of this series that the Quran does not stand against the LGBT people rigidly and unconditionally. So, those who want to live a life of faith and establish a family in chastity are not outcast by the Quran.

Second, from our study of the hadiths relevant to the LGBT issue, it was seen that the prophet did not display animosity to a person only because they have non-traditional gender traits.

From these two conclusions, we can naturally and rationally expect that anal sex must have a position of its own within the realm of the licit. The same must be true among straight couples, too. But when we look at the above hadiths and the verse, it seems that anal sex is unconditionally banned. Or is it?

In order for something to be banned, or to become haraam, it must be clearly forbidden in the Quran. You can verify this information by looking at the Quranic references of all major sins in Islam. If something is not explicitly mentioned in the Quran but is banned or suppressed by the prophet, it acquires a conditional status, such as the situation of music and arts. So, let's see if the above mentioned verse is against anal sex explicitly.

To start with, the above translation by Sahih International actually contains a few interpretations. If you were to minimize those, you would get the following:

Say "...Once they have become pure, approach them in a way God has directed you.” God loves the repentant, and He loves those who keep clean.” Your women are tilth for you; so approach your tilth however you like, and send ahead for yourselves. And fear God, and know that you will meet Him. And give good news to the believers. (2/222-223)

The underlined verb in the first translation, ordained, is a very strong verb that gives the image that "God is ordering men to do exclusively vaginal sex." However, when you look at throughout the Quran, God's orders or His borders are expressed as "uhillalakum = made lawful for you", "hurrima = made unlawful for you", or "kutibe alaykum = written for you". The original verb in 2/222, "amara" is used in the Quran in a few different meanings, (except one) non of which contains a certain or explicit order or ban. Let's see these meanings.

One meaning is seen when God highlights or disapproves certain qualities, hence a general notion, not a certain act. This meaning, although translated as "to order or to ordain", is more like "to direct, to orient". If you ask how I am coming to this conclusion, the answer is that otherwise, the obligations in Islam would be much more and detailed than it is now. So, even the scholars are applying these verses through the meaning I gave, although they are translating it as if a certain command. For example, see 20/132, 16/90, 3/104, 7/28, 44/5, 31/17, 6/163, 27/91-92, 40/66, 11/112. Another meaning is "affair/state/work", and again is never linked to a clear, well-defined act for humans. For example, see 17/85, 18/10, 3/109, 2/210, 8/44, 22/76, 57/5, 35/4, 31/22, 3/47, 43/79, 33/38, 16/77, 11/40, 23/27, 82/19, 44/4, 3/128, 3/154, 36/82.

Let's see the single case in the Quran when the verb amara is used in context of a clear act for a human. The verb is used in the noun form at the end of the verse, and is italicized below:

"... So when Zayd had no longer any need for her, We married her to you in order that there not be upon the believers any discomfort concerning the wives of their adopted sons when they no longer have need of them. And ever is the command of Allah accomplished." (33/37)

There are two things to see here. One, the act and the actors are clearly visible without a doubt. Second, the verb amara, although used in this explicit context, in fact is mentioned as a general notion. That is, the short conclusive sentence at the end of the verse is the lesson from what is told before. That lesson is either 1- when the mentioned work is done, the tendency engendered by God in the soul of the prophet will have been accomplished, 2- when God sets an orientation, it is realized in the manifest world for sure. You can contrast these meanings with an exact order as expressed in another verse: Verily, when He intends a thing, His Command is, "be", and it is! (36/82). So, we can say that even this most clear case about amara also qualifies for the two meanings given above, i.e. orientation or state/work/affair.

The conclusion from the analysis of the usage of the verb amara in the Quran is that it does not link to a certain act to be done or to be avoided. Returning to the verse in the chapter Al-Baqarah (2/222), this conclusion is the reason why in the second translation, amara is translated as "God has directed" instead of "God has ordained". You may ask what the difference is. It is huge.

How do you tell how God directs you, if there is no clear explanation? You look at your feelings. So, when with your spouse, how do you know where to visit? You look at your feelings. If you doubt this conclusion, read the very following verse:

Your women are tilth for you; so approach your tilth however you like,... (2/223)

In order to warrant a pleasurable experience for both partners in the act, the selected verb (ataa = come) implies that the coming must be easy. Again to strengthen the notion of pleasure and hygiene for both partners, the remainder of the verse admonishes to pay attention to prerequisites:

"... and send ahead for yourselves. And fear God, and know that you will meet Him. And give good news to the believers." (2/223)

The same notion of uncertainty that we saw with the verb amara is also visible in the word that precedes this verb. The verse tells to embrace A way (hayth), not THE way (al hayth). And in order to know that way, we are told to look at where God directs us. And that direction is left uncertain, as we discussed above.

If we look at the third underlined word, "harth = place of sowing/cultivation", this translation, in fact, is not a wrong one, but can be used to refer to opposing meanings of the verse. Those who use it to ban anal sex claim that God clearly confines the sexual act to vagina by virtue of reference to cultivation. Some among these scholars, based on that interpretation, even proceed to ban certain types of oral sex. However, those who use the same word to allow anal sex say that it implies a place to be watered, and they say that the rest of the verse approves this meaning by telling to "approach ... however you like".

Both of these interpretations have their own merits, but we can add to this discussion a few more points. First, women are not just baby makers, and sex is not just about reproduction. So, if you are using sex for reproductive purposes, then you can go with the first meaning of harth, but if you are using sex for non-reproductive purposes, you can go with the other meaning.

Second point, the essential needs of the believers who have LGBT traits cannot be addressed if we confine ourselves to the first interpretation, and this contradicts the general position of the Quran about the topic.

Third, in the Quran, there are places where the vagina is explicitly mentioned (66/12, 21/91), i.e. in the cases of Elizabeth (wife of Zachariah pbuh) and Mary (mother of Jesus pbuh). If there is a ban or a clear order, we would expect God to do so without going into metaphors or analogies. Given that a metaphor is used, instead of the word itself, then we can rightfully ask why we are obliged to limit ourselves to the first interpretation of harth (place of cultivation) and not consider different interpretations of that metaphor.

To further our discussion, it is important to remember the concept of "functionality", which is discussed in depth in a different blog you can reach here. For the sake of completeness, I want to briefly touch upon that issue here, too. When we read the verses 2/222-223,  we see that women are held analog to a tilth. This is a clear case of analogy, where the notion of functionality is in the forefront for two reasons. One, the occasion of the revelation for this verse is as follows:

“The Jews used to say that if a man has intercourse with a woman in her vagina from the back, the child would have a squint. Then Allah, Glorious is He, revealed: 'Your wives are a tilth for you, so go to your tilth, when or how you will.' ” (Grade: sahih, Ibn Majah, Marriage, 2000)

In the light of this hadith and through the notion of functionality, we can see a notion of reproduction. Accordingly, the meaning of the verse is an instruction to men not to worry about superstitions on vaginal sex. That is, in the context of its revelation, these Quranic verses have nothing to say about anal sex, for or against.

Second, although there are occasions of revelation (historical context) about the verses of the Quran, the meanings therein are not confined to those occasions, if the content is not explicit and definitive, such as in the ban of intoxicants or in the ordering of fasting in Ramadan. This is exactly what we see here. Yes, there is an occasion of revelation, but it is irrelevant to anal sex. And yes, the content has implicit references that call for interpretation based on functionality. Then, let's think what other meanings or connotations "a tilth" can have.

In order to gather some equipments to help us in our quest, let's see some other similar examples of the implementation of Quranic verses in real life. For example, in the case of polygamy, although the relevant verse (4/3) explicitly builds on the grounds of taking care of the orphans, neither the Prophet himself and his companions nor the religious scholars restrict polygamy to such a context. Rather, they build an expansion on top of the notion of functionality. That is, the imperative form of the verb in the relevant verse, juxtaposed with a condition, tells that in such a case, it becomes a must, but otherwise, there is no ban or obligation, hence the expansion in the implementation.

Similarly, in a verse telling the believers to marry the single ones, the imperative form of the verb is used: 

"And marry the unmarried among you and the righteous among your male slaves and female slaves. If they should be poor, Allah will enrich them from His bounty, and Allah is all-Encompassing and Knowing." (24/32)

Do you ever see the scholars claiming that it is an order of God to marry? Rather, they talk about the functionality of marriage in protecting one's self from the prohibitions, and they recommend, urge people to get married, but they never force people thereof, despite the imperative form in the verse. In not doing so, they have supporting arguments, which I am not going to discuss here, but the bottom line is that something does not become an order of God or a ban simply because of a verb in a verse. There are several conditions for that to happen. And this is not something that the scholars have invented, either. Rather, if you read the Quran with a critical mind and some basic knowledge of Arabic and Quranic history, this is what anyone would conclude naturally.

Another example is about not approaching the women during their periods:

They will question thee concerning the menstruation. Say: 'It is hurt; so go apart from women during the monthly course, and do not approach them till they are clean. When they have cleansed themselves, then come unto them as God has commanded you.' Truly, God loves those who repent, and He loves those who cleanse themselves. (2/222)

Again here, when telling not to approach the women during their periods, the imperative form of the verb is used. However, when we look at the practice of the prophet Muhammad himself, we see that he used to approach his wives according to their sensitivities but always abstaining from intercourse until completion of the menstruation (e.g. Tirmidhi, 132). The clear imperative in the verse and the application of the messenger of God seem to contradict here! Or do they? This apparent discrepancy is easily resolved if you remember that something does not become an order or a ban unless it satisfies various conditions. Otherwise, it attains a conditional status, by which the application may vary due to individual differences among people and surrounding conditions.

With these in mind, let go on with our analysis. If you lived in the 7th century Arabian peninsula, you would be living in conditions of extreme heat and shortage of water. So, if you had a tilth that is providing shade and giving produce, it would be extremely precious. You would pay so much attention when dealing with it. At the same time, spending time there would be so comforting for you. Even the thought of having it would be a factor of serenity in that land of deserts. In short, a tilth would mean much more than getting produce.

By the same token, given that the functionality of women to men is much more than giving children only, and given that functionality of sex is much broader than reproduction, the analogy of the Quran can be expanded in meaning in a way to include and regulate anal sex.

Furthermore, not accepting this broad notion and insisting on the idea that these verses are exclusively relating to the reproductive traits, then, based on the same grounds, one can ban birth control on religious grounds, since it goes against the idea of being a tilth. One can even claim that sex is haraam if you are not intending to make children. Even, marrying a woman who is known to be barren would become questionable, since she is not a tilth.

Therefore, I would suggest that the word harth can and must be translated in inclusive ways, not exclusive. And, when we consider the different meanings in the present context, we see that they all contribute to make a more complete picture on the issue.

So, in short, if we consider the discussion so far about the Quranic references to the anal sex, we see that it doesn't make sense to claim that God unconditionally and/or explicitly bans anal sex. Rather, it can be claimed that there are regulations in the relevant verses (2/222-223) for all forms of sex. And so, the strict position against it in the hadiths must have a conditional status. Now let's study this aspect of the matter.

First, let me clarify what I mean by conditional status through some examples. If you look at the hadiths about those who make pictures and statues, you see that they are clearly banned (e.g. Sahih Bukhari 5954, 5657), although there are no clear Quranic verses against them. So, if we go with this result, the robotics and genetics studies today must be abolished. Or if you look at the travel rights of women, you see a clear restriction (Tirmidhi, Suckling, 1169), and we would have to reset the society. But these are not happening. Why not? Because these hadiths are put in a context. So, whenever those same conditions apply, the same jurisdictions become valid. But otherwise, it is the duty of the knowledgeable ones to come to a conclusion or recommendation.

For a more detailed analysis of this topic, you can read a previous blog on the importance of historical context and human limitations in interpreting the hadiths.

Coming back to our topic, if there is no clear ban against anal sex in the Quran, but it is severely disapproved by the Messenger of God pbuh, there must be reasons behind it. Whenever those conditions are valid, then the same disapproval becomes valid; but otherwise, it must be acceptable. Then, what could those conditions be?

First, as indicated in the part 4 of this series, the messenger of God was very sensitive for his people, and tried his best to keep them away from the ways of people destructed by God in the past. So, this sensitivity could have played a role in his words.

Second, at the time of the prophet, women rights were virtually none. Although with his coming, the status of women was enhanced incomparably, kind treatment by their husbands and women's sexual needs were still issues to be addressed. Therefore, many hadiths were uttered by the prophet to warn men against the rights of women on them. Talking about anal sex, due to the physiological nature of the rectum, more attention and sensitivity is required to ensure a healthy and pleasurable experience for both sides. Such sensitivity was unlikely to be found among the men at the time. But still, it was practiced by some, and protecting women from unwanted and/or unsatisfactory sex was an important issue for the prophet.

Third, anal sex requires further attention to hygiene compared to the vaginal sex. The available technological means at the time were simply not enough to ensure this.

Fourth, reproduction of the Muslim community was important, and anal sex did not serve to that end.

In order to read hadiths related to these four reasons, you can look at the part 4 of this series and also read the following hadiths among others: Sahih Bukhari, Marriage, 5187; Ibn Majah, Marriage, 2003; farewell sermon.

In conclusion, as long as it is done according to hygiene conditions and practiced in a way to please both spouses, anal sex should be within the realm of the licit. Otherwise, why would God create nerve ends around the rectum area in both men and women, which enable pleasure?

In the end, given all of the discussion above, it is your call to decide what to do. Allah knows best.

A Rationale and Antidote for the Greatest Trouble - Part 3

Before we begin, let's remember what we discussed so far. First, we saw that lack of critical thinking and its active suppression are major factors inviting the Antichrist and facilitating his actions. So, a necessity to conserve critical thinking was born out of this conclusion. However, critical thinking comes with inherent differences in opinions. Such differences have been historically responsible for major conflicts and clashes. Islam strictly warns its adherents against such misfortunes. Then, are we to give up critical thinking to avoid divisions? If we do so, then we are inviting the Antichrist! So, what is the solution?

With this question, in the second part, we looked at Quran and Hadiths about differences and disputes. After a critical look, we figured that Islam is against any atmosphere that suppresses free thinking, but not at all objecting to friendly diversity. Having resolved our problems at the fundamental philosophical level, we turned to what is happening to critical thinking among Muslims. We saw that critical thinking is neither flourishing nor surviving among Muslims! The factors underlying this problem are the topic of the current article.

In my opinion, the fundamental reason behind the Muslim's lack of hospitality towards critical thinking is the lack of direct, unmediated relationship with Quran. Below, I am going to discuss the various manifestations or symptoms of this disease.

First Symptom

Quran is the word of God that is guidance for all who embrace it (2/2, 27/2). Quran can be a friend, a teacher, a protector or healing for those clinging to it. This poetic introduction based on Quranic verses and hadiths may sound nice, but in practice, there are barriers between people and the Quran!

Usual connotations of barriers before Quran include the unlimited worldly pleasures and actual enemies who are working to disinform and misinform people about Quran. However, aside from these, I am going to elaborate on an unusual barrier: scholars!

This sounds counter intuitive, I know. So, I am going to make myself clear. When I present the scholars as the barrier before Quran, this is either due to the scholars themselves or due to the way they are treated by people. Let's see how these unfold in real life.

Today, who we call a scholar varies according to who we are. The title of scholar may be assigned based on ideological or cultural adherence, rather than critical and objective assessment. When a human is held at an unquestionable position to convey the Quranic knowledge and wisdom, that person's intellectual horizon becomes the limit of those following that human, the width of perception of that person defines the big picture available to those in the following.

This is how the fundamentalists consider themselves as truthful, because they are following the "scholars". But in fact, those scholars are a barrier, preventing their followers' direct access to and free thinking on the Quran. And this is not just about the fundamentalists! Other believers, too, are vulnerable to holding a scholar at a position to block their direct benefit from Quran.

What makes things worse is the constant propaganda from the learned people that warns ordinary people against taking their personal initiative to understand and interpret Quran. As a result, the works of scholars remain as the sole source to learn from Quran, when they are limited by the human conditions, namely bu time, culture and intellectual ability. So, overtime, those sources and respectable individuals become obstacles to be removed. But nobody can do it, because removing them requires wisdom, well-trained manners, courage and, most of all, direct relationship with Quran. In this context, the ordinary people would think "who are we to interpret Quran, who are we to question the conclusions and injunctions of scholars?" This learned helplessness over centuries, in turn, leave people in an expectation of someone else worthy enough to be imitated, hence a moratorium for free and critical thinking, and good bye to the direct relationship with Quran.

Second Symptom

Quran is the unmediated communication between God and his servants. A symptom of severing this tie and constructing walls between God and people is the silencing of hearts and minds. A consequence of their silence is blind imitation and formalism, that is valuing the visible and outward entities and actions, rather than the invisible and the inward. In other words, this means erecting buildings rather than individuals, this means a blind focus on increase in the number of followers rather than strength and sincerity in faith. At a larger scale, this is when people neglect "individuality and personal relationship with God through Quran" in favor of "social adherence and political power to shape people", hence a state-regulated religion.

At this point, I am going to remind you the statement by Karl Marx: "religion is the opium of the people". We can make a critique of these words but in our context, it is logical to modify this statement as "political Islam is the opium of Muslims".

Remember, Islam came to remove everything between God and His servants, and acting in the opposite direction comes with a cost, which is traditionally formulated as becoming servants of those other than God. Of course I don't mean that people are becoming idol worshipers, but the underlying psychology and the mental construct is the same. That is believing in things we see, rather then those invisible.

Third Symptom

Quran is a telescope that enables us to live in this transient world with a perspective for the infinite afterlife. This connection to infinity is not just about responsibilities but also about adjusting our attitudes and manners to the transients in this life. Nevertheless, we humans don't really like death nor situations reminiscent of it. We try to keep things forever, if possible, whereas God wants us to tame this instinct of ours and aim at the eternity, not in this life but, in the afterlife.

What's more, God creates death in this life as an agent of renewal, and so invites us to have confidence in the works of his unseen hand (41/39). Still, even those who believe in the afterlife fail to get this message, and exhibit a resistance to renewal, which is more famously termed as bigotry. The reflections of mentally ascribing infinity to the mortals or our mental constructs are manifold in the social life.

For example, a leader is kept as the leader until they die, and even after that, their teachings and principles are deemed untouchable and permanent. So, the good leader of the past transforms to an idol-like spirit, disabling the motivations for renewal, hence suppression of critical thinking. But Quran criticizes holding the mortals at a status that solely belongs to God (9/31). However, knowing this subtlety and acting upon it requires a direct relationship with Quran.

Another reflection of inability to accept mortality is the will to continue a social construct forever and to spread it as wide as possible through increasing the number of adherents. But again, retaining social constructs beyond borders and beyond times means an ascribed eternity. If there is someone to be praised beyond times and places, that would be God (1/2); but even He is not doing this! So, this motive to spread boundlessly and unconditionally is reminiscent of acting like God. Such effort for omnipresence can only happen if critical thinking is systematically suppressed.

Especially in our times, the pace of change in anything is at an ever-highest level. So, we humans must admit our mortality in the face of time and changing social conditions. This opens the way to the emergence of new leaders and new social constructs for the flourishing of the good. It can even enable a second birth opportunity for ourselves, too. The power to go through death and come alive renewed is found in the Quran (2/54), which is the Qaaba of the minds.

Now that we talked about these three symptoms of lack of personal relationship with Quran, let's remember why we were here. In order to equip ourselves against the Antichrist, we need critical thinking. And that can be attained if we can establish a direct and personal relationship with Quran. To facilitate this direct communication with the word of God, all believers must be equipped with the essential knowledge and methods necessary for a safe navigation in the ocean of Quran. That is, instead of  waiting for and sticking to a single scholar, Muslims must become community of critical thinkers.

"Jabir b. 'Abdullah reported: I heard the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) say: A section of my people will not cease fighting for the Truth and will prevail till the Day of Resurrection. He said: Jesus son of Mary would then descend and their (Muslims') commander would invite him to come and lead them in prayer, but he would say: No, some amongst you are commanders over some (amongst you). This is the honour from Allah for this Ummah." (Grade Sahih, Muslim, Book of Faith, 71/156)

A Rationale and Antidote for the Greatest Trouble - Part 2

In the first part, we arrived at the conclusion that "critical thinking" and "thought based action" are integral parts of the defense against the troubles of Antichrist. However, the inherent divergence of opinions among the critical thinkers is an issue to be digested, because Islam constructs a firm rejection against disputes. In this article, we are going to scrutinize the difference between what Islam really says and what people understand, and how people are paving with their very hands the way for the coming of Antichrist.

When you listen to the preachers or the religious leaders, they would appreciate the differences of opinions among the scholars and would consider this as a blessing from God. In this context, the classical example given is the difference of opinion among the imams of the four major schools of practice (i.e. hanefi, shafii, maliqi, hanbali). But when it comes to the contemporary issues, anything that diverges from the teachings of those imams of centuries ago are considered as part of the dispute that is condemned in the Quran and hadith. If you ask why, here is the explanation they give.

There are verses in the Quran that tell about the clarity of the meanings in the Quran, hence the corrupt nature of the requests for new interpretations. Prophet Muhammad himself made interpretations, and he implicitly endorsed his companions and the first two generations following them to do the same. Us, who are not among those generations and who are 14 centuries away from them, who are engulfed in worldly innovations, etc. etc. are not qualified to make interpretations. If really necessary, the scholars that are trained in Islamic schools of fiqh would extract jurisdictions. Other Muslims need not worry, and just need to obey the rulings from those holy scholars.

So, we, the ordinary Muslims, go home thinking that our religion has already been analyzed thoroughly, and there is no need for further scrutiny, there is no room for real discovery. Even if there is an extraordinary situation, there is a knowledgeable elite to address it. Despite this conclusion of ours, the unprecedented complexities of the humanity and the propositions from science and philosophy don't leave us alone, and we find ourselves in endless arguments, so we keep bothering the scholars and imams.

It is exactly when the scholars feel cornered that they look for a solution, i.e. new interpretations. But when this happens, the believers split into groups. Some of them support the new interpretations and some others condemn those novelties as corruption. In this spectrum of opinions, we can see those who welcome almost anything as Islamic on one end, and the extreme conservatives and fundamentalists on the other.

Seeing this weird picture, non-Muslims cannot decide which one of these various opinions represents Islam. So, they either study the religion themselves, and arrive at their own conclusion, or they listen to what the media says and stay distant.

Is this state of disconnection and polarization pleasing to God? Before we say anything further, it is crucial that we see directly what the Quran and Hadith say about the topic of disputes, disagreements and differences.  

"O mankind, indeed We have created you from male and female and made you peoples and tribes that you may know one another. Indeed, the most noble of you in the sight of Allah is the most righteous of you. Indeed, Allah is Knowing and Acquainted." (49/13) 

"It is He who has sent down to you, [O Muhammad], the Book; in it are verses [that are] precise - they are the foundation of the Book - and others unspecific. As for those in whose hearts is deviation [from truth], they will follow that of it which is unspecific, seeking discord and seeking an interpretation [suitable to them]. And no one knows its [true] interpretation except Allah . But those firm in knowledge say, "We believe in it. All [of it] is from our Lord." And no one will be reminded except those of understanding. [Who say], "Our Lord, let not our hearts deviate after You have guided us and grant us from Yourself mercy. Indeed, You are the Bestower." (3/7-8)

"And let there be [arising] from you a nation inviting to [all that is] good, enjoining what is right and forbidding what is wrong, and those will be the successful. And do not be like the ones who became divided and differed after the clear proofs had come to them. And those will have a great punishment." (3/104-105)

Before looking at the hadiths, first let's make sense of these verses to further our analysis.

The first verse teaches us that the differences among people are actually will of God. Then, difference of opinion should not be evil, just by itself. In fact, this notion is highlighted in the second verse through the words of those firm in knowledge. These people admit that all those different interpretations could potentially be intended meanings by God. So, they carefully go for what they think is true, and ask in humbleness from Allah guidance and correction. By logic, you can see that people who are not firm in knowledge, instead of scrutinizing their opinions and thinking critically, exhibit hostility towards such differences in opinion, and comfort themselves by suppressing and silencing other opinions. And in fact, it is this hostility, which is burgeoning in an atmosphere of diversity but threatening diversity itself, that is criticized in the third verse. In other words, rather than the differences in opinions, it is the bigotry and polarization that is disliked and condemned in this verse.

Having read and pondered over the verses from Quran about the issue, now let's look at some of the relevant words of Prophet Muhammad pbuh:

"Beware! The people of the Book before were split up into seventy two sects, and this community will be split into seventy three: seventy two of them will go to Hell and one of them will go to Paradise, and it is the majority group." (Grade: hasan, Abu Dawud 4597)

Among the classical commentaries about this hadith, you can hear that there are going to be exactly 73 groups among Muslims. This, I think, is a very shortsighted opinion. This hadith could mean that the Muslims are going to be divided at least as much as the people of the book, hence the difference of opinions.

The second half of the hadith forces us into further scrutiny. Why? Because in the appearance, it tells that the majority is always truthful, but we know that there are other hadiths implying otherwise (Sahih Al-Bukhari 7052,7055,7059,7062,7064,7066,7084). Plus, history is a testimony that majority is not necessarily always true. So, there must be other intentions behind these words.

One meaning could be that forced and misguided interpretations of the Quran will not be embraced by majority in the long run. So, the time is going to be a test for the veracity of an opinion. Another meaning could be that this expression is an exaggeration to highlight a notion. That notion is the difficulty of finding the path pleasing to Allah in times of aggravated disputes. Accordingly, this hadith is a call for attention. A third meaning is that this hadith is specifically talking about the near future after the prophet pbuh. We know that he was informed by God about certain events that are going to unfold after his death. But he was not given all the details, so, the prophet is trying his best to warn his companions and the generations following them of the upcoming conflicts.

Contemplating these options, we see that rather than the difference of opinions, it is the conflicts due to difference of opinion that we are alerted about in this hadith. The following hadith shows us another situation that we need to avoid:

"The most despicable amongst persons in the eye of Allah is one who tries to fall into dispute with others (for nothing but only to display his knowledge and power of argumentation)." ( Grade: sahih, Muslim 2668)

Again here, rather than the discussions, it is an evil motivation driving the discussions that we are warned against. That is dispute for its own sake, rather than for the sake of discovering the subtleties of the path of God and acting accordingly. 

"I enjoin you to fear Allah, and to hear and obey even if it be an Abyssinian slave, for those of you who live after me will see great disagreement. You must then follow my sunnah and that of the rightly-guided caliphs. Hold to it and stick fast to it. Avoid novelties, for every novelty is an innovation, and every innovation is an error." (Grade:sahih, Abu Dawud 4607)

This hadith is a very famous one that is used as a weapon to defeat an argument that is not voiced by the classical scholars or conservative imams. Briefly, what they say is: "anything that you claim, if it is new, it is wrong, because the messenger of God says so in this hadith! After all, anything he says is revealed to him, as told in the Quran: Nor does he speak from [his own] inclination. It is not but a revelation revealed,... (53/3-4) " Furthermore, "And whatsoever the messenger gives you, take it. And whatsoever he forbids, abstain (from it)." (59/7). Since you wouldn't like to position yourself against the prophet, you feel awkward to continue, and shut up.

But if you have more courage and wisdom to clarify yourself, you explain the rationality of your point and underline the incompatibility between the classical stance and the modern conditions. Then, they stop you with the Quranic verse (5/3) about the perfectness and completeness of Islam. At this point, you are not expected to say even a single word, because who are you to say anything about religion of God, given that you are not a trained scholar. Hasn't Muhammad pbuh said "whoever says (something) about the Qur'an according to his own opinion and he is correct, yet he has committed a mistake." (Tirmidhi, Tafsir 2952)

The shear warning against anything and everything new has burdened the early scholars as well, because clearly, with the passage of time and the change of conditions geographically and culturally, there must be new injunctions for the practice of religion. Plus, the prophet himself approved of such interpretations at other occasions. So, what is meant here?

The bottom line in that discussion is that a novelty that supersedes and puts to oblivion a clear injunction in religion is what is condemned in this hadith. So, the points that are left vague are not at the target of this hadith. Furthermore, we can see, using our previous analysis of the verse from chapter Ali-Imran (3/7-8), that the effort to suppress other opinions while highlighting and promoting yours is an indication of the falsehood of that path. And this hadith is reiterating that in view of the upcoming conflicts after the death of the prophet. In fact, the history shows us that in the times following the prophet, there have been efforts to establish a politically guided interpretation of Islam while curtailing the other free thinkers.

The second point about the holy status of everything that the prophet utters is an exaggeration and a clear misinterpretation of the verse, because the context of that verse refers to the Quran itself. Second, life details of the prophet Muhammad pbuh and several Quranic verses criticizing/correcting him are against those who claim this verse as a proof that everything is revealed to him. If you are interested, you can read another blog specifically on this issue (Chosen From Among Us Humans).

And then comes the perfectness and completeness of Islam. What people have difficulty in understanding is that the perfection and completeness of Islam is not due to its coverage of all possible conditions and thoughts that could occur to humanity, but rather due to its simplicity and approval of "interpretations in an atmosphere of friendly divergence". This is the whole point of this blog, but let's make it clear through Quran and hadith.

Had the Quran taught everything that we need in an explicit manner, there would be no need for scholars at all, or even a messenger thereof. So, the example of the prophet is needed to understand the book of God, or to establish a methodology to interpret it. This is how all scholars, classical or non-traditional, find authenticity within the borders of Islam. If you curtail the work of some scholars, or any thinker for that matter, you render all interpretations baseless. In the end, all of these efforts throughout the history and the hadiths and verses about their authenticity are clear evidence that perfectness of Islam lies in the "brevity of its pillars of faith and small number of clear orders" and in its invitation to "think and take lessons from the creation", hence a stable belief with a dynamic intellect.

And finally, we saw the hadith about the mistake of those who make interpretations of Quran based on their own opinion. First, is there anyone who is not making their own opinion? It is easy to see that the target of this hadith is forced interpretations to justify worldly ambitions and lack of fear of God (Probing Fear of God) while interpreting the Quran. Second, the scholars themselves are making their own opinions based on knowledge, and they try to come to a conclusion with a sensitivity towards what is pleasing to God.

The last point to discuss in this issue is "are you a trained scholar of religion?" This question, itself, actually summarizes a lot of things that pave the way for the coming of the Antichrist. When people leave the job of learning, understanding and interpreting the Quran to a certain group of people, they basically turn themselves into non-thinkers and imitators. This, in itself, is a problem, and anyone living as such is vulnerable to all kinds of misguidance in today's world. No individual today has the luxury of not thinking. Everybody has to think for themselves, and scrutinize the matters relevant to them. After all, one of the manners severely criticized in the Quran is to say "we saw our forefather doing this" (e.g. 31/21, 2/170). And the prophet Muhammad pbuh himself told in his farewell sermon to spread his words, because "those who were not present there could understand better than those who were present at that sermon".

After all this discussion, you can see that neither the Quran nor the hadith has an objection to difference of opinions or the inherent divergence in the thoughts of critical thinkers, as long as they are kept in an environment of friendly diversity.

However, when you look at the Muslim world, you see a strong tradition to unify everything, rather than friendly diversity. Even today, some of the most severe clashes break out between Islamic congregations. It seems that the bigger the Islamic communities and the higher the ambition to gain power, the less is the intellectual activity, the less is the tolerance for diversity. So, growth of the Islamic groups today is acting as an invitation to the conflicts due to Antichrist?!?! This needs a discussion on its own.

More Quranic verses and Hadith on the issue:

"Indeed, they who conceal what Allah has sent down of the Book and exchange it for a small price - those consume not into their bellies except the Fire. And Allah will not speak to them on the Day of Resurrection, nor will He purify them. And they will have a painful punishment. Those are the ones who have exchanged guidance for error and forgiveness for punishment. How patient they are in pursuit of the Fire! That is [deserved by them] because Allah has sent down the Book in truth. And indeed, those who differ over the Book are in extreme dissension." (2/174-176)

"... Had Allah willed, He would have made you one nation [united in religion], but [He intended] to test you in what He has given you; so race to [all that is] good. To Allah is your return all together, and He will [then] inform you concerning that over which you used to differ." (5/48)

"And if your Lord had willed, He could have made mankind one community; but they will not cease to differ." (11/118)

"A Book whose verses have been detailed, an Arabic Qur'an for a people who know, as a giver of good tidings and a warner; but most of them turn away, so they do not hear. And they say, "Our hearts are within coverings from that to which you invite us, and in our ears is deafness, and between us and you is a partition, so work; indeed, we are working." " (41/3-5)

"'No people go astray after having followed right guidance, but those who indulge in disputes.' Then he recited the Verse: "Nay! But they are a quarrelsome people.' " (Grade: hasan, Ibn Majah 1/48)

"The Messenger of Allah (pbuh) recited this verse: “He it is who has sent down to thee the Book: in it are verses basic or fundamental . . . .” Up to “men of understanding”. She said: The Messenger of Allah then said: When you see those people who follow that which is allegorical in the Quran, those are the people whom Allah has named (in the Quran). So avoid them." (Grade: sahih, Abu Dawud 4598)

"Whoever says (something) about the Qur'an according to his own opinion and he is correct, yet he has committed a mistake." Weak-Tirmidhi, Tafsir 2952

A Rationale and Antidote for the Greatest Trouble - Part 1

What is the greatest trouble of all times? You could answer this question in many different ways, but I chose to go with the answer in the words of the Prophet Muhammad pbuh.

"There would be no creation (creating more trouble) than the Dajjal right from the creation of Adam to the Last Hour." (Grade: sahih, Muslim 2946)

"Hasten to do good deeds before six things happen: the rising of the sun from the west, the smoke, the Dajjal, the beast and (the death) of one of you or the general turmoil." (Grade: sahih, Muslim 2947)

"I warn you of him, and there was no prophet but warned his followers of him; but I will tell you something about him which no prophet has told his followers: Ad- Dajjal is one-eyed whereas Allah is not." (Grade: sahih, Bukhari 92/74)

"Narrated `Aisha: I heard Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) in his prayer, seeking refuge with Allah from the afflictions of Ad-Dajjal." (Grade: sahih, Bukhari 92/76)

Antichrist is also addressed in the Bible, too:

"And he shall speak great words against the most High, and shall wear out the saints of the most High, and think to change times and laws: and they shall be given into his hand until a time and times and the dividing of time" (Daniel 7/25)

"Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition; who opposes and exalts himself above all that is called God, or that is worshiped; so that he as God sits in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God." (2 Thessalonians 2/3-4)

In different communities, there are varying opinions of the Antichrist as to who he is and when he will appear. On one hand, these brainstorms are good in the sense that they may awaken a vigilance against this trouble of all times. However, instead of focusing on the action and mission of the Antichrist, if we focus on his identity and his appointed time in history, we miss the real point. Remember, he is going to deceive people about the truth. He could disguise himself, too, and your efforts to pinpoint him would go in vain! Worse, if you are not well equipped, you may even fall to his schemes, let alone recognizing him. So, instead of focusing on the exact name-place-time of Antichrist, it makes more sense to analyze his actions and the social conditions hosting his mission.

The coming of the Antichrist is decreed in the destiny; so, there is no escape from it. But, knowing that his coming is going to be accompanied by lots of troubles and conflicts on earth, we can ask why divine wisdom allowed it? Which actions of ours could be making us deserve such a punishment? To answer this question, let's remember certain facts.

First, the varying descriptions of the Antichrist has been interpreted as a sign that the same trouble is going to appear at different times and places throughout the history, although The Antichrist is going to come towards the end of time. So, instead of actions of a single person, we are looking at a problem that is due to an indispensable aspect of humanity from its beginning to its end.

Second, in the Quran, we are told that any tribulation that visits us is due to our own actions (4/79). So, a tribulation of the size of Antichrist must be related to community-wide or global mischief. Nevertheless, the coming of this misfortune can, at the same time, be a bitter medicine for the humans to heal from their mischief. Therefore, during the events of the Antichrist, there might be losses, but in the end, humanity, or that community, gets out cleared. 

Third, there is no clear hadith or Quranic verse about the identity of the Antichrist. Plus, similar to the wisdom behind the uncertainty of the time of death or the wisdom behind the uncertainty of the end of time, etc., the fact that Antichrist is not well-defined could be due to a reason. Regardless of what you think that reason is, if you claim a person to be the Antichrist and announce this information as a well-established fact, you are going against the wisdom of Sunna and the Quran. Those who think a person to be the Antichrist would not anymore stay vigilant against its deceptions, and would render themselves prone to the plots of the greatest misfortune of all times.

Having established these three points, now let's think about what makes us, humans, deserve this punishment from our Creator.

In the history, the greatest disaster that hit the disbelievers is the Great Flood. Virtually all disbelievers were eradicated from the face of the planet. Why did this happen? If we read carefully through the Quran, we see that the individuals in that community did not suffice with their rejection of the divine call but worked systematically to misinform and disinform the rest of the people so that no one would even listen to Noah pbuh (23/23-25). Furthermore, they extended their influence to the new generations so that none of the new generations could think clearly (26/11-116, 71/26-27). Plus, they successfully (!) executed their system and proved beyond doubt that they are enemy of God (29/14).

If we turn towards the believers, on the other hand, the greatest misery befell them must be the losses and destructions that took place through the 19th and the 20th century. During this period, not only did they fail on the material side, but also collapsed in term of their faith and religion. At first, the believers thought that this was due to lack of technological power. Over the decades, many Muslim countries acquired that, but still, no clear victory is visible. Then, they said it is due to the political systems. Again over the decades, they tried different options to no avail. Lack of education was put forward as another reason of demise. Countless schools were opened, but still education is not a shining star among Muslims, despite the clear orders from the Quran to read and think and work! Then the believers started talking about misunderstandings and misinterpretations in the religion. After years of studies, the best of the achievements are the reiteration of the past scholars or misguided justifications of the worldly ambitions and innovations. So, it looks like despite the changes on the outside, we did not change inside that much after two centuries of tribulations.

"Indeed, Allah will not change the condition of a people until they change what is in themselves. And when Allah intends for a people ill, there is no repelling it. And there is not for them besides Him any patron." (13/11)

If you think about it, perhaps all of the suggestions from the believers played a role into their demise in history. However, what is the underlying energy that is driving everything else? I would answer this question as lack and suppression of critical thinking and the unlimited resistance to change. And these two are synonyms of what I described above about the disbelievers: misguiding the society and maleducating the new generations to suppress free thinking. Therefore, anytime free thinking is blocked and locked among the humans, gates of misfortune are opened!

"And fear a trial which will not strike those who have wronged among you exclusively, and know that Allah is severe in penalty." (8/25)

"And return [in repentance] to your Lord and submit to Him before the punishment comes upon you; then you will not be helped." (39/54)

"By the One in Whose Hand is my soul! Either you command good and forbid evil, or Allah will soon send upon you a punishment from Him, then you will call upon Him, but He will not respond to you." (Grade: Hasan, Tirmidhi 2169)

This could be a great clue to what is going to invite or host Antichrist. You wonder why? Let's read and ponder the below hadith:

"The Prophet pbuh said about Ad-Dajjal that he would have water and fire with him: (what would seem to be) fire, would be cold water and (what would seem to be) water, would be fire." (Grade: sahih, Bukhari 92/77)

So, Antichrist is going to deceive people so much that that they are not going to truly understand what they see with their eyes. One way this could happen is through the blocking of the critical thinking ability so that people accept anything as it is presented to them, without questioning whether it makes sense or it is in line with the commandments of God or whether it is acceptable in the framework of the Sunna. Actually, there is another hadith, which signals that such a state is actually underlying the troubles of Antichrist:

"No prophet was sent but that he warned his followers against the one-eyed liar (Ad-Dajjal). Beware! He is blind in one eye, and your Lord is not so, and there will be written between his (Ad-Dajjal's) eyes (the word) Kafir (i.e., disbeliever)." (Grade: sahih, Bukhari 92/78)

Is it at all possible that you see someone with a clear mark on his forehead, saying disbeliever? No. So, this must be a conclusion of the reason, not eyes. If the people are not able to come to that conclusion, that means an obstruction of the reason.

Second, let's say you see that person, you know the above hadith, and he is offering you water. Would you accept it? One of the first things we teach our children is not to accept any edibles or drinks from strangers. Would you do the same, if you deemed that person as stranger, let alone Antichrist? No. Therefore, Antichrist must be someone who is going to look like "someone from among us", and he is going to block the reason, so that people are going to accept the water from him, which is going to take them to fire. However, due to lack of reason, you are not going to understand why you are burning, and drink more "water" in a vicious cycle.

So, the power of Antichrist is not really due to his personal superiority, but due to the lack of reason and intellect among the people, due to a social atmosphere that drives people away from thinking. Then, the receipt for the coming of the Antichrist, or the antidote thereof, has to do with the critical thinking and free discussion of ideas and events.

But the problem is that whenever there are people who start questioning, who think critically or who are trying non-conventional ways of doing things, they keep talking, preventing real action. They lead to disagreements, disputes; and perhaps they indulge in sinful extremes. Plus, there are many Quranic verses and words of the Prophet Muhammad pbuh that admonish us to avoid dispute! So, what are we going to do?

Have You Ever Talked to God?

They say "If you speak to God, it is prayer. If God speaks to you, it is schizophrenia." This saying is worth thinking about, but on the other hand, it brings a gloomy message implicitly, that is God does not speak to you!

Today, there is more than ever research about being happy, and the ultimate finding from these studies is that "meaning" is what makes humans happy. Even success or wealth does not make people really happy, if there isn't a bigger picture it is part of. What makes us human is our inquisitiveness about and ability to probe into the unseen. So, anything that hinders this avenue for exploration makes us unhappy, no matter how comely it may seem.

Interestingly, in case of misfortunes, those who cannot see a meaning beyond what is surrounding them, or those who don't have a belief thereof, in other words, those who believe the existence to be nothing but the seen and the visible, fall into depression. In the Quran, repeatedly, belief and conviction about the unseen are listed as an important property of the believers. Thus, they believe in an unseen good in the face of the misfortunes befalling them.

Pondering our issue in the beginning, what makes us really happy and strong in the face of troubles is the communication between us and the unseen. This is how all those prophets stood amidst the oppressive people. This is how the first believers sustained under the harsh social and economic conditions. But what is going to happen when there are no prophets and messengers? Doesn't God talk to ordinary people? Do we have to become schizophrenic in order for God to speak to us?

Read the following verses from the Quran. The first quotation is from the story of Children of Israel. One of them, Samiri, makes a statue of a calf, and they embrace it as god. In this context, Allah tells:

And he extracted for them [the statue of] a calf which had a lowing sound, and they said, "This is your god and the god of Moses, but he forgot". Did they not see that it could not return to them any speech and that it did not possess for them any harm or benefit?" (20/88-89)

Quite literally, one test for anything to be god is formulated by Allah as "talking to its creatures" and "providing for them and protecting them". But, we, ordinary humans, have never heard Allah, either! And, when we pray to Him, is He directly answering them? No! Nevertheless, this test is exactly what Allah wants us to apply!

The same approach is reiterated in the following verses:

"Indeed, those you [polytheists] call upon besides Allah are servants like you. So call upon them and let them respond to you, if you should be truthful. Do they have feet by which they walk? Or do they have hands by which they strike? Or do they have eyes by which they see? Or do they have ears by which they hear? Say, [O Muhammad], "Call your 'partners' and then conspire against me and give me no respite. Indeed, my protector is Allah, who has sent down the Book; and He is an ally to the righteous. And those you call upon besides Him are unable to help you, nor can they help themselves." " (7/194)

Here, similarly, the assumed gods are expected to respond to the calls and help the inquirers in order to qualify as god. Allah tells that those other than Him are not able to do these. But again, when we are in trouble and call upon Him, does He respond, or does He magically deliver us from trouble? On the contrary, in the Quran, He admonishes us to be patient until the appointed term for things to pass.

"If a wound should touch you - there has already touched the [opposing] people a wound similar to it. And these days [of varying conditions] We alternate among the people so that Allah may make evident those who believe and [may] take to Himself from among you martyrs - and Allah does not like the wrongdoers - And that Allah may purify the believers [through trials] and destroy the disbelievers. Or do you think that you will enter Paradise while Allah has not yet made evident those of you who fight in His cause and made evident those who are steadfast?" (3/140-142)

So, whether you call upon God or not, the things are going to happen as decreed before. Nevertheless, you, as a believer, would pray to God, because He instructs us to do so, in the first place. But again, this is a communication in our belief, in our mind. Isn't it the same for the disbelievers or idol worshipers? They could think the same way, that is they could explain why their gods are not responding in a human way, just like Allah is not responding in a human way!

Let's remember that it is Allah, subhanehu wa ta'ala, who led us into this inquiry. So, there must be a solution to all this.

"And your Lord says, "Call upon Me; I will respond to you." (40/60)

There are two major distinctions between the divine call and all others. First, Allah sent humanity his words multiple times throughout the history, Quran being the last and best preserved. Quran is His living word and His talk to anyone who listens until the end of time. So, clearly, if you want to talk to God and hear Him, read His book.

If you talk to any Muslim, they will tell about the mysterious coincidences between the Quranic verses and their needs. That is when they really feel that God is talking to them. In short, when we put Allah to the test He instructs us to apply, His talking will be the intertwining of the Quran and our lives. No god ever sent words that live with us.

The second distinction between the divine call and all others is the existence of the life after death, the coming of the judgment day. As seen in the verse from chapter Ali-Imran above, this life is a process of purification and distinction. So, the things that befall us might appear as the action of others or haphazard natural events, but at a deeper level, they are a scenario written for a purpose and with a wisdom.

Still, we humans want to feel with company in times of trouble, and want to be assured of safety. That is when we are given the means to meet Allah anew, if we accept the invitation.

"And when My servants ask you, [O Muhammad], concerning Me - indeed I am near. I respond to the invocation of the supplicant when he calls upon Me. So let them respond to Me [by obedience] and believe in Me that they may be [rightly] guided." (2/186)

In order for God to respond to our inquiries, we are asked to respond to Him as a prerequisite. And what He wants from us is something that each individual must listen to in their hearts. That is, they must speak directly to God and act accordingly. Actually, when you listen to God in your heart, you will see that He talks to you not only at times of trouble but always:

"Indeed, in the creation of the heavens and the earth and the alternation of the night and the day are signs for those of understanding. Who remember Allah while standing or sitting or [lying] on their sides and give thought to the creation of the heavens and the earth, [saying], "Our Lord, You did not create this aimlessly; exalted are You [above such a thing]; then protect us from the punishment of the Fire." (3/190)

So, the answer to the second question about being provided for and being protected depends on your presence with God. God tells that He is with you, but your conscience of His presence is what determines whether you can see His hand at work or not.

"... and He is with you wherever you are..." (57/4)

In the end, what is so interesting is that Allah encourages us to put Himself to test in order for us to reach ultimate conviction in our belief and to completely and sincerely submit to Him.

Peace on the Messenger

"But Allah would not punish them while you, [O Muhammad], are among them, and Allah would not punish them while they seek forgiveness." (8/33)

Although this verse initially addresses the disbelievers of the time, it puts forward a timeless rule. To stay safe from punishments both in this world and in the hereafter, we need to keep the messenger of God among ourselves and we need to repent for our sins. In this blog, I would like to ponder on the first half of this rule, i.e. keeping the messenger among ourselves.

Yes, it doesn't make sense to physically keep the messenger with us. But the verse must have a message that goes beyond the life time of the prophet. What could that be?

In a previous blog, I had discussed the meaning of reciting peace on the prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings upon him). A take-home message from that discussion was that rather than a robotic reiteration of prayers for the messenger of God, deeds that are going to make him happy are closer to the spirit of salawat. This stance is similar to what I am looking for as an answer to my question above: rather than a material presence, a spirit that gives life to our deeds and fuels our thoughts...

The divine rule for sending a messenger to any creation is to choose someone from among them. So, prophet Muhammad was a human being like us. During his life time, he was physically among people, and his status as a human was well recognized. For this point, you can read two earlier blogs: Chosen From Among Us Humans and To Praise or Not To Praise the Messenger. But after his death, he was not only taken away physically but also pushed above!

Yes, he was taken by God, and was buried in Medina. His memories stayed with his companions for long. The early scholars who collected and published the hadith knew well to see that spirit, and were able make interpretations according to their times, just like their holy teacher did when not guided by revelation. In this regard, although the prophet was missing physically, he was present spiritually.

But at some point, rather than living the spirit he represented, blind imitation of his actions and literal implementation of his words started to dominate the minds. With that, Muhammad's all words pbuh became timeless, and praising him to a super or beyond human level became standard. With that standard, the questioning, understanding and re-interpreting his words as necessary became impossible. Consequently, understanding and interpreting the Quran became crippled. That is when the entire Muslim world started seeing failures and losses globally, which took place during the 19th and 20th centuries.

Today, we are still suffering from the dehumanization of the prophet Muhammad. Rather than a human being, who is in touch with the divine at times and who is using his human capacity to his best, we see a character who is timeless and above all thought processes, negating any attempts for critical thinking. This image does not reflect the reality. That means prophet Muhammad pbuh is not among us spiritually, either.

This is a sign of danger!

However, there is another border of danger related to the way we treat the messenger. If over praising and pushing out of the human boundary is the upper limit, the lower limit would be treating him like anyone:

"Do not make [your] calling of the Messenger among yourselves as the call of one of you to another. Already Allah knows those of you who slip away, concealed by others. So let those beware who dissent from the Prophet's order, lest fitnah strike them or a painful punishment." (24/63)

"O you who have believed, do not raise your voices above the voice of the Prophet or be loud to him in speech like the loudness of some of you to others, lest your deeds become worthless while you perceive not." (49/2)

"And know that among you is the Messenger of Allah . If he were to obey you in much of the matter, you would be in difficulty, but Allah has endeared to you the faith and has made it pleasing in your hearts and has made hateful to you disbelief, defiance and disobedience. Those are the [rightly] guided." (49/7)

So, instead of robotically calling peace on him hundreds of times, we could try to emulate his attitudes towards his family and other people. Instead of mechanically performing certain actions of his in worship, we could embrace his critical thinking and wisdom in seeking God's pleasure.

In short, let's be companions of his with whom he would feel pleased.