Some Problems 3

(11) Sin

Critic:-

There are some things in the Quran that can be and are regarded by many people as being immoral.

Comment:-

What do you mean by immoral and moral? Is the judgement purely subjective? Does it simply depend on personal whim, or accident of circumstance, or on social consensus at a particular place and time?

We take our ethics from what is revealed by Allah, the creator of the Universe and all things and therefore, also from the spirit of Allah within us that gives us true conscience (as opposed to prejudice, illusion or social conditioning) and the understanding of the revelation. That is the objective attitude. People can, however, misinterpret the Revealed Scriptures (the Quran for Muslims) according to their degree of knowledge, insight and various prejudices, whims and self-interests and their conscience may be suppressed to various degrees because of the same obstructions. That is why they are required to undergo a spiritual discipline and follow those who are further advanced in this respect.

The ultimate good is "surrender to Allah" and what ever is conducive to that is good.

The ultimate sin is rebellion against Allah which includes denial of His existence and His attributes, polytheism and idolatry. Everything that is based on that or leads to it is evil.

(12) Aisha’s age.

Critic:-

Muhammad is reported to have married Aisha, a six year old child. This is child abuse and implies that he cannot have been a Prophet.

Is there no Muslim willing to speak out and say that these rulings under Shariah law - to marry a girl before she reaches puberty, and to consummate the marriage when she is nine, and rape her if she is unwilling - are utterly outrageous? So far there has been a deafening silence: thus we see how the conscience is nullified under Islam, eliminated by mass pressure. Please, what do you REALLY think?

A Muslim:-

"They" think that everything Mohammad did was OK, because HE did it. If they would concede that Mohammad could have done anything wrong or even bad, they would cripple the entire idea and concept of the Sunnah.

There is nothing such as "good" or "bad" unless defined through Mohammad’s deeds. What he did was good, no matter what he did.

While I have no problem to dismiss history when it tells things about Mohammad that do not conform to the text or the context of the Quran, "they" would hardly dare to reject history or the Hadith literature.

Comment:-

It has been pointed out several times that when Muhammad (saw) married Aisha there was no objection to it either by Muslims or non-Muslims and not even by the parents of Aisha. Obviously it was accepted practice and there was good reason for the parents to find it so.

And there is no evidence that Aisha suffered or was unhappy. On the contrary she was devoted to the Prophet.

There is no fixed age for marriage. This varies greatly from time to time and from country to country even today and can be as low as 3 years old.

It is only now many centuries later in the West that evil-minded people raise objections without any evidence for their assertions. Do they really think that Muhammad centuries ago in Arabia should have conformed to the critics prejudices in the 21st century?

But the wish to dismiss history when it does not suit someone’s opinions cannot be regarded as admirable. How do you assess the truth or otherwise of the Hadith? Where else can one obtain the early history of the Prophet and of Islam? Much research has gone into it and much is incorporated in the culture, and there is ongoing research.

It is well known that the Hadith are like the New Testament, reports, selections and interpretations by persons other than the Prophet, and that they do not have the same authority as the Quran. What Muslims accept is the Sunna (rather than Hadith) of the Prophet according to the instructions of the Quran to obey Allah and the Messenger and not to make distinction between Allah and the Messenger (4:150).

Whereas "Islam" in the Universal sense refers to all the religions sent by God through Prophets and Messengers, it also refers to the specific religion brought through Muhammad (saw) which also incorporates the Universal (because it is this that universalises Religion). But this specific religion is based on loyalty to Muhammad (saw).

But whereas the Quran contains mostly (but not exclusively) what is Universally applicable, the Prophet applied it to the specific conditions of the times and place where he found himself - how else would he be understood and followed.

As for "What he did was good, no matter what he did". This is not quite true. The Quran itself rebukes the Prophet for some actions and guides. This rebuke is itself a lesson for us as is the insistence that he is human not God.

As for his marriage to Aisha, a good case can be made out that Aishah was considerably older than six years as stated by some reports. And that was based on other reports also in the Hadith.

Muhammad is accepted as a Prophet because of the spiritual teachings of the Quran that were revealed to him and because his life was based on these. There is no report in the Quran that Aisha was 6 year old. This idea comes from some reports in the Hadith which are not reliable. Reports give the following facts:-

Abu Bakr had four children, before his conversion to Islam, named Abdullah, Asma, Abdur-Rahman, and Aisha. Asma was ten years older than Aisha. Aisha was engaged to Jubayr ibn Mutim, before Abu Bakr accepted Islam in the first year of the Call, 12-13 BH (years before the Hijrah, the migration to Madinah). This engagement was broken of when Abu Bakr accepted Islam and went to Abyssinia 8-9 BH. Aisha remembered the Revelation of a verse known to have been revealed in 8-13 BH.

Aisha was betrothed to the prophet two years after the death of Khadijah, his first wife, 1 BH. Aisha did not accompany her father and the prophet during the Hijrah, but arrived in Madinah later. She fell sick and lost all her hair. She moved in with the prophet a year or two after the Hijrah, two to four years after her betrothal. The exact time is not certain. Aisha was widowed in 11H (the 11th year of the Hijrah). She died in 50H having been a widow for 40 years. When she died her older sister Asma was 77 years old. Asma died at the age of 100 in 73H, i.e. 23 years later.

Hisham bin Urwa reported that Aisha was 9 in 2H, was widowed in 11H and died in 50H when his grandmother was 77, ten years older than his great aunt Aisha. That is, Aisha was 67 in 50H, and would have been 16 when betrothed, and 19 when she moved in with the prophet. The only reports that Aisha was 6, or 9, comes from the same person, Hisham and is considered mistaken as every other report showing her to be much older than 6 is uncontested.

(13) Elections in Iraq (Dec 2005)

Question:-

Is the political system being set up in Iraq Islamically valid?

Comment:-

I do not think it is, though it might be the best that can be set up under present circumstances.

According to reports the people have come out to vote in great numbers because they want their own government and get rid of the invaders as soon as possible.

The fact is that the Political system in Iraq has been set up by the Americans under a massive military force and a huge Diplomatic Embassy - the biggest anywhere in the world with a great number of "advisers". They have control over the affairs, the purse and the propaganda.

The voters do not know the candidates, who put them up or what their policies are and can hardly make an informed decision. In fact, they have no say in the construction of policies. The political system will be more or less similar to the one in the USA where the small group that hold the power and wealth will have control of all things and will manipulate information, events, conditions and the people. The values they pursue will be non-Islamic Western ones and their interests will be linked with those of the power holders in the West and not necessarily with the Iraqi population.

For Islam, the Quran provides the constitution under which mutual consultation is required. This means that every small community has a local Assembly to which all members of that community (who know each other) have a right to attend and they discuss and control their local affairs. They also choose their leaders that also represent them at a higher District Assembly which controls the affairs at that higher level.

This higher Assembly, in its turn, chooses leaders and representatives who are members of a still higher National Assembly and control national affairs. Information and suggestions passes both up and down between these levels. At each of these levels there should be consultation with knowledgeable experts in the field being discussed and planned for.

The system is open-ended, so that several nations can also federate in the same way. Commercial companies, Societies based on various cultural, scientific or other interests could also be organised this way and form networks that interpenetrate and transcend geographical and national boundaries. In fact the Political system organised in this way need have no connection with existing political systems and can transcend national borders and eventually replace them. But people are not yet sufficiently developed to take up the personal responsibility that this system requires.

(14) Globalisation.

Question:-

We see that where ever the World Trade Conferences take place there are mas demonstrations against Globalisation, often leading to riots. Does Globalisation have ant relevance to Islam?

Comment:-

Globalisation has certainly relevance for Islam.

To understand this we have to get behind the propaganda and verbal assertions about it and look at the way the Conference is organised, and the sources, assumptions and motives behind it.

The delegates to the World Trade Conference represent the groups that have the power and wealth and control the Industries and Corporations throughout the world. These groups are interlinked and interdependent to a large extent and dominated by the power group in the USA. The purpose of the Conference is to increase the profits of this group. This is to be done by extending its power and control over the whole global economy, creating a single system. It is their values that are to be established worldwide.

It is not difficult to see that if there is such a global system it would make the arising of all alternatives, including Islamic ones impossible. If the system does not work or has harmful effects then there would be global disasters. If better ideologies should be presented they could only become established by a massive struggle and the destruction of the existing system. Evolution in the world takes place because there is variation and experiment, so that those systems or organisms that are successful because of some advantages multiply and progressively replace others or stimulate changes in them. This is also indicated in the Quran (e.g. 11:57, 14:19, 70:40-41, 76:28) This natural process would be abolished.

The main problem is that owing to the creation of national and industrial boundaries the flow and balance of raw materials, goods, capital, manpower, expertise and knowledge has been obstructed and the disequilibrium is increasing especially because it is also creating wastage of resources, pollution, adulteration and disruption of the environment. The self seeking of Nations and their various Corporations has caused them to form and implement discriminatory economic and political policies that are unethical, unjust and criminal. The result has been excessive riches and wastage in some countries and in others dire poverty with which disease and lack of education, economic, cultural and political organisation, technology and environmental development are also associated.

The main features of the present dominant system are as follows:-

(1) The Economic system is a Pyramidal, consists of hierarchies such that the power, wealth and control passes into the hands of fewer and fewer people the higher one goes. Owing to the smaller number at the top where the greatest rewards and privileges exist, there is a struggle towards the top, reached only by the self-seeking ambitious and ruthless trampling over others, often by foul means and by ingratiating themselves with those above them. The system does not, therefore, facilitate social integration and moral development.

(2) The employers control the livelihood of those employed and through this they control their actions, behaviour, thoughts, social interactions, way of life and even their conscience, consciousness and will. Many companies require their employees to speak in certain ways, repeat a certain sets of ideas, dress in certain ways, mix in certain companies, go to certain clubs, live in certain areas and holiday in certain places. All this is done to obtain material economic growth and ignores all social and psychological welfare and benefits, except in so far as it serves the economic purpose.

(3) The system causes a disintegration of the individual by making a distinction between owners and workers and a third force, the managers who are required to control the workers on behalf of the owners. This also leads to the separation of work, money and product and between supply, organisation and demand. Ownership is not a natural law but a legal device which allows people to own more than they can work with, and yet extract a portion of the benefits from the work of employees. The wages of the workers is less than the price of the products of their work. The owner's profit is the price of products sold minus costs which include wages and materials. The profit can be increased by raising the price of products, lowering the wages, making workers work harder to produce more, increasing efficiency of production, increasing the number of products produced and sold. There is a tendency towards expansion. If profits fall then production is discouraged and may stop while the need for goods still exists. It is clear that the greater the number of products or industries that a person can control, the less Profit he needs to make per item while yet maintaining an overall high total profit. This means that large Companies or Corporations can always sell products cheaper than smaller ones. They can also invest more in Research and Development and Mechanisation. There is a tendency to enlarge Companies by take-overs and mergers and towards the formation of Monopolies and Total control. Governments want to stop this in order to retain competition which tends towards lowering prices and greater competition. But this also stops it.

(4) Companies and Corporations have become enormous, transcended national boundaries, and become International. National governments, even when democratically elected by the people have become relatively powerless. This is because the Company can set up its business in any country where the government provides conditions that are to its advantage. National governments are forced by the need for employment for its citizens to accede to the demands of these Corporations.

These Conferences can therefore, be seen as a means to enslave the world population.

Note that there is an opposition between those within the Conference (representing the employers and power group) and those outside demonstrating against them (usually farmers, employees and small business people). The third force keeping them apart, the national police and sometimes the military, is not neutral but protects those in the conference and often assaults and is assaulted by the protesters, who are given no voice in these Conferences or any other power. But this opposition, unfortunately, tends to be futile owing to lack of power, but also because they have misunderstood the problem. It is not possible to bring about a change in policies without actually creating a radical change in ideology and organisation for the reasons given above.

Fundamentally the problem is one of disintegration, the general separation and compartmentalisation that leads to loss of coordination and to conflict. This appears to be based on the separation of spirit, mind and body and in the consequential human faculties of thought, motive and action. Politically this separation has happened not only on national lines and within nations, but it is also reflected at the economic level as a distinction between owner, manager and worker, which also leads to the loss of coordination between work, money and product. Communism appeared to have offered a solution to this problem, but it failed because it did not see its deeper roots, supposing it to be only an economic problem. It ignored the larger context that includes the psychological and social aspect, in particular the problem of power and ideas. With the collapse of Communism the only other alternative is the Islamic one. This requires the abolition of these distinctions. Partnerships, for instance, should replace the master-slave or employer-employee relationship. But this is based within a different ethical and ideological context and world view.

This requires people to break out of the narrow "horizons" that circumscribe and imprison their perceptions, motivations and actions. Islam is centred on Allah who is All-pervading and encompasses all things and all possibilities. This has psychological as well as social and physical and environmental consequences. In human affairs, this in effect, means progressive decentralisation and increasing local self-sufficiency. This is likely to be forced on nations in any case when cheap sources of energy and fuels, oil and coal, run out and the transportation of workers, raw materials and goods from and to centres of manufacture become uneconomical. It is entirely possible for efforts to be diverted to the invention and development of small scale versatile technologies that encourage independent domestic or small scale, more adaptable and skilled industries, rather than the huge centralised factories that make people anonymous cogs and where affairs are run by remote control, regimentation, and standardisation, through a huge parasitic superstructure that cream off most of the benefits.

(15) Schisms, sects and divisions

Request:-

Islam is One, but Muslims are divided and seem unable to work together though that has weakened them and proved a disaster. I am curious to know more about the divisions/schisms/break away groups since inception of Islam and the reasons why these divisions occurred.  Dates, names and reasons for these divisions would be very helpful even if these groups do not exist today. What questions should the uninformed public ask about beliefs and behaviour in order to differentiate between true Muslims and those who call themselves Muslim but are members of break away groups?

Comment:-

Divisions and schisms have occurred in all religions, not just in Islam. These divisions occur owing to differences of opinion based on human limitations mainly partial knowledge so that different sets of people see different parts according to their various experiences, situations, interests, purposes, and prejudices.

As all of us learn through life and progressively acquire more knowledge, then we are all at different stages and the existence of partial knowledge is inevitable. But there are obstructions to learning that arise from prejudice, habit, addiction, obsession and mental conditioning. This also happens when people instead of learning, simply follow a founder of a sect or are brought up in a family that adheres to a sect.

As this is a universal phenomenon and differences depends on accident of circumstance and idiosyncrasies of people there is really no point in curiosity about particular schisms and sects. This gives us no useful knowledge.

Intelligent people try to continue learning about truths not illusions.

A Christian:-

There are many interpretations of Islam, and the system for "regulating" whether a branch of belief is "true" or not is by no means simple or universally applied. Unlike Christianity, where the tenets of belief are usually set by a central body of councils (c.f. Catholic, Eastern Orthodox councils), and thereby there are in effect only a handful. Islam prides itself in having little in the way of a formalised system of creeds as this is seen as open to abuse and human error. The problem this causes dates back to the earliest days of the Islamic state after Muhammad, and mirrors the explosion of myriad sects and cults which arose within Christian circles as part of the Renaissance. The upshot is that each Muslim chooses what they believe for themselves, and provided they stick to the central tenets of Islam (the 5 pillars) then it is very difficult to turn round to someone and say that they are not a "true" Muslim. In that sense there is no hard and fast way of differentiating between "true" Muslims and others, outside of this central set of beliefs.

Anything else tends to be agreed by broad consensus which can be regional, or even specific to an individual mosque. This would be less of an issue if it were not for the fact that the Quran expects Muslims to be treated differently from non-Muslims. Hence the tendency for dissident or "breakaway" Muslims to be either accepted as Muslims yet misguided, or totally rejected as Muslims by different parts of the Ummah. Choosing the latter attitude is often a tool used by the unscrupulous to allow/condone the use of methods such as violence against other groups of Muslims. The most common example of this is the sporadic Sunni/Shiah disagreement which has occurred over the ages, which has been punctuated at times by men of violence labelling the opposing side as non-Muslim and thence "fair game". A more recent example is Al-Quida's labelling of Muslims in Western states (e.g. U.S., U.K.) as non-Muslim owing to their "allegiance" to western democracy and depravity etc., etc.

Comment:-

Islam makes each individual responsible for his own salvation. There is no priesthood or organised Church. This means that they must seek the appropriate knowledge and understanding and make the appropriate efforts.

It is not possible for another person to create understanding or faith in anyone.

The same statements can be understood differently by different people according to their different sets of experiences and efforts at understanding. Conversely, the same idea can be presented in many different verbal forms. Therefore, a pronouncement made by some central authority as to what should be believed is meaningless - It is meant only to create social uniformity, not faith or effort.

If a person P1 understands a statement S1 differently from another person P2 then we cannot say that they agree though they accept and utter the same statement.
On the other hand, if P1 accepts S1, and P2 accepts another statement S2, then we cannot say that they disagree because they may understand them the same way. It follows that sects based on different verbal understandings are illusions. They are particularly so when each has partial knowledge and adheres to different parts of the whole truth.

The intelligent thing to do is to seek to increase ones knowledge and understanding and reject the illusion that this refers to form of verbal statements. Islam requires the seeking of truth and suspension of disputation based on opinion and conjecture.

----------<O>----------

Contents