Sense and Sensibility in Islam: Linguistics, Context and Rationality

By Abdul Elah Nazer

Islam, more than 1400 years after its revival by Prophet Muhammad is still misunderstood today. The traditional Islam practised today, is not the Islam of the Prophets, Abraham and Muhammad. It has been acutely syncretized with alien concepts of Paganism, Zoroastrian and Judeo-Christian.

This book will attempt to explain some of the misunderstood verses using linguistics within its various contexts. Resorting to reason, Sense and Sensibility in Islam “sieves” out words and expressions of literalism from historicity. The resulting exegesis closely mirrors the message of the Quran as understood by the Pagan, Persian and the Judeo-Christian weltanschauung of the days of the Prophet Muhammad.

The use of logic and context of the message is paramount. Arabic lexicons are frequently consulted and ancient metaphors revealed. Myths, legends, dogmas, miracles, superstitions, and historicity will be examined in the light of modern disciplines of archaeology and it sub-discipline of epigraphy, anthropology, cosmology and other scientifi c disciplines in deciphering and “teasing” out the message to its “original” rational intent.

Contrary to popular perception, Islam is not a religion. It is in fact opposed to it, states Nazer. Traditional Islam today is a syncretic medley of traditions from Zoroastrian, Jewish and Christian traditions. While Nazer attempts to separate Original Islam from this syncretism, he asks various pertinent questions on the origins of Prophet Muhammad; the rituals perpetuated in the name of Islam by the Pagan Meccans of the Omayyad Period and later Abbasside Zoroastrian Persians and question their authenticity through linguistics, common sense and unveiled metaphors from Arabic Lexicons. Like separating wheat from chaff, Nazer “teases” out ancient words and metaphors from commonly translated rituals in today’s Islam.

What was the essence of the ancient faith, he asks? Did Abraham travel all the way to Mecca to found a faith on the ritual of prayers, or did he found a system of socio-economic reforms, which Muhammad followed, for later generations? Did Abraham build the Kaaba in Mecca? Did Mecca exist during Abraham’s time? What do the words Kaaba and Bakkah really mean? Was Bakkah the Mecca of today, or was it the Baca or Bekah of the Judaic religion? Nazer explains these words through linguistics from context and the answer may surprise many, including the followers of traditional Islam today.

Finally, Sense and Sensibility in Islam examines whether Islam is compatible with Western democracy. Is Islam a democracy or an autocracy, allied to patristic bondage as practiced in Iran and Saudi Arabia? He comes to the conclusions that Islam is a set of social reforms that lead to peace, security and human rights for all.

• Language: English
• Publisher: Xlibris US
• Release date: Apr 28, 2012
• ISBN: 9781469148328

Book preview

SENSE AND

SENSIBILITY IN

ISLAM

missing image file

LINGUISTICS, CONTEXT AND RATIONALITY

ABDUL ELAH NAZER

Copyright © 2012 by Abdul Elah Nazer.

All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the copyright owner.

To order additional copies of this book, contact:

Xlibris Corporation

1-888-795-4274

www.Xlibris.com

[e-mail]

104811

Contents

Acknowledgments

Chronology of Events

Prologue

1. Introduction and Background

2. The Perversion

3. Adam

4. Myths and Legends

5. Miracles versus Metaphors

6. Islamic Traditions, the Hadith

7. Salat, the Only True Pillar of Islam and Zakat

8. Ruku’u and Sujud: Bowing and Prostrating

9. Ramadhan, Saum, and Fasting

10. Hajj: The Pilgrimage to Mecca

11. Loss in Translation: The Tasreef Impact

12. Deen versus Religion

Epilogue

Notes

Appendix 1

Glossary of Terms

Appendix II

History of Elephant Wars

ENDNOTES

Dedicated To Those Who Reflect

missing image file

The book revealed to you is full of bliss so that people ponder upon its verses, and so that people of intellect may reflect. (Quran 38:29)

Acknowledgments

The thought-provoking articles of intellectual Muslims laboring to figure out their religion, confirmed the doubts I had harbored for the longest time. When I decided to put pen to paper, I realized that there were quite a few of us—people who thought differently on today’s version of Islam.

I would like to acknowledge the thoughts of Dr. Shabbir Ahmed of Florida, whose translation of the Quran is far advanced in thought and content than others extant today. I sincerely hope that he will not take my constructive criticisms as being thankless. With an astute mind like his, I am quite certain that he will rethink certain issues in his next edition.

To my wife—gratitude goes to you for the illuminating discussions on Islam, and for providing feedback. You often acted as the devil’s advocate to my thoughts and analysis on Qur’anic verses. Out of fourteen titles for the book, you and I independently picked out the same title. Thank you for that.

To Ms. Neme—my appreciation is also directed to you for your insight and discussions on certain areas of the text, but most of all, I sincerely thank you from taking the time, out of your busy entrepreneurial endeavors, to design the cover for the book.

To L. Bates—thank you for encouraging me to write this book. You have, over the years, repeatedly planted the seed into my head and I am very thankful. We have had diverse discussions on traditional Islam and other faith systems over time, and all have been illuminating and educational. Thank you again for going through the introduction and background. Your comments and suggestions were positively received.

To Wladek—the discussions we have had before and over the course of writing the book, have been stimulating, especially your instructive understanding on Catholic beliefs. Thank you also for reviewing the first chapter of the book. I have incorporated some of your thoughts.

And finally to my publisher, and especially Amy Ramirez from the Productions Team, without whose help, direction and support, I would have been unreservedly lost.

missing image file

With the name of Allah (who is not a deity), the eternal Nourisher, the Merciful Sustainer (of the universe)

missing image file

Portion of v. 319: Certainty, Allah (who is not a deity) is indeed aware with that (which) is in the mind.

Oh! Allah, if I have erred, it is due to my ignorance. You are indeed aware of my intent.

missing image file

19:59 And they were replaced by others who lost the Salat and followed their own desires (took a different path from that of Allah); and [who] will be met with utter disillusionment.

For the Son of man is come to seek and to save that which was lost (Luke19:10. KJV)

missing image file

Byzantium and Sassanid Empires

missing image file

Ghassanid and Lakhmid Kingdoms

Courtesy: Thomas Lessman

missing image file

Felix Arabia with kingdoms

missing image file

The Kingdoms of Israel and Judea

missing image file

Felix Arabia with kingdoms

missing image file

Sectarian Islam

Chronology of Events

Prologue

This book is primarily intended for Muslims who possess the fundamentals of today’s Islam in order to digest, research, analyze, absorb, and arrive at their own conclusions regarding the material presented. If intelligence and language are the primary factors for human success on planet earth, then there should be no hesitation in adjudicating and arriving at a conclusion.

In order for the material presented to be grasped fully, it is incumbent to divorce oneself from all forms of materials presented as Islamic history, especially the corpus of books known as the Hadith, and to begin exegesis from a clean slate devoid of preconceived notions. Since this book does not endorse extra-Qur’anic literature produced during the Omayyad and Abbasside Dynasties, it is of vital importance to shun any and all indoctrinating influences.

Its particular emphasis is on linguistics as understood by the Pagan, Sabean, Persian, and the Judeo-Christian Weltanschauung of the days of the Prophet Muhammad. This is necessary in the translation, interpretation, and in the ultimate understanding of the divine message.

The book should be of interest to academics and laity alike. Some may label it apologetic due to recent terrorist events, but serious students will cross-check the meanings with good Arabic Classical dictionaries, one of which is Lane’s Lexicon.

The central theme of the message has to be kept in mind at all times, and within context, when translating. Although the Quran is generic in its content and outside of temporal and spatial limitations, history is nevertheless regarded as an important ally of any serious student. An understanding of the geopolitical and cultural perspective of the milieu of the times is an essential ingredient to understanding the Quran. Both are briefly prescribed in the next chapter. These factors, and especially the political, the socio-economic and the judicial are the main ingredients of the message.

The book is ubiquitous with Qur’anic verses to support arguments. This, however, should not detract the earnest reader who has no familiarity with Arabic. It does not require an in-depth knowledge of the language; even those who have a passing familiarity with it will gain much. For those who have none, English renditions provide ample food for thought. Muslims conversant with Arabic should face no hurdle in understanding my intent. For those who cannot read Arabic, I must apologize for sacrificing transliterations for brevity’s sake—there are numerous Qur’anic Web sites that provide this service. However, translations, amply provided, are clear and in modern English, to which the Judeo-Christians and peoples of other faiths can refer to and compare with the traditional versions.

It must be pointed out that the ideas presented may also be the thoughts of intellectual Muslims eager to tear themselves away from traditionalism, myths, legends, and superstition in order to propel themselves into the realm of logic by rationalizing the message of the Creator. These are in clear and lucid terms.

Muhammad Sven Kalisch, a German convert to Islam and a Professor who teaches Muslim theology at the University of Munster was quoted by Asia Times Online of November 18, 2008 in an article entitled "Scandal Exposes Islam’s Weakness " [on Muhammad Sven Kalisch] as stating that:

… Kalisch does not want to harm Islam, but rather to expose what he believes to be its true nature. Islam, he argues, really is a Gnostic spiritual teaching masquerading as myth.As to his assertion, that Muhammad is not an historical figure, this topic is outside the scope of this book. However, I have subtly alluded to this concept.

Professor Joseph Kastein, an historian and an ardent Jew while declaring the following, did not obfuscate his intent:

Whether Moses lived or not, he cannot have led any mass-exodus from Egypt into Canaan (Palestine) … unambiguously confirms his assertion that Moses is unlikely to be an historical figure. Similar words were echoed by Emil Gustav Hirsch, a reform movement rabbi in the United States.

If it can be proven, that the Quran is not an historical document, but an eternal one, and is not tied to spatial and temporal components, then it beehoves us to cautiously reexamine Islamic history as presented to us by the traditionalist Muslims.

Professor Gibb states (H A R Gibb, 1947):

The Koran is essentially untranslatable; in the same way that great poetry is untranslatable. To paraphrase them in other words can only be to mutilate them, to substitute clay for fine gold, the plodding of the pedestrian intelligence for the winged flight of intuitive perception. .

All we can do is take its unique linguistic rendering and its cadence and endeavor to understand terminologies using a process of ratal (described below). This, I believe, can be interpreted to produce an approximately correct sense of the divine message.

This presentation is not meant to ridicule present-day Muslims, who prefer to understand the Quran with extra-Qur’anic texts, nor is the non-Islamic material presented meant to denigrate the faiths of others—particularly the Judeo-Christians. For the Muslim, its purpose is to provoke the reader to think, rationalize, and exercise the power of linguistics rather than a mostly calque loan translation expunged from context; the use of the Quran’s variant idioms rather than superstitions and myths; the use of logic in interpreting the message, rather than literalism; and to take into consideration the infusion of misogyny prevalent in the then patriarchal society into the faith where culture interplayed with religion. Unfortunately, this misogyny still persists in some Muslim countries. It further incites the reader to the use of facts, rather than conjecture.

Myths and legends may have been necessary media needed to express universal truths in ancient cultures. They were employed as tools in understanding the message of the previous revelations. It was only when these tools were reinterpreted into a literal and historical context by the Judeo-Christians of the time, did meaning become garbled, and understanding obscure. This happens when idiomatic phrases are taken literally. People start believing in these myths as truth. How else would a people comprehend the message if their cultural context is excised?

After the Prophet’s demise, and particularly after the first four Khalifas (caliphs), the clarity of the message was obfuscated and imitations of previous scriptures became rampant under later despotic caliphs. This was due to various factors, the most important of which was, the self-aggrandizement of the Meccan and Medinian elite, who were disenfranchised by the Prophet, not in a political context, but in an economic one. The second was the honor and grandeur of the Sassanian Empire, the humiliation of which, for some, was intolerable. It took time, but when given the chance, the Persians, still stifled under the Omayyads, saw hope in the last vestige of the Prophet’s family, the Ibn Abbas, and probably avenged themselves.

Muhammad (the praised one), and including all of the preceding prophets, were highly intelligent and pragmatic individuals. Their prophetic missions were not about setting up rituals, nor were they to promulgate myths and legends. On the contrary, they were about eradicating them—like separating wheat from chaff. The basic élan of the message was the setting up of an institution where the populace would live in harmony, where man would not exploit his fellow man. This would result in a state in which oppression would be terminated and man would live with dignity, peace, and justice. This was the quest of all prophets. The message throughout history has been the same. Only when this message was discarded and literalism emphasized did religion arise.

In short, the Quran is a book on human relations. It gives directions or instructions to humanity on freedom, and shuns exploitation and slavery (of any type). It puts forth values and general principles and also gives figural examples of attributes, for example Moses (the eraser of oppression) against Pharaohs (champions of tyranny and dictatorships); Jesus (the logician) against the religious hegemony of the Sanhedrin and the oppression of the Romans; Muhammad (the praised one) against the domination and social injustice of the Arabs towards their own people—much like the Spring Arab Awakening towards their rulers—the case then, however, was more profound and with shattering consequences.

The prevalent state of the Muslim society where I grew up discouraged women from being educated; relegated to second-class citizens, treated as unclean at least once a month, and had no say in the family household. They could not even sit in the company of men, other than their own families. Thus, no exchange of ideas took place between opposite genders. The reasons given were that Islam demanded this and that a woman’s place was in the kitchen.

How these ancient Judaic concepts crept into Islam is not hard to trace. This view left me at a particular intellectual disadvantage in the early development of my life. Having lost my father at an innocent age of six, and in the care of an unschooled mother, my young pliable mind was inadvertently indoctrinated with myths and superstitions. This misogyny, coupled with the deprivation of education for women, and accentuated by the restriction to question the faith, was one of the fundamental reasons why I needed to investigate Islam at an early age.

Being but a youth, I needed to acquire the tools necessary to understand the religion of my birth parents. For a large part of my life, I became an agnostic—with a brief stretch of atheism in between—and when guilt overwhelmed me under desperate situations, I once again took up the mantle of religion—how hypocritical of me, but I was na’i’ve then. I now believe that I have acquired the necessary ingredients for exploration. I am of mature age and living in an environment that fosters education and critical thinking; an environment in which information is readily available and technology ever so expansive. This was the time to pen my findings to the world.

I cannot bear but endeavor to fathom this religion in detail. What I discovered shocked me into disbelief at first. It took a good while before I could digest the truth from within the Quran, and how it diametrically opposed the religion of my parents. It was the opposite of what I had been led to believe. The Islam that left my mother bereft of education, and women as mere chattels; and so many intelligent men and women confounded in the hands of the panjandrum clergy was in fact, not Islam.

After a careful piecemeal study and thoughtful deliberation over a number of years, I cannot let my fellow humans remain ignorant of these findings—that the Quran is completely devoid of such accusations. I discovered that Islam is not a religion but rather opposed to it. It is a path enshrined with permanent value systems necessary for attaining security and peace within which every human should be able to live with freedom and dignity; and that all humans under God are equal and the best of them are those whose conduct leads them to human rights.

In the West, that perennial media question that always catches my attention is Is Islam compatible with democracy? I rephrase this into: Is Western democracy compatible with Islam? After all, Islam was founded way before Western democracy was. The answer to this question is provided in almost every section of this book.

Fourteen centuries have elapsed since the Quran was revealed to the praised one (Prophet Muhammad). The message still remains a mystery to the majority of Muslims—let alone others. Their true meanings remain obscured by literalism, myths, legends, superstitions, and shrouded in controversies.

I do not lay claim to have understood the Quran in its entirety. I am a student, and whatever I have discovered if perceived as a conflict with the Islam of Abraham in the Quran would necessitate constructive criticisms with substatiation from my readers. I am sure you do realize that translating the Quran into English is an onerous task indeed. Sometimes there are no words to convey the exact meaning. I hope you will bear with me in this regard. Therefore, I implore the reader to weigh carefully and consider rationally, and not be to too quick to judge and condemn my shortcomings.

Lastly, I must emphasize the fact that I do not pretend to be an expert in Arabic grammar. Although I speak, read, and write it fluently, this may not afford me the credentials to expound—some might point out. What I have done, however, is stood on the shoulders of giants and endeavored to complement their efforts ino my own research. In an ancillary effort, I have analyzed their approach, added, subtracted, constructively criticized, improved upon, and synthesized it according to my own understanding by using the process of ratal (remaining true to tasreef, context, and the core message of the Quran), common sense, logic and consulting various classical Arabic dictionaries. The concept of tasreef will be explained in chapter 1. Should there be areas where I may have erred, constructive criticisms would be welcomed, which if deserving, will be incorporated into the next edition should there be a need for one.

For those who are eager and cannot wade through this lengthy book, chapter 7 will stand out as the jewel in the crown. This chapter and the three that follow are the most important, and their grasp will illuminate the reader’s understanding of the gist of the Quran in totality. The reader will get a rare insight into the actual meanings of terms that have been misrepresented for centuries.

While there is a widely recognized system for transliteration of Arabic into English, I have used the bare minimum. I have taken the course of presenting all Qur’anic verses in their original and pristine Arabic form. All technical terms are italicized and transliterized, while the Arabic equivalents are bordered in parentheses. Their meanings are explained from Arabic Lexicons within their contexts.

I have not differentiated the letter ‘ain (£), best pronounced as a glottal stop, in the transliteration at all times. There are times when this may have escaped my attention, and I do apologize. Those familiar with Arabic will recognize it; others will not notice the difference.

The word Allah has no translation in English as it neither bears a masculine nor a feminine gender. It also lacks the dual and plural genders. I have used the original transliterated form in many places, but have also used the word God (although He is not a god), Creator, the Almighty, and the Supreme Consciousness at other places. The word God, however, does not portray the true meaning of the Arabic Allah since we cannot conceptualize Him.

The Qur’an has also been rendered as the Profound Reading and the Recital in some places.

I will, at times, refer to Prophet Muhammad as the praised one as that is his appellation in the Quran.

Bold faced translations from the Quran are the author’s and differ substantially from traditional ones. The referenced Qur’anic verses are displayed in the following format: the chapter will be represented by digit (s) followed by a colon; followed by the verse, also a digit(s). For example, the chapter of the Cow, the second chapter of the Quran will be represented as 2, then the colon (:) and following that, the verse. If we suppose that we need to check chapter 2 and verse 2, then the representation will be 2:2.

The following chapters contain my convictions after much deliberation. I implore the Almighty for forgiveness if I have erred.

To err is human; to forgive divine.

-Alexander Pope (1688-1744)

1. Introduction and Background

The aim of education should be to teach us how to think rather than what to think; to improve our minds so as to enable us to think for ourselves rather than load our memory with thoughts of other men.

—Bill Beatte

It may seem redundant to the casual reader—particularly a follower of Islam—but the word Islam needs to be redefined from the commonly understood meaning. The obvious common meaning is to surrender or submit to the will of God. This meaning is a declension and, therefore, a derivative of the root word. The words Muslim and Mu’min come under the paradigm of Mifa’al which in Arabic means the action of a doer. A Muslim is a provider of Salam or peace. Similarly, a Mu’min is a provider of Amn, or security. While the former has the root Seen-Lam-Meem[1] missing image file the latter has missing image file Alif- Meem-Noon, as the root. From the former, we get salaam, which means peace, related to the Hebrew word shalom, while the latter produces the word iman, which means to be secure in something, like having faith in something or someone. One cannot obtain peace in a country until there is security. The Quran will distinguish the meanings for us by a process called tasreef.

Tasreef is a cross-referencing technique within the Quran. Whenever we are in doubt about the meaning of a word or an expression in a particular context, then looking up a similar word or expression in another verse usually confirms the meaning, provided the context has no change. Salama has the meaning of submission or surrender to something. So what is that something? It is the ideology of peace provided by God, which ultimately brings peace from security. In certain contexts, it is synonymous with the word tasbeeh missing image file the meaning of which will be apparent when we discuss verse 62:1 below. The word aslama missing image file which here means, he surrendered to the laws of the universe, is given in the verse 3:83 below.

missing image file

3:83 Do they seek other than the Deen of Allah (path of Allah, who is not a god), while all in the heavens and earth (universe), willing or unwilling, have submitted (surrender through physical laws) to His Will, and to Him is the return?

The concept of Allah will not be described in this book as we have none (see 24:35; 42:11, and 6:103). Suffice it to say that He is not a deity as He Himself tells us in the Quran, and hence not an object of worship but is metaphorically described to us as energy upon energy of supreme consciousness who dwells within us (see 50:16). The word ilah does not really refer to an idol; it rather refers to an ideology.

For those not conversant with Arabic, the willing or unwilling, have submitted above, implies that everything in the universe is compelled to follow universal laws—no other option. Now compare how the word tasbeeh, the derivative of which is yusabihu missing image file the third person singular masculine, and is the very first Arabic word read from right to left in verse 62:1 below. In the context provided, the general meaning is similar to the word aslama missing image file and hence the two words here are almost synonymous in context. Please also check verses 64:1, 17:44, and 24:41.

missing image file

62:1[2] All that is in the heavens and earth glorify Allah (through physical laws), The Sublime King, the Magnanimous, and the Omniscient.

The word yusabihu has the root missing image file Sa-Ba-Ha which means to swim, but in this particular context, it implies the course of elliptical orbits of planets and stars in the heavens that swim—follow an elliptical path. Biological forms are also subservient to these forces, be it gravity or any other natural law. Life depends on these forces of nature. This verse includes both the inanimate and animate objects. Therefore, salama is only achieved when we submit to the laws of Allah.

You might be tempted to ask whether we, as humans, have any choice in the matter. No, we don’t in the case of universal laws, but we do have a choice in the case of social laws. The above verse just gives a glimpse that every other animal species obeys the laws of the universe instinctively, but humans are special in having free will, for although they too must live under universal laws, they do, however, have a choice of obeying or denying these social laws. Social laws are meant for humans, although a variety of animals have them instinctively too—no option. It is in this context that we get the definition of Islam as submission or surrender to the will of God.

We have seen linguistically that a Muslim is one who provides peace through submitting to the laws of God. This is the quality or attribute of a person, and by linguistic definition, is any person who provides peace and protection to others deserves to be called a Muslim. So linguistically speaking, a Muslim is not necessarily the one born of Muslim parents, but can be a Christian, Jew, a Hindu, a Sikh, or any person who provides peace and security to others. Here is proof from the Quran:

missing image file

2:62 Indeed those who seek to be secure (those who seek peace and security); and including the Judahites; and the Nazarenes; and Sabaeans (any believer in peace); whoever seeks security in Allah (who is not a god), and the Last Day (the day when peace will reign supreme) and does good deeds (for the benefit of a peaceful society), will have rewards from Allah; and should fear nothing nor should he grieve.

We need to realize from the onset, that the names as presented in the Quran are actually attributes of people and do not refer per se to a people in a historical context, although a semblance of the attributes of these people may have existed and will continue to exist.

The only proviso for a reward, God says, is leading a life of peace under the values and parameters set by Him, which should, in the long run, translate into peace. He (who is not a god) doesn’t share His laws with any human. The argument runs like this: If you are prepared to submit to the creation of this incredible universe with its subsequent laws as having emanated from God—an incredible feat by any human standards—then submitting to His social laws that should similarly be perfect, makes perfect logical sense. Applying this logic, we come to submit to social laws. In this sense, the definition of surrender or submission is derived from the word Islam. You are at peace because of your surrender logically to the plan, the Deen which is the social law of God on earth.

The word amana complements the word salama. A Mu’min’ is the provider of safety and security. How is one to achieve this state of security and peace? This will only happen when one follows the commandments of social laws—the Deen, the path to security.

The following verse admonishes the pagan Arabs for claiming that they have faith (security) in the system and clearly demonstrates the difference and the relationship of the two words, salama and amana.

missing image file

49:14 The Arabs claim, We have attained security. "But tell them (O Prophet): You have not. (They instead should have said), We have submitted (to the System of Deen), for the security (of understanding the plan) has not yet entered your hearts (their minds have not yet attained conviction, only then can they call themselves Mu’mins). Yet, if you obey Allah and His messenger, He will not belittle any of your works. Allah is forgiving, most Merciful."

Tasreef on the word the Arabs missing image file in the verse33:20 clearly distinguishes the Arab townsfolk from the Bedouins; hence, the proper translation in this verse of the word, the Arabs missing image file should be the Arabs as opposed to other translators who have translated it as Bedouins. The verse below gives us the answers.

missing image file

33:20 They thought the partisans (enemy) hadn’t withdrawn, but (even) if they did come, they (hypocrites) would have preferred to be in the desert with the Bedouins (baadu-naa fil-a’rab, missing image file enquiring of you. Had they been in your midst, they would but fight a little (a pretense).Therefore, in Islam, submission is a pre-requisite to Iman, the attainment of faith in the system. See how Allah sequentially uses these terms in the following verse to describe His attributes. Both words have been used in the following verse where two of the attributes of peace and security are extolled (since all these terms are proper nouns, they should be referred to as His alternate names). Once human logic accepts the surrender of the Almighty mentally, then the one at peace with his Creator should also be at peace with others through action, that is, following the system so that security is attained for the community, and this involves deeds and actions—deeds that would foster brotherhood and human rights and would eventually lead to peace and prosperity.

missing image file

59:23 He is Allah, who is not a god, except Him (We personify Him due to our ignorance and a need for worship),The Supreme King; The Immaculate; the Peace; the Provider of security; The Guardian of all; the Majestic; the Powerful; the Possessor of Greatness; Glorious is Allah, far above what they ascribe to Him.

As pointed out before, there is no suitable word for Allah in the English language. He denies being a god whom the pagans worshipped, nor is He immanent in the sense of being deistic and He certainly is not a material being, but instead, He dictates His attributes to us and tells us nothing more. See verses 2:255 where again He denies being a god and many other verses emphasize on this as He extols His other attributes. In 3:28 Allah describes Himself as nafsahu i.e. His Self or His Consciousness. This is the Great Consciousness we call Allah. There are no words to describe Him in our languages. This is the limitation of language and thus the limitation of our knowledge. See 17:85 where He states that we do not possess the knowledge to understand the conduit of the revelations and the mode of their communication to prophets, so how can we conceptualize the source of these revelations?

The main reason for quoting this verse, however, was to point out the linguistic difference between a Muslim and a mu’min according to the Quran. In verse 49:14, the words used are aslamna missing image file and amanna missing image file respectively. The pagans stated that they had attained the state of security, amn missing image file but Allah tells the Prophet to reply that it was not so. Rather they should have said that they had surrendered to the system by paying lip-service to the system of Deen. In reality, they had not yet attained faith in the system. The only time that they would acquire the status of a mu’min would have been to acquiesce to the commandments of Allah by following the Prophet. In corroboration, the next verse suggests that you first have to surrender yourself fully to Islam (peace) before you put the system of belief in action for others to experience peace. Surrender to the Deen of Islam first. Read how God admonishes those half-hearted individuals.

missing image file

2:208 Oh those who seek to be safe and secure; surrender yourselves entirely (not half-heartedly), and do not follow Satan’s (ideas of oppressors) footsteps, for certainly, he is your ardent foe.Your surrender to the system of Deen of Islam has to be in full—make a full study of it and understand its principles. When you have acquired faith in the system and followed it practically, then only can you call yourself a mu’min. The path to full peace is to have faith in the programmed system of Deen. And in order to implement this programmed system, the modus operandi given is Salat (See chapter 7).

Salat missing image file is not a ritual prayer as will be shown under chapter 7, but the commitment to bonding very closely to the laws of Deen. There shall be no deviation and no following the systems of men. This word that today carries the meaning of ritual prayers and the word Zakat missing image file that has been translated as a tithe of 2.5 percent are erroneous translations. Chapter 7 will explain the words in detail through linguistics and context from the Quran.

Contrary to popular belief, Islam is not a religion. Religion is a man-made concept, and thus contrary to the principles of the Quran and Islam. Little wonder we’ve had terrible wars in the name of religion. The difference between the terms Deen and religion will be explained in chapter 12.

From the above then, what are the definitions of these two words? Let us retrace our steps so that we understand these terms in their true intent. A Muslim, therefore, is a provider of peace through a logical understanding of the laws of God while a Mu’min, a later phase, is the provider of security by putting social laws into action through the process of Salat. Islam and Iman are hence ways to a system or state that will provide security and hence peace through social, economic, and judicial laws of God which, in turn, will produce a peaceful nation with human rights for all.

In order to establish perspective in the study of the message of the Quran, we need to familiarize ourselves, not only with the geopolitical situation, but also with the language and culture of the Bedouin and the urban pagans. We also need to be aware of the Romans, the Sassanians (Zoroastrians), the Judeans and the Christians; for they all played a part in the unfolding drama of Islam.

The Arabia of the Prophet was a different place from Felix Arabia, the Arabia of culture and learning in the South. Nevertheless, it was not a closed world, but was a place of lively contact with people speaking different languages with differing cultural traditions. The Arabs were divided into two strata, the pure Bedouin of the desert who lived in a closed society, rarely visible, very conservative, traditionalist, and admitted no new ideas into their ilk. Their mode of thinking was rigid and their societal motto was living in the tribe, with the tribe, of the tribe and for the tribe—a sort of tribal hegemony. They were a condescending lot who, even today, have a superiority complex about them.

I am reminded of the days when I was lecturing to Arab Bedouins not so long ago. During a lecture on work tools, a British engineer colleague of mine requested that I interpret into Arabic the salient points of his lecture. Emphasizing care in the use of tools, he talked about work place injuries and possible blood group transfusions as a result of careless use thereof. After I had interpreted his intent, one of the students exclaimed that he would have no need of blood from him or from anybody else except from his own tribe—theirs was royal blood. Even today their pugnacity and arrogance persists. But even these people had, from time to time, come in contact with foreigners; the wine merchants who were mostly Christian, Jews, and Persians. This fact is known from their poetry as well as with their familiarity with the Syrian Christian monks who lived in the desert, whose solitary lamps lit the darkness as guides for night travelers (Isutzu, 1964).

The others, the town dwellers, more tolerant, relatively enlightened, open to others, sometimes did embrace ideas from other cultures so long as it served their mercantile interests. The so-called Jahilliyah[3] (of both strata) produced great poets of Arabic literature like Labid, Al-A’sha, and Al Nabigha. They too shared the Bedouin traits of stubbornness and their mode of reaction in general was of the Bedouin but a tad more cosmopolitan. Please keep in mind that when we talk of Bedouins, we are talking about the Bedouins of Mecca and its environs. A divergent view of some scholars about the origins of Islam will be touched upon later in the book.

The Judahites as they were by then called were primarily resident in Medina as we are informed by Islamic history, the city that welcomed the Prophet of Islam. Most of the Christians were Nazarenes as in the following verses; the term used is missing image file nasara. Check verses 2:135, 2:140, 2:11 2: 120, and many other verses. See how verse 2:62 quoted above with respect to the attributes of nasara and yahood are rendered in chapter 7. After the demise of the Prophet, the conquered Persian Empire too played a huge part in the unfolding drama of Islam.The Persian Empire subjects who converted to Islam and those who retained their previous faith also lived among the people. After the demise of the Prophet, this melting pot of people with their concepts slowly crept into original Islam and corrupted it.

Before the death of the Prophet Muhammad (the praised one), there existed in Medina, a fully-fledged system of Islamic government ruled according to the laws of God as enshrined in the Quran. This, in turn, was conducive to the expansion of Islam outside its borders with astonishing fervor, which, within the span of a century, propelled Muslims to be in control of a vast territory. However, other than Muslim sources, and there is no corroboration from sources outside the pale of Islam that this event ever took place. There is neither historical nor archeological data to verify these sources. The Quran is silent as it is a generic template only.But we are given hints as to its completion (V.5:3).

According to Islamic sources, as Muhammad lay on his deathbed in Medina, an expedition was being assembled on the outskirts of the town whose task was to pave the way for Islam in Syria. After all, the Quran had designated him as rahmatun lil’alameen, … to be the nourisher of (peace) to the world (i.e., to enlighten the world to human rights, see verse 21:107). Islamic history has informed us that the praised one sent letters to that effect to Roman and Sassanid Kings.

Orientalists of the twentieth century, on the other hand, state he set forth to conquer the world with the sword. Would the Prophet, and later his companions, ignore the verse that commanded them to shun violence and only fight in self-defense? Would he, after reading verse 59:23 extolling the attributes of peace and security in God Himself, commit violence? After the misconstrued verses have been deciphered in this book, then only will you, the reader, to be able to come to your own conclusion. Later, you will come across what Napoleon Bonaparte has to say about Islam.

If we take Islamic history seriously, then for the next two years, the Muslim leaders were busy suppressing revolts of pagan reverts in Arabia, but in the following ten years, this small state with its center in Medina, wrested the rich provinces of Syria and Egypt from the Byzantine Empire and that of Iraq from the Persian Empire, sending the latter reeling to destruction. However, (Yehuda and Koren, 2003) dispute these assumptions through numismatic and epigraphic evidence.

This book will discuss a few themes that have been misrepresented or misunderstood. To highlight the essence of the message, permanent values and principles will be presented. One especially important pillar, if we may call it that, will specifically be targeted and this is the pillar of Salat translated as a ritual prayer to be performed three times a day by the Shiahs and five times by the Sunnis. Zakat, traditionally translated as charity and formulated to be 2.5 percent of one’s wealth in any one year by the traditional Jurists, has also been misrepresented. This book will attempt to show that Salat and Zakat, as well as Saum (fasting) and Hajj (the Pilgrimage to Mecca) have entirely different meanings to what they have been traditionally purported to have. Other verses commonly misinterpreted and, hence, misunderstood will appear throughout the book as deemed appropriate. It is opportune here to quote John Penrice’s Dictionary and Glossary of the Quran:

"It is not to be expected that all the transcendent [excellences] and miraculous beauties of the Koran by its commentators and others should immediately unveil themselves to our cold and [unsympathetic] gaze; beauties there are many and great; ideas highly poetical and clothed in rich and appropriate language’ which not infrequently rises to a sublimity far beyond the reach of any translation; but it is unfortunately the case that many of those graces which present themselves to the admiration of the finished scholar are but so many stumbling-blocks in the way of the beginner; the marvelous conciseness which adds so greatly to the force and energy of its expressions cannot fail to perplex him, while the frequent use of the ellipse leaves in his mind a feeling of vagueness not altogether out of character in a work of its oracular and soi-dis-ant prophetic nature. … It has been the privilege of the Koran rather to impose its own laws upon grammar than to accept them from other sources; and as it was written originally without vowel points it is not surprising that a good deal of difficulty has been experienced in framing rules to meet the various readings that have thence crept in … but will not be without value if it lighten the labors of those for whose use the book is principally designed; it has no claim to originality, it merely presents to the reader in a succinct form that which the writer has culled for his benefit from the works of others"(Penrice, The Dictionary and Glossary of the Quran, 1873, 1991).

A hundred years after the praised one’s (Muhammad) death, the sway of successes extended from north of the Pyrenees through North Africa and the Fertile Crescent to Transoxiana (Central Asia) and the Punjab (Rahman, Fazlur, 1979). However, this was not to last. The reasons, as we shall discover in the following chapters are numerous, the most vital being steering away from the way of the Prophet and the creation of dynasties for personal aggrandizement. I will only document this failure by elaborating on the meanderings that opposed the system of the Prophet, particularly during the Omayyad and Abbasside Periods.

Outside the Arabian Peninsula, the system of law and administration underwent a drastic change where Persian and Byzantium (see maps) local elements, including concepts, and some customs were borrowed which crystallized into a distinctive moral ethos within Islam. This provided the real constitution, and it was within this structure that the present Islamic sciences of tradition, law, and history developed (ibid). Fazlur Rahman, the late Harold H. Swift, distinguished service professor of Islamic thought at the University of Chicago, correctly pointed out that the present Islam developed out of this milieu. This, in my view, was the beginning of the perversion. Fazlur Rahman continues and I quote:

This immensely rapid intellectual development, which was a result of the interaction of the Hellenistic tradition in Syria and the basic structure of ideas supplied by the Arabic Quran, remains one of the marvels of the intellectual history of mankind (Ibid).

On the one hand, Fazlur Rahman pays glowing tribute to extraneous elements within Islam, implying that it was the complicity of the Arabic Quran and the Hellenistic tradition that uplifted Islam, and on the other hand, he claims:

This development was facilitated by the shift of the capital of the Islamic Empire from Medina to Damascus in the year AD 660 and by the fact that the Omayyad Caliphs at Damascus employed at their court certain eminent Hellenized Christian Arabs such as John of Damascus. At the same time, however, by this change a shift occurred in the relationship between the religion and state. Although it would not be correct to say that the Omayyad state had become secular and that a full cleavage had occurred between religion and state, nevertheless it is true that the state life no longer possessed that kind of relationship with religious developments which it had hitherto. Whereas previously the Caliph had enjoyed a religious and moral preeminence and his political decisions had been subservient to a religious end, the Omayyads, though their state basically retained the Islamic framework, were largely lay rulers who exercise political authority but lost a large measure of religious prestige. As a result, the specifically religious disciplines developed outside the state and, in a certain measure, out of harmony with it. (Ibid)

The constitution had already been established in Medina, and for Fazlur Rahman to say that the borrowings of the Byzantium and Persian local elements provided the basis for the real constitution is unfounded. If he were referring to a secular intellectual development, I would be inclined to concur. Was there really a need for a change at all? Wasn’t the Quran a beacon for the whole of mankind? Didn’t the Prophet fulfill his mission? Surely some administrative changes had to take place now that Islam’s implementation had crossed new frontiers. Read what Michael Hart had to say:

My choice of Mohammed to lead the list of all the world’s most influential persons may surprise some readers and may be questioned by others, but he was the only man in history who was supremely successful on both the religious and secular levels (Hart, 1978).Read what Napoleon Bonaparte had to say:I hope the time is not far off when I shall be able to unite all the wise and educated men of all countries and establish a uniform regime based on the principles of the Quran which alone are true and which alone can lead men to happiness (Cherfils, 1914).Napoleon seems to have understood the Quran more than most Muslims today. Hart wasn’t talking about post Islamic frontiers when he quoted. Wasn’t the legislative portion of the Islamic State initiated in Medina? Didn’t Muhammad apply the law in Medina? All Muslim historians accept this and so do the majority of non-Muslim historians. The Quran had already stated that Allah had perfected the Deen so why would the praised one not institute it?

missing image file

Portion of 5:3. This day have I perfected your Deen (path) for you, and have bestowed upon you My blessings, and willed that Islam be your Deen.So what was Fazlur Rahman referring to when he stated that the rapid intellectual development was a result of the interaction of the Hellenistic tradition in Syria and the basic structure of ideas supplied by the Arabic Quran? Syria was conquered after this verse was revealed and after the demise of the Prophet. Perhaps Fazlur Rahman was referring to the development of myths, superstitions, and legends. Or perhaps he was referring to the Mu’tazila, the Ahl al Kalam, otherwise, known as the rationalists.

The founder of this rationalist movement was Wasil ibn Atta (80-|3|[4]AH-699-749CE) when he broke off (‘Itazala) from Hassan al Basari (d.ll0/728CE) who was regarded as a representative of Medinian piety. The Ahl al I’tizal were stoical rationalists and followed an ancient Greek school of philosophy founded by Zeno around 308 BCE. Some historians like H. S. Nyberg (Kitab ul Intisar, Cairo, 1923) claim that they were Alids. The concept of justice is clearly formulated as one of the pillars of the Shi’ah Islam of today which differs from the six articles of faith of the Sunni Islam. The Mu’utazila stripped God of all His attributes, save His essence. The only aspect of their philosophy that the author agrees with is that they put reason beyond anything else in understanding the Profound Reading (the Quran). Whereas the orthodoxy held that the Quran was the eternal word of God, the Mu’tazila held that it was the created word of God. During the time of Caliph Ma’mun (786-833 CE), Mu’tazila thought became the state creed and whoever disagreed with them was flogged and imprisoned, as Imam Ahmed ibn Hanbal (d.24lAH / 855CE) was. This is contrary to the rulings of the Quran. From these statements, one can clearly discern a divergence from the egalitarian Islamic Government of the Prophet.

The church and state had bifurcated during the Omayyads, but instead of continuing on the Prophet’s footsteps, conflicts of opinions on matters of theology arose due to foreign cultural elements, particularly Hellenism and Hellenized Christianity. This was the beginning of the sectarian movement in which, the Omayyads, and later the Abbasids, changed the ancient faith and created a new syncretic one in its stead.

A worthy point to add here is the fact that since the Quran was revealed in Arabic, it was taken by the Arabs as evidence that it was the best language in the world. When God sent his revelations to the Israelites, the Taurat (Torah), He chose their own language. Similarly all the prophets received revelations in their own language. This is natural as the following verse reveals. Arabic, during the Omayyad period, suddenly became a sacred language. Sooner or later, the non-Arab, even up into our time, due to their veneration for the book, regard it as sacred. This attitude naturally produced repercussions during the Omayyad period when the Arab Assabiyyah were challenged by the Persian Shu’ubiyyah who claimed superiority of the Persian culture and language in Islam over that of the Arabs. This will be discusses in chapter 2.

missing image file

14:4 And We have never sent forth any messenger except with his peoples’ tongue (language), so that he might make (the message) clear to them; People go astray or attain guidance according to Allah’s laws (according to the overall scheme of natural laws and how your brain perceives); He alone is Almighty, truly Omniscient.

During the Abbasside period, the church and the state reunited again. This is not to say that all was well. The Abbasside despots relinquished all religious matters to the Persian intelligentsia, who were hugely responsible to bring about the fall of the Omayyads and pave the way for the Abbasids. The Persians were rewarded by being the custodians of religion. This is when further syncretization took place.

In order to supplement our understanding, a thorough familiarity of the geopolitical situation during and after the time of the Prophet will provide us a very helpful perspective. Before Islam, there were two super-powers of influence and both had their Arab vassal states acting as buffers against each other (see maps). Historically, during the sixth century, rivalry between Byzantium Chalcedons (Christ has two natures, one divine and one human) and Sassanid Persia under Chosroe Anushirvan (616-629 CE). Heraclius, a Greek under the Roman Dominion (c. 575-641 CE), a representative of the eastern part of the Roman Empire, and Chosroe Anushirvan played havoc with the world. The Byzantium Empire under Justinian, the predecessor of Heraclius, realized that to defend itself from the Persians, it needed an ally and found it in the Ghassanids,[5] who were Monophysite Christians (the doctrine of one nature of Christ, the divine). This was approximately the year 529 CE in what are today the combined countries of Syria and Jordan that the Ghassanids played a significant part under Harith Ibn Jabala, the leader of the Arabs of Syria. Justinian had hoped that Harith would neutralize the Lakhmids[6] who were Nestorian Christians (Christ doesn’t have two natures in one person, but two natures, one divine and the other human). This was the Persian vassal state. The first Ghassanid ruler to mold the Arabs of what are now Syria and Jordan into a cohesive tribal confederation was the dynamic and charismatic al-Harith Ibn Jabala (Aretas). The sixth-century Syrian churchman, John of Ephesus, put it such:

He was held in … awe and terror by all the nomad tribes of Syria …

The Lakhmid kingdom was a center of Christianity in the east, probably Nestorian, and was cultivated by the Sassanians against the Orthodox religion of Byzantium. The Lakhmids remained prominent throughout the sixth century. Because of suspicion of treason in 602 CE, the last Lakhmid king, Nu’man III, was put to death by the Sassanid king, Chosroe II, and the kingdom annexed. Islam assailed the Sassanian Empire in the seventh century, but the city was abandoned. It is now widely accepted that the annexation of the Lakhmids was one of the main causes of the decline of the Sassanid dynasty and the subsequent conquest of Persia by Muslims.

We shall, in the next chapter, tackle the very controversial topic of the perversion of the three Abrahamic faiths that today have schisms contrary to the commandment of God:

Establish the Divine System of Life and make no sects in it (42:1 3).

2. The Perversion

There are many things that are true which it is not useful for the vulgar crowd to know; and certain things which although they are false it is expedient for the people to believe otherwise.—St. Augustine, City of God.Tradition is the living faith of the dead; traditionalism is the dead faith of the living.—Jaroslav PelikanAll the religions of the world, while they may differ in other respects, unitedly proclaim that nothing lives in this world but Truth.—Mohandas GandhiWhat St. Augustine meant was that Christianity evolved into historicity as a result of corruption of a higher form already extant; it was not a new religion. It only gained favor centuries later with the masses, including the West, purely because of its success in conveying the message to the uninitiated and overall lack of intelligence of the people, by portraying it literally. In doing so, continues Tom Harpur:… it inevitably distorted its truths into ludicrous caricature and baneful forms of error and falsehood(Harpur, 2004).I daresay that this is also true of present-day Islam.

Alvin Boyd Kuhn, in his book, The Shadow of the Third Century, deeply influenced Tom Harpur. In his book, The Pagan Christ, Harpur stated that the truth about early Christian history has been sadly suppressed and that Kuhn proved, in no uncertain terms, that it was deliberate and with the involvement of its clergy and that this was the pattern throughout ecclesiastical history (ibid).

The Judeo-Christian dogma was not an isolated case. Muslims did the same thing as we shall see later. The taqleed or imitation from the predecessor religions has been rife throughout Islamic history. This should not be surprising because all systems, or religions, as they had become, stem from one God. The problem is not in the imitation of the Bible vis-avis the Quran, as has been continuously asserted, but in not being able to discern the message from legends, myths, superstitions that have been woven into scripture through allegories and metaphors. The older generation, be they Judeo-Christian or Muslim, could no longer grasp the idiomatic language in which their scriptures were couched in—or so it seems. According to Kuhn, they were deliberately distorted.

In 458 BCE Judaism was losing its footing, when humanity was ready to acknowledge the one true living God and shun away from idols and tribal gods. Prior to that period, all was legend and mythology, and distinct from the period that followed. In that period, there were only oral traditions. The documentary period begins roughly around 680-458 BCE when Judah, the southern kingdom, was not even acknowledged by the northern kingdom of Israel. It was precisely at this time that oral tradition started to be documented and that’s when the perversion crept in. Surviving words of the Israelites show that their belief was one of a universal God and the Quran corroborates that (Quran 4:46).

Moses (the destroyer of oppression) was a great tribal leader who heard the voice of one God speak from a burning bush subsequently receiving moral commandments. The time when this tradition took form was when the idea was planted in the minds of men. All manner of people began borrowing from each other’s thoughts and traditions. The idea of one God may have come from the Egyptians, although the earlier Egyptians themselves may have received it from others. The attribute of Moses and his law were taken from material already existing. It seems that the story of Moses in the bushes was borrowed from a much earlier legend, with which it is identical of a king of Babylonia, Sargon the Elder, who lived