Not Reform but Return to the Qur'an
http://www.quranic.org/quran_article/3/not_reform_but_return_to_the_quran.htm
The primitiveness, the ugliness and the contradictions displayed in the name of
Islam make it indispensable to clarify where we stand and what should be done
to redirect people who have been diverted from the true path described in the
Quran. Muhammad Ikbal, ill at ease at the sight of this state of affairs, had
made the following remark in the 1920s: “If we are resolved to describe Islam
as a system of superior values, we are obliged, first of all, to acknowledge
that we are not the true representatives of Islam.” Muhammad Abduh had, before
him, expressed the same truth in the following words: “If the word ‘Islam’
associates in the mind problems, dilemmas and contradictions, this is due not
to Islam itself, but to the Muslims. So long as the books taught at Al Azhar
and similar publications exert authority, I see no future for this community.
The spirit needed to awaken the public is inherent in the Quran.
Everything remaining outside the sphere of the Quran is but an obstacle
preventing the Quran from being understood and experienced.” The famous Turkish
poet Mehmet Akif Ersoy had the following to say to describe the plight of Islam
that the interpreters had corrupted in total disregard of the clear indications
of the Quran: “If it is the Quran that is understood by the word ‘Islam’, we
must be in a position to acknowledge that there is no such thing as Islam,
since the Quran has been raised back to the heights and the Islam on the earth
today has lost all contact with it.” An American professor of Arabic origin,
Ýsmail Faruki, interprets the situation as follows: “Islam is not represented
by the lifestyle and behavior of Muslims, nor is it represented by any one
period of history of Islam, nor by any book written on Islam. Islam is the
Quran.”
THIS IS NOT A POPULIST MOVEMENT
The majority of the public among whom the number of thinkers is considerable
wants to see Islam in its original garb and cleansed from its corrupted state
of today. This is not a populist movement. In other words what is purported
here is not to make Islam attractive in the sight of large masses. The origin
of it lies in the contradictions created between the Quran, which is the only
source of Islam, and the actual practices developed throughout the ages. The
objective is not to shape Islam into a new form that will seem attractive to
the general public, but to reinstate the true Islam as revealed by God. The
religion propounded in the Quran is, in fact, more gratifying for mankind, in
which love and tolerance have a larger share. This is why it is generally
appreciated. The main objective is not to please the public, but it is one of
the consequences.
A movement whose origin is mere enjoyment by the general masses would be
inclined to shape the religious practices as they seem attractive to them, and
in this design, cultural traits and political ends have a great share. The
renaissance and the reform movement in the wake of the French Revolution may be
shown as examples. Whatever is subjective – that is human – cannot be defined
as religion.
THERE WAS A TIME WHEN NO SECTS EXISTED
During the lifetime of the Prophet and the Four Caliphs there was no religious
source other than the Quran (see Chapter 11). Men were not members of any
particular sect. They practiced what the Quran prescribed to them and were free
in points when there was no prescription in the Quran, according to their own
appreciation, customs and conventions. No opinions were told in the name of
such schools as Sunni, Hanafi, Shafi, Shii, Alawi or Jafari. They simply called
themselves Muslims. And this fact satisfied them. Even the most illiterate of
the Beduoins during the lifetime of the Prophet practiced Islam according to
their own interpretations and were Muslims. That is what we are after today: to
be simply a Muslim without having to belong to any particular sect and to abide
by the Quran’s dictates which never change, which involve no contradictions and
which are logical and rational as laid down by God.
One God, one religion and one book will clear up the confusion that the masses
are suffering at present. The aim is to stick to the Quran exclusively and to
refuse to acknowledge all other sources. To interpret the elbowroom that the
Quran recognizes as applied in a particular period is not our objective.
However, if we conceive the free zone of action about which the Quran is
reluctant as a place where we are left to our own devices, we can find the true
path and correct the mistakes we have committed in the name of religion. The
corruptions have been mostly in points where there is no explicit commandment
in the Quran (see Chapter 39).
In realizing this we must be conscious of the fact that it is God’s will. This
may be established by the views expressed in Chapter 2 of our book about the
exclusivity of the Quran. We shall be quoting verses other than those already
cited about the self-sufficiency of the Quran to substantiate our claim. We
shall presently take awareness of the fact that what has been alleged to be
Islam up until now has been but a mixture of elements alien to Islam, a blend
of hadiths and traditions and personal views which eventually assumed the garb
of religion where truths and untruths have became inextricably mixed. Had the
hadiths been a source of Islam like the Quran, it would have followed that it
was hopelessly contaminated. To make clear that the sayings attributed to
Muhammad cannot constitute a source of religion would liberate both Islam and
the Prophet from irrelevant authorization. We shall see in the coming pages
that the hadiths conflict with the Quran in many instances,
that they are self-contradictory, illogical and that they have a supplementary
character. When you see that the Prophet himself and the Four Caliphs were
unwilling to see the hadiths written down (see Chapters 4, 10 and 11), you will
see once again the rationale behind it and clear the path that leads to the
Quran.
LET US SET ISLAM FREE FROM THE MONOPOLY OF IDOLIZED MASTERS
Having cleansed Islam from alien elements and entrusted it to the sole
exclusivity of the Quran, we must liberate Islam from the dominance of tabooed
masters. Unless this is achieved, we cannot expect a rapprochement between the
Sunni, and the Alawi, the Shii and the Hanafi, the Shafi and the Jafari. (We
must make clear that we are Sunnis in the sense we are faithful to the Prophet,
and Shiites and Alawis in the sense that we love Ali, the son-in-law of the
Prophet. Yet, we are not concerned with the linguistic meanings of these, but
rather with the sociological meanings they have assumed throughout history and
the structural formations that have come about, full of elements alien to the
Quran.)
They will say: “Our Lord! We have obeyed our leaders and the elders, but they
led us astray.” (Quran 33:67)
The members of the Sunni branch of Islam must cease to dignify Abu Hanifa, Imam
Shafi, Imam Maliki and Imam Hanbali. They must cease believing in such
statements, as “Abu Hanifa was a great man; so great in fact that he had seen
God in his dream 99 times.” Along with the aforementioned Imams, the
traditionalists Bukhari, Muslim, Tirmizi, Abu Davud, etc. must clear the path
that leads to the one truth, the truth of the Quran. The Shiites must cease to
declare: “Our Imams are innocent, they never err” and rid themselves from
powers assignable to the Prophet and the Quran. They must cease to believe in
the existence of a source outside the Quran and of a religious leader other
than the Prophet. They should know that to be a descendant of the Prophet does
not mean he has holiness. The swerving from the straight path of Abraham’s
father and of Lot’s wife is related in the Quran.
Considering that someone related to a given prophet is liable to be doomed even
during the lifetime of the prophet in question, ascribing superiority to a
distant descendant of a prophet and, in so doing, being oblivious of the Book
sent by God as a guide, a divine favor and a mercy (16 The Honey Bees, 89) is
inconceivable. We must note that there is something that sects excel in: the
skill of seeing through the faults of others. For instance, the Sunnis
justifiably level criticism at the Shiites’ blind obedience to their imams,
while they declare their own imams, Hanafi, Shafi, Hanbali and Maliki,
blameless and forget that they live by their instructions rather than by the
precepts of the Quran.
While they perform a binding duty of the religion according to a given sect,
the very act they perform quite often proves to be unlawful according to
another sect, and while the religion sent by God is one and unique, the
emerging result is a plurality of concepts and practices (e.g. Chapter 14 on
sects).The eye that skillfully detects the idolization of imams happens to be
blind at its similar practice; the eye seems to be unable to see itself. While
it accuses the other of disagreement, it styles itself as the only accepted
denomination. If you follow the sayings of particular individuals, what makes
you different from your brother? The person whom we revere happens to be the
wisest person, while the others are but separatists. What is the exact
criterion according to which these people can be classified? Had you adopted
the Quran as the only authority, you would not have sought other guides. Their
controversies make them forget this truth.
RELIGIOSITY AND ATHEISTIC FANATICISM
The Quran, the revelation recited, contains all the messages that our Creator
wanted us to know in the name of religion. It is God’s revelation that provides
for every eventuality. Changes do occur in life, this is incontestable; but
being able to provide for every probability is a miracle inherent in the
structure of God’s revelation. This fact prevents the necessity of carrying out
reforms. There are two communities, however, that draw their powers from the
prevailing pseudo-religion: the fanatic atheists and the staunch defenders of
adulterated practices misnamed religion. While the latter strictly abides by
the said adulterated practices, the former makes every effort to swerve the
latter from the path of Salvation, trying to level criticism at the prevailing
practices as false reasoning. On the other hand, the religious fanatic embraces
his false convictions still more tightly, condemning those who remain outside
their sphere, whom they style as wood for hell’s fire.
Although their practices differ, both systems live on the same capital. These
are the two main communities that are reluctant to return to the Quran.
The infidel will go nowhere having been divested from the assets he would have
used as means that would have enabled him to launch attacks on religion. The
religious fanatic will be infuriated at having been stripped of his
conventional trappings and will have recourse to the mechanisms of
excommunication and hatred. We should not be surprised at the fact that the
excommunicators are university professors; that the sects and orders find huge
masses of supporters; and that these ideologies have their so-called
intellectual media. We learn from the Quran that when a new idea crops up, the
objection will be raised first by the prominent personalities of the
established order. The professors, the staunch defenders of conservative
practices, the sheikhs who based their orders on the established system will be
in the forefront of those who attack the Islam of the Quran for fear of being
divested of their authority and losing their charisma that they have built up
throughout long
years. If we remember that those who attempted the life of Jesus Christ were
prominent rabbis, we must not be puzzled by the fact that those who argue
against the Islam of the Quran are self-styled religious personalities.
Religion’s worst enemy is the exploiter of religion.
The majority of Muslims can see this illustrated in the inquisition that
excommunicated people and in the act of confession. The same eye that sees
this, happens to be blind to its own wrongdoing in contriving a new religion
that aims to replace the one preached in the Quran. Islam also has been subject
to cruel dealings just like during the war waged by the Christian clergy in
their attempt to monopolize religion. Just as the miracles performed by saints
and clerics have become legendary, so the sheikhs’ and imams’ power of sanctity
and their alleged vision of God in their dreams made them necessity of their
faiths.
It depends on us to return to the Quran and avoid being corrupted by the
personal viewpoints of the Arab-Omayyad sovereignty. In this way, a new link
will be established between man and the religion alienated from man. The
solution is not reform but rejection of what is foreign to the Quran. Nor is
this movement an attempt at the reunification of sects. The reunification of
phony ideologies would be absurd anyway. The religion is unique and all other
attributions are irrelevant. The Quran that towers high above sects must be
reinstated as the only and unique source. The Omayyads and the Abbasids
attempted to bring reforms to Islam by adding adjectives like Hanafi and Shafi
to their conceptions of Islam, transforming what was from God into human work.
The thing that should be done today is not reform God’s religion but reform the
pseudo-religion; in other words a restructuring. This is returning to the
essence rather than reforming.
____________________________________________________________________________________
Be a better Heartthrob. Get better relationship answers from someone who knows.
Yahoo! Answers - Check it out.
http://answers.yahoo.com/dir/?link=list&sid=396545433
