The Nature of Idols - Continued - Part 3
For many, Islam means the five pillars and the enforcement of one
of the five schools of Muslim jurisprudence. For me, Islam means
the five pillars – in both their literal and more expanded senses – along
with a use of all of the teachings of the Qur'an and the Prophet to construct
an expression of public Deen that operates in accordance with spiritual
principles that should have been part of the basis of traditional Muslim
jurisprudence but were not … and, God willing, in the near future, there
will be an elaboration of precisely what is being alluded to here within
a number of pod-casts that are, at this time, in the planning stages.
In the meantime, let me say the following: I take exception with the idea
that unless an individual adheres to someone's checklist of Muslim
legitimacy, then, their spiritual pedigree becomes suspect and such
individuals deserve the oppression which comes their way at the hands
of those who consider themselves to be spiritually pure. Whether someone
is submitting, or trying, as best she or he can, to submit to Islam, is not
a judgment which should be left in the hands of other than God or His
Prophets.
If a person were to say there were no Prophets, or there are no angels, or there
were no books of revelation, or there is no Day of Judgment, or that God is
not the determiner of good and evil, or that God is not One, then, all of this
would be to promote a Deen which is other than Islam. Or, if one were to say
that God is uninterested in whether, or not, we struggle to spiritually
purify ourselves, or that God does not encourage human beings to learn
how to worship properly, or to remember Divinity, or to do justice or
to serve human beings or to establish character in our lives or to be
loving, kind, forgiving, patient and compassionate with respect to other
human beings, or if one were to claim that God said or taught that
human beings have no duty of care to Creation, then, all of this would
be seeking something other than Islam.
There are many Christians, Jews, Native Peoples, Buddhists, Hindus, and
people of a few other spiritual traditions I have met or whom I have read
who would not have a problem with any of the foregoing principles and
practices of Islam, even if those individuals might give expression to
such principles and practices in a way that is somewhat different from
how I might have understood things.
There are many Muslims I have met who do not pray five times a day, or
who have not gone on pilgrimage, or who don't always observe the
different aspects of halal and haram, or who do not keep the fast of
Ramazan. Have these people rejected Islam? Not necessarily, but they
seem to have misplaced or given insufficient attention to some of its
components.
There are a fair number of Muslims I have met who are quite religious about
observing the five pillars of Islam but who are absolutely repugnant in terms
of how they treat other people, or with respect to the high opinion
they have of themselves, or in relation to the lack of character they often
exhibited during the course of everyday life. Are these people really
embracing the fullness of Islamic Deen, and, if not, should we say that,
perhaps, they are not acting in accordance with the requirements of
Islam and have, to this extent, rejected Islam?
Why should only those people get spiritual credit for that which is dear to
the hearts of some people – for example, observing the five pillars –
even as some of those 'observant' individuals go about their lives as
cruel, unjust, manipulative, uncaring, abusive individuals. And, why
should those people who strive, for the sake of Divinity, to be loving,
kind, compassionate, just, honest, charitable, forgiving, peaceful,
patient, humble people not get spiritual credit for this even if they
may be somewhat lax when it comes to certain forms of worship.
Islam is all inclusive. However, one engages Islam according to capacity
and God's Grace, and, therefore, being Muslim involves working on
a continuum of spiritual possibilities. “To God belongs the conclusive
argument” [Qur'an, 6, 149] … to God -- not to human beings -- belongs
the conclusive argument. People who are inclined to make judgments
about who is and who is not a Muslim have ascribed to themselves
God-like qualities to which they are not entitled.
The Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) is reported to have
said:
“Muslims are brothers and sisters in Deen, and they do not oppress
one another, nor abandon assisting each other, nor hold one
another in contempt. The seat of righteousness is the heart; therefore,
that heart which is righteous does not hold a Muslim in contempt.”
To label someone who is seeking to submit to the truth -- as best
she or he is able to do under a given set of circumstances -- as being
not a Muslim simply because the spiritual offerings of those
individuals does not precisely reflect one's own sense of what
it means to be a Muslim seems to be lacking something in the realm
of righteousness, and it borders on, if not crosses over into, the
domain of contempt for someone who may be a Muslim in God's
eyes even if that person does not appear to be a Muslim in
one's own mind's eye.
You go on to speak about the perennialist philosophies
in the following way:
“The perennialist philosophies may point to commonality in
all religions, to which Muslim scholars simply say that Allah
sent messengers to every people, this accounts for similarities,
and points out that Allah has perfected His religion in Islam.
Perennialists often point to the verse, “The Messenger believes
in what has been revealed to him from his Lord, as do men of faith.
Each one of them believes in Allah, His angels, His Books, and
His messengers. They say, 'We make no distinctions
between any of His messengers.' And they say, 'We hear
and obey: We seek Your forgiveness, our Lord, and to You
is the end of all journeys.” (Koran 2:285), but again Muslims see
this merely pointing out that Islam was and is Allah's religion,
inclusive of all the prophets and messengers, and that Muhammed
(Allah's peace and blessing be upon him) was the last and through
him came the perfection of religion – not that all religions have
the same end.”
I am not a perennialist. I do not believe, among other tenets of
the perennial perspective, that there is a transcendental unity of
religions.
However, I do believe that many – but not all -- of the spiritual systems
now in existence have their roots in truths which were disclosed to
different peoples in various times and places by an array of
Prophets and Books of revelation. Moreover, because God
has given human beings both a limited capacity for free will, as well
as capacities for both spiritual growth and spiritual ruination, the
tendency was that many people lost touch with all, or part, of the
truths to which they once were heirs, or people corrupted those
truths with their own ideas, conjectures, beliefs, and theories.
Where different spiritual traditions hold things in common, it is
because of the truths which are jointly shared as part of the
spiritual legacies that have been bequeathed to them through
the Prophets and Books of Revelation which were sent to
them. Yet, this is saying something quite different than the
idea of a transcendental unity of religions.
There has only ever been one authentic spiritual tradition.
The plurality of religions has arisen as a result of error,
misunderstanding, corruption, and rebellion in relation
to the truth.
Notwithstanding the foregoing contention, I do not necessarily
agree that the understanding of any given Muslim constitutes
an accurate expression of the essential truth. As previously
indicated, even the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him)
knew that there would be 73 sects within the Muslim community
and only one of them would be correct. Moreover, the Prophet
is also reported to have said:
“Every child is born according to fitra (primordial nature), then,
that person's parents make that child a Jew, Christian, or a
Zoroastrian.”
Fitra is now what it always has been – our capacity for acquiring
spiritual truth and essential realization. It is religions which have
drifted away, to varying degrees, from the truth concerning the
nature and potential of fitra.
Neither the Qur'an nor the Prophet spoke in terms of Sunni,
Shi'a, or madh'habs. These are all human inventions.
I am Muslim, but I do not consider myself to be either Sunni
nor Shi'a. So, what am I?
The Prophet is reported to have said the following:
“Islam began as something strange, and it will revert to being
strange as it was in the beginning, so good tidings for the
strangers.” Someone asked: “Who are the strangers?” He said:
“The one's who break away from their people for the sake of
Islam.”
This is what, God willing, I am. God willing, I am one of the
strangers to whom the Prophet referred. By the Grace of Allah,
for the sake of Islam, I not only have tried to break away from the
tribes of religion, imperialism, materialism, oppression, capitalism,
militarism, and the like, but I have sought to break away, for
the sake of Islam, from as many of the erroneous sects existing
within the Muslim community as God has permitted me to do so
and to the degree which Allah has permitted.
In the next portion of your e-mail, one finds:
“From the Islamic perspective, the Temple Mount is a holy site
– as you know, the third most holy site in Islam. While you said
that is because of essentially a lot of warm, fuzzy feelings about
the Prophet (upon him peace) being there for the Isra and Mi'raj,
I would ask you to consider another idea.”
Before proceeding on with the idea which you wish me to
consider, there is a problem with the way you have characterized
what I said in the pod-cast concerning the significance of the
Temple Mount and the al- Aqsa mosque. I did not say, nor did
I imply, that this area constitutes the third most sacred site
in the Muslim world because of a “lot of warm, fuzzy feelings”
about the Prophet (upon him peace) being there during the
Night Journey and the point from which his mi'raj, or ascension,
began.
The import of the night journey and the ascension is established
by the Qur'an and the testimony of the Prophet Muhammad (peace
be upon him). 'Warm, fuzzy feelings' have nothing to do with this,
and, rather, this is a description which you have imposed, without
justification, on the words I have spoken.
The idea to which you wished to draw my attention is the
following:
“First, one ought to clarify the meaning of Masjid Al-Aqsa, which
literally means “the furthest place of prostration.” Early Muslims
understood this to be the entire Temple Mount, and not what is
now called Al-Aqsa Mosque, which was originally called
Omar's Mosque because Omar bin Khatab ordered it to
be built. I make this point because it is the whole of the
Temple Mount which is considered a sacred site and not
just the Al-Aqsa Mosque.”
The spiritual significance of the Temple Mount is over-
determined in the sense that its sacredness derives from
a multiplicity of events that are not restricted to the
role it played in the night journey and spiritual ascension
of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him). The
Temple Mount is also the site of the place where the first
and second temples of the Jewish people had been built.
One might even dare to raise the question of why was
the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) brought
to this location. Obviously, the space was sacred
quite independently of what happened that night in
conjunction with the Prophet Muhammad (peace be
upon him). Indeed, all of the Prophets were led in
a prayer of prostration on the Temple Mount because
the sacred precincts had spiritual significance for
all of them not only because of what was about to
happen, but, as well, it was hallowed ground because of
what had happened there in the past.
I do not have a problem with the distinction which you
are making between, on the one hand, the Temple Mount
and, on the other hand, Masjid al-Aqsa, or the mosque of
Umar (may Allah be pleased with him). In fact, it only
strengthens the point I wish to make, because it is all of
the Temple Mount which is to contain the building of
the third temple and not just the site where the al-Aqsa
mosque resides.
You continue by saying:
“The mosque Omar built was merely to facilitate Muslims
making prayers while on pilgrimage to the site. Abdul Malik's
intention, when he ordered the Dome of the Rock to be built,
was to protect visiting Muslims from the weather – but in doing
so, created one of the world's most beautiful expressions of love
to Allah.”
The reason why the Jewish people wish to re-build the third
Temple is to facilitate worship. Their intention in this respect
is no different than that of Hazrat Umar (may Allah be pleased
with him). And, while one might agree with you that, indeed, the
Dome of the Rock is a beautiful expression of love for Allah,
is it not possible that the Jewish people could also construct,
with God's help, a beautiful expression of love for God? In
fact, wouldn't it be doubly beautiful if, somehow – if it were
possible – that the mosque could be preserved even as the
temple was build around it?
You state:
“Muslims hold this place in high regard not merely because
the Prophet Muhammed (upon him peace and blessings) was
there, but that many other prophets were there as well. We
know from the Sunna that Muhammed (upon him be peace)
led all the prophets in prayer before making his ascent into
Heaven. Thus we know the Rock to be the spiritual locus for
Islam. By Islam I do not mean here merely those that follow
the Prophet Muhammed (upon him peace), but Islam as Allah's
religion – the religion of Abraham, Moses, Jesus, and all the
other prophets (upon them all peace and blessings).”
Yes, many other Prophets were there, including many that
are held in common reverence by both Muslims and Jews.
You seem to think that the Temple Mount is of spiritual
significance only to those whom you consider Muslim in
a restricted sense of the term of 'one who submits' according
to your way of thinking about things.
God has identified the Jewish people as people of the Book.
They have been given a book of spiritual guidance, just as
the followers of Muhammad (peace be upon him) have been
given a book of spiritual guidance.
In the Qur'an, God has spoke in loving and eloquent terms
about the problems, crises, and events which have occurred
to some of the Prophets that are dear to the hearts of Jewish
believers. So, I'm not exactly clear why you feel that the
Temple Mount should be of more spiritual significance to
the followers of Muhammad (peace be upon him) than the
followers of Moses (peace be upon him).
Jews may not call themselves Muslims, but, in point of fact,
to whatever extent they seek to submit themselves to God,
then, a rose by any other name is still a rose. And, in essential
terms, we ought not to make any arbitrary categories of
who and what constitutes 'proper submission to God'.
Your perspective continues on with:
“As a beautifully written and sung litany moves the heart
closer to Allah, the Dome of the Rock is also meant to be
such an expression. The Dome of the Rock is considered to
be the prime example of spiritual architecture in Islam.
Additionally, the Rock was the first qibla in Islam, and will
be again in the future after Mecca and the Qaba are destroyed
in the time of the Dajal and Messiah. We cannot say that Abdul
Malik was trying to build a monument in order to keep Jews from
building another Temple because that thought, I can say with
certainty, would not have occurred to him.”
Assuming, for the purposes of discussion, that the Temple
Mount was the first qibla or direction of prayer rather than
Jerusalem, in general, nevertheless, one needs to ask the following
question. Why was the Temple Mount made the qibla?
Isn't it possible that Prophets Ibrahim, Issac, Jacob, Solomon,
David and Moses ( may Allah be pleased with them all) had
something to do with this? Isn't it possible that making the Temple
Mount serve as the qibla was a way of paying tribute to the spiritual
history which coursed through Jerusalem and that constitutes
fundamental aspects of the Jewish spiritual tradition -- just as making
the Ka'bah, the new qibla was a way of paying homage to the original
construction of the first house of worship by Adam (peace be
upon him) along with its being re-built by Prophet Ibrahim (peace be
upon him)? Why is it acceptable for Muslims to build and
rebuild the sacred mosque, but it is not acceptable for the Jewish
people to build, and rebuild, and rebuild again their sacred house
of worship?
A little later in your e-mail -- during which you repeat a verse of the
Qur'an you cited previously -- you state:
“Unlike some Muslims today, the early Muslims believed that
Islam was the perfection and final religion, abrogating all
other religions. Allah says, “This day have those who reject
faith (kafaru) given up all hope of your religion: Yet fear them
not but fear Me. This day have I perfected your religion for you,
and have chosen for you Islam as your religion.” (Koran 5:3).”
I don't know which Muslims of today you are referring to, but I might
choose a different way of saying things than the manner which
you have chosen to do in the foregoing excerpt. More specifically,
Islam was the Deen of Adam (peace be upon him) as it was the
Deen of all the Prophets who came after him. Although the exoteric
aspect changed with circumstances – that is, although the formal,
ritualized nature of worship assumed different forms among different
people, the esoteric essence of Islam has never altered. At no point
was any of this esoteric essence abrogated, and, furthermore, although
there were certain ritual changes from time to time, as God saw fit,
none of this abrogated the spirit of Islam which was taught through
the Books of revelation or prophetic examples during any given
period of time.
The Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) followed the Jewish
practice of fasting until God ordained that a different kind of fasting
be observed by those who were his followers. The followers of
Muhmmad (peace be upon him) had no particular form of prayer
until after the ascension of the Prophet, and the form of this
prayer, both in terms of number and positions, were, respectively,
due to the urging of Moses (peace be upon him) to return to Allah
and ask for a reduction in the number of daily prayers, and, a request
that was made by the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) to
Allah for permission to incorporate into the ritual prayers different
positions of the angels who were engaged in worship and which
the Prophet witnessed during his ascension.
Jews believe in the oneness of God. Jews perform prayers –
although more akin to what Muslims used to do in the way of
prayer before the gift of formal prayer was given during the time
of ascension. Jews fast in their own way. They are charitable.
They do their pilgrimages to the Wailing Wall which is all that
is left of the sacred temple.
Some of them may even accept the idea that Muhammad (peace
be upon him) was a Messenger of God. However, even if they do
not accept Muhammad (peace be upon him) as a Messenger and
Prophet of God, nonetheless, they ascribe to many of the same moral
values, teachings and practices as did the Prophet which they have
derived from their own Prophets, and in doing that, they indirectly pay
homage to the same spiritual truths which were expressed through all
the Prophets, including the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him).
If you wish, you may fault some Jews for the short-coming of leaving out
something which you consider to be important to Islam. But, if
you should do this, perhaps, you might keep in mind the following
passage from the Qur'an:
“If Allah were to take humankind to task for their wrong-doing, God
would not leave hereon a living creature, but God reprieves them to
an appointed term. [Qur'an, 16: 61]
None of us is perfect. We all make mistakes. There are shortcomings
in all our forms of worship – whether Muslim or non-Muslim. We all
need to repent and be forgiven for our transgressions.
As for those who believe their worship is perfect, then, I would remind
them of the counsel of Hazrat Ra'bia (may Allah be pleased with her)
which was said to a fellow Sufi who was quite enamored with his
own dedication to the pillars of Islam: She is reported to have
said: “Thy existence is a sin with which none other can compare.”
| Return to Menu | Part 1 | Part 2 | Next | Part 5 | Part 6 |
|
