The Issue of God: Does God Exist?

By Furrukh B. Ali

For humans, the relationship with God commenced when they began to personify as gods and goddesses the powerful, awe-inspiring forces of nature that surrounded them, sometimes benign, often threatening, always mysterious. There followed a long and diverse succession of tribal deities, divine rulers, the Greek Olympians and their many offshoots. Finally, there appeared the one God of the monotheistic religions, who gradually displaced the others among a large portion of humanity.[1]

Each of these later versions of God was soon surrounded by an elaborate web of dogma and ritual, presided over by a layer of clergy and theologians who became the guardians of the religion (often in a mutually beneficial alliance with the secular authority). These religions maintained that God created the universe and all that is in it, and controls and directs everything. They also taught that God directs and controls human affairs, and rewards and punishes human beings according to their compliance with His wishes.

God’s wishes, it was claimed, were enshrined in the religion’s scriptures and laws, which were developed, interpreted and expounded by the religious establishment. For a long time religions maintained their hold on their followers by investing their lives with meaning and purpose, and through the promise of divine rewards and the threat of divine punishment. But, in modern times, as knowledge and information have increased and superstition has faded, the hold of religion has weakened and with it the belief in God, so that for increasing numbers of people He has become a polite fiction and plays no real role in their everyday lives. Even for many of those still caught up in religious ritual and dogma God is a distant presence, obscured by all the clutter; they may have belief in Him, but not faith.[2]

More recently, a religious phenomenon that has surfaced from time to time has once again risen to prominence – the God fanatic. These fundamentalists (to be found in all religions) claim a direct connection to God, and zealously adopt the mission of implementing His will (usually some simplistic but grandiose formulation, bolstered by selective reading of scripture). This pits them not only against outsiders but also against their co-religionists, whom they declare to be lacking in the true faith. The crisis affecting the human relationship with God today is that while too many believe too little in Him, an aggressive minority believes too much.

Lately, into this flux has come a spate of books attacking the concept of the God of religion.[3] The essence of their case is that the various “proofs” or arguments[4] usually advanced for the existence of God can all be shown to be fallacious, and that the concept of God proposed and taught by religion is not supported by any evidence; in fact, that there is much evidence and logic to contradict it.

Science has shown that the universe, life, and human beings could all have developed through natural processes, without the intervention of God. Similarly, whatever goes on in the natural world can be shown to occur according to natural processes and laws.[5] One would have to shut one’s eyes and close one’s mind to deny all this evidence.

Human societies and individuals live in many different modes and forms, their natures and shapes due largely to the dictates of history, geography, economics and politics. There is no evidence to show that the God of religion plays any part in determining these. We also see that the outcomes of human choices and actions follow no discernible pattern relating to their ethical or moral quality, or their conformity or otherwise to any divine or religious injunctions. Often, good deeds have bad outcomes while evil actions result in gains, the wicked prosper and the virtuous or innocent suffer.

An open-minded, unbiased examination of the evidence of science, as well as an honest assessment of human affairs, show that there is no convincing proof of the existence of the God of religion. Nor is there any necessity to postulate such an entity to explain what happens in our world. However, it does not automatically follow from the demolishing of this concept of the God of religion that it is not possible to formulate a tenable concept of the entity that we generally think of as God. All that these contrary arguments and evidence show is that the God of religion is not a concept that an informed and intellectually honest person can accept as sustainable.

A viable and tenable concept of God would have to meet two basic conditions :
· Externally, it must conform to our observation and experience of the physical world (i.e., our science).
· Internally, it must be logical and self-consistent.
Another obvious requirement is that the concept must have some relevance for us (otherwise the whole exercise becomes pointless).

In studying and exploring our universe science has established that it is a unitary system. All matter is composed of various combinations of the same fundamental particles. The forces that operate in the universe are all interrelated.[6] The laws that we observe functioning on earth appear to govern the entire universe; they are also all coherent and compatible with each other as part of a single system. It is thus not surprising that, in its search for the origin of our universe, cosmology is discovering that it appears to be of a single origin, a singular event or process that caused it all to come into existence.

Science is coming up with ever more refined (and elegant) hypotheses[7] for how our universe came into existence, and its resulting structure and composition (in the process even postulating the possibility of the existence of many other such universes). But, even as the originating event keeps getting pushed further and further back, there always remains the question : what brought this into being? (As Leibnitz asked : why is there something rather than nothing?). This conundrum cannot be resolved in the physical sphere since, in it, something cannot come into existence from nothing (just as, in reverse, it is not possible for matter or energy to disappear into nothing).

We are thus left with two options : to either accept that there will always be a grey area around this origin, however far back science pushes it, or to assume that the first physical entity or event was caused by something outside the physical sphere. It then becomes a matter of choice which position one adopts. But the belief in a non-physical causality would be just that – an assumption; no physical proof will ever be possible since we are considering an entity that transcends the physical.

If we choose to believe in this higher causality we could define it thus :

That entity which, while existing independently of our universe, is its ultimate cause; which, while existing outside the space-time framework and energy-matter structure of our universe, imposes on it a systemizing unity and direction; and which, as a result, is connected to everything in the universe in a benign and constructive way.

This concept conforms to what we know of our world. It is in accord with the hypotheses of science regarding the origin of our universe, and with its functioning as a symmetrical system working in conformity with natural laws. It is logically consistent, and also postulates an underlying connection between this entity and us. It would be appropriate for us to call this entity God, since this is the name we use for a concept of this nature.

As was stated earlier, believing in such a concept of God is purely a matter of belief. It involves making a conscious choice to assume the fact of an external causality for the universe instead of being content with accepting a purely physical universe, created (in some unknowable fashion) through natural processes and physical laws, and running according to them. The question arises: why would we want to do that? Why should we try to go beyond the facts of science to a belief in the fact of God?

The main reason is that certain logical implications follow from whichever assumption we make about the existence or non-existence of God (the latter is as much an assumption as the former, since it is not possible to prove this negative proposition). These implications are not just of academic or philosophic interest but have far-reaching significance for the way in which we live our individual and collective lives.

Foremost is the issue of what, if any, is the significance and purpose of human life on earth. As we stand at the edge of an increasingly fragile world and look out at the vast, empty darkness of the cosmos, aware that each of us may be but a tiny spark of consciousness born of a freak combination of cosmic circumstances that, after a short while, winks out for ever, this is not a question we can easily avoid.

Ever since humans could think beyond the needs of daily sustenance and survival, they have wondered about this. With religion came an answer that sufficed for centuries, but as religious faith has waned so has its power to answer this conundrum. Materialistic doctrines and systems such as capitalism, socialism and communism have all, despite initial bursts of enthusiasm, failed to provide a satisfactory alternative meaning and purpose to human life. In recent times, increasing numbers of people are turning to religious fundamentalism to fill this void.

Apart from its existential significance, this issue is becoming one of critical importance as our power and efficacy grow exponentially. Already we are reaching out to the planets and the stars; we are probing into the central mysteries of life and matter; we have the potential to alter the face of the earth; we have the means to reorder life on this planet. There seem to be few limits to how much more we can acquire in this direction. The critical question is : to what aims and purposes will human beings put this vast reach and capacity? So far it has been mostly used for parochial profit and power, and often put to destructive purposes. A rational belief in God, and its resulting implications, could provide us with a common set of goals towards which we should use this great power and capability that we are acquiring, goals which serve all humanity and are in harmony with nature.

A darker side of this great progress in science and technology, and the uses to which we have been and are putting it, is its impact on the natural world. As we are beginning to realize, from a nurturing habitat we have transformed it into a polluted, dysfunctional environment that is threatening to severely disrupt life on earth. The most effective way of dealing with this looming crisis is through a united response by all of humanity. A common, rationally tenable belief in God, and the acknowledgement of its implications, can provide us with the basis for the tremendous joint effort that we all need to make to deal with this threat to human welfare and, possibly, even our existence on earth.

A tenable belief in God can also have an important effect on our everyday life. Human societies have constructed elaborate systems of laws and institutions to control and channel the many human tendencies that are a legacy of our evolutionary past (in which the ‘law of the jungle’ generally prevailed). However, the success of these measures depended to a great extent on the ethical and moral codes that religion taught, and which became embedded in the cultures it fostered. With the decline of religious belief these codes have lost much of their power; we need a new basis on which to revitalize the system of human values which govern our individual and collective lives. A rational belief in God, and in the implications that follow from it, can provide such a basis.[8]

Another consideration relates to our human individuality and its subsistence. The observable fact is that each human being lives for a certain period and then dies; as far as we know he or she then ceases to exist. Yet, from the earliest times, humans have conceived of the idea that what dies is only the person's body, and that the person can continue or resume their existence on a different plane. It is easy to see how radically the whole perspective embracing our life on this earth changes if we believe that this is in fact what happens.

There is no way in which we can prove that human beings can live again after death; we can only make an assumption that this may be so. It is an assumption that most of us would like to make, not least because the alternative robs human life and human individuality of much significance. To make such an assumption is, of course, to postulate a whole order of existence outside or beyond the framework of this universe. This assumption becomes logically possible if we first assume the existence of an entity that created this framework, and is thus capable of creating other frameworks of existence. Logic apart, it is also almost impossible to believe in a life beyond death without a prior belief in God.

To sum up, the God of religion is fading away. The mists of awe and incense within which He thrived are being dispersed by the cold, hard light of science. Even most of those who still mumble the old formulas probably know in their hearts that He is a dying fiction. So do many of those who cling with increasing desperation to His waning presence, waving His flag and fighting against the rising godless tide, some with strident faith and strange crusades, others with guns and bombs, all the while assuaging their mounting fear with comforting reports of His imminent arrival on earth.

Those of us who are prepared to face this hard truth find ourselves in an empty landscape, bereft of the many comforting props and shelters we have come to rely upon. Some declaim that the brightness of the new light will suffice, but for the many others who recoil from the barren hardness of a purely material existence, there is another choice. We can choose to believe in a God who can withstand the bright light of science. Such a belief could invest our lives with true significance and purpose, determine how we will use the great powers and capability that we are acquiring, provide a common basis for us to jointly deal with the many dangers that threaten humanity, underpin our societal structures with a moral basis, and give hope that death is not the end for us.

To establish whether believing in such a God can lead to these results, and therefore this is a choice worth making, we need to examine what would be the implications of this belief.
What Does God Want of Us?

Having assumed the fact of God, a transcendent entity that is, in some fashion, connected to everything in our world, the next issue that faces us is the nature of our relationship with God. What does he want of us? What can we expect of him?[9]

In seeking answers to these and similar questions the first thing we observe is that there exist certain fundamental differences between human beings and everything else that we know of. Everything else in the universe is bound in a certain mode of existence and behaviour. The mighty galaxies travel in pre-determined paths and speeds; the huge stars follow ordained life cycles; the planets move unwaveringly in their orbits. The microcosm is no less firmly regulated than the macrocosm; each particle has its inherent properties and must conform to them; the sub-atomic universe appears to be as bound in a unitary system as the wider universe. Life itself comes into being and develops according to evolutionary laws. Plants live and die in the established rotation of the seasons. Animals exist bound in the iron bands of instinct, their behaviour fixed within narrow limits.[10]

On the other hand, human beings, in contrast to everything else, appear free to order their lives and determine their behaviour in any way they choose. Recorded history and our own observation disclose human beings living, individually and collectively, in many different modes, according to the highest standards conceivable as well as the lowest, in pursuit of all kinds of aims and goals as well as none at all, performing actions that we would call saintly, and also those of the utmost depravity. This vast variety is proof enough that neither our inner nature nor any external constraint compels human beings to live and act in any particular pattern or mode. How they live or what they do is for them to decide. It is true that not many of us are able, in practice, to make such free choices, but, in principle, there is no insurmountable barrier to prevent us from doing so. What any human has done, it is possible for other humans to also do.

It appears, therefore, that there is a radical difference in the relationship between God and humans, and between God and everything else we know of. The systemization and orientation that binds the latter does not extend to human beings. Whatever God may want of other things and beings is inherent in their natures or properties, and in the laws that govern them, but this is not so in the case of human beings. Everything else perforce lives out its relationship with God; human beings alone can live and act in any fashion they please.

This crucial difference between us and other living things is due to the evolution of our minds into this powerful instrument that gives us the capacity to chart our course as we will, to bend our environment to our purposes, and to think conceptually, imagine, analyze and speculate. If our relationship to God is not implanted within us or imposed upon us from without, then perhaps the only way in which we can discover it is through our minds.

The human mind, on its own, has tried two methods of discovering this relationship : rational speculation and mystical intuition. Neither of these has produced any answer which has commanded acceptance either from most other minds similarly engaged or from large numbers of other people. Since this relationship is not between God and some humans but between God and the totality of humanity, any valid answer must, over a period of time, appeal to and be found satisfying by a large proportion of human beings. The only answers which have, historically, met this test are those provided by religions based on “revelation” or “inspiration”.

However, that does not solve the problem. We find that there are many major religions in the world that have held the allegiance of vast multitudes over centuries, and still number their adherents in the hundreds of millions. Each one of them claims to be based on “revelation”, and each asserts, whether overtly or implicitly, that it alone possesses the truth while all others are false. Whose claim should one accept? It is not good enough to accept a religion as true just because one happens to have been born to parents who professed it. As rational, thinking beings it is fitting that we cast aside all preconceptions and use our minds as best we can in arriving at such a decision.

When we approach this issue in such a manner, certain factors strike us straightaway. The most recent serious claim of “revelation” or “inspiration” is that of the Quran. Even though there have been a number of prior “revelations”, logically we should first examine the latest one, which should be the one most relevant to us and our circumstances. Secondly, it is an established historical fact, generally accepted, that the Quran we have today contains in its original form (practically, if not totally) the record of the “inspiration” that occurred some 1500 years ago. No other religion can make a similar claim; in none of them is it possible to disentangle the pure, original “revelation” from later accretions of human inception.

Thirdly, the Quran is the only self-claimed “inspiration” which does not reject the similar claims of others. It affirms a whole system of periodic “inspiration” which culminated in itself; all of them, it says, had the same source, and the same fundamentals have underlain each one of them. Thus, it does not reject previous “revelations”, but claims to incorporate them all within itself.

The above factors all point to the conclusion that, in seeking to discover the true relationship between God and humanity through “inspiration” or “revelation”, logically we should turn first to the Quran.[11] (Whether the answer it provides is worthy of acceptance will, of course, depend solely on our evaluation of it and not on the source).
What Does God Say to Us?

The Quran claims that the essentials of the message it brings to humanity are the same as those perceived and transmitted by earlier messengers over the course of human history, including the “revelations” on which the major religions were based. Unfortunately, these essentials have to a large degree been lost or distorted under layers of later constructions and elaborations. (The same fate has befallen the essential message contained in the Quran, but it is possible for us to rediscover it).[12]

Summarized below are the main elements of this message :

· The origin of our universe is due to God, and he is connected to everything in it. The universe, and all that it contains, is bound by the laws that he has embedded in it but, beyond that, he does not intervene. Humans, as physical beings, are also so bound, but otherwise possess complete freedom of choice and action. In addition to this freedom, God has given us great powers and capacity, and, by virtue of these, offered us a special role – stewardship of our world on his behalf. He urges us to assume the responsibility of acting as his surrogates, to act in his place as causative beings in our world, to work towards his goals and purposes, to do all that he would have done in our world if he had chosen to act in it.

· In accepting this role we would live our lives for God, and not for ourselves. Whatever responsibilities and obligations he has in our world as its creator, we would undertake to fulfil. To be able to do this we have to develop the great potentialities with which he has endowed us; with these we must strive, individually and collectively, to move this world towards its rightful condition, and thus, through human instrumentality, to restore God as a causative agent to a world within which he has chosen not to act as one. We stand for God in our world, and must fashion ourselves and our actions accordingly.

· The message also tells us that the principal values that should govern our lives and our actions should be freedom, love and compassion, justice, the sanctity of human life, and beauty and harmony.

This is the essence of what God has to say to us, according to the Quran. This is what he has said to human beings through all the prophets and seers who have perceived his message, enshrined now in the many religions that have held the allegiance of countless millions over the centuries, in spite of this message being largely concealed under the later additions and interpretations of men.

Conclusion

We started off by seeing that it is not possible for an informed, intellectually honest person to believe in the existence of the God of religion. A tenable concept of such a transcendent entity that created and “governs” our world must conform to what science has discovered about the physical world, and what we know of human history and human affairs. We formulated such a definition of the concept and called it God, because that is the name most familiar to human beings for such an entity.

However, the concept we have defined here, and refer to as God, is not the God of religion. We could give it another appropriate name; for example, we could call it the Cosmic Principle, or the Primal Cause, or Ultimate Reality. We can then visualize this entity actualizing its intent in the first physical form or event, which then led to the evolution of our universe, a gradual process that is still ongoing. This has resulted in the entity’s intent and impetus becoming, in some fashion, immanent in this creation, as we can observe in the consistent, symmetrical and all-pervasive laws of nature, and the way in which the universe has evolved. Its directing impulse caused the creation of life in inanimate matter, and then propelled its evolution into increasingly complex life-forms, culminating in humans with minds capable of self-awareness, abstract thought and volition. We can conceive that, since humans have broken free of the determinism of the natural world, this Cosmic Principle now also seeks to express its impulse through us, trying to make us aware of our responsibility to use the tremendous capability that we already have, and can increasingly acquire in the future, to move our world towards a more perfect state.

It is also quite possible that the working of the Principle has resulted in life developing in other parts of our universe, where it may well have gone through an evolutionary process similar to ours to create intelligent beings who, though their form might differ from ours (due to the differing physical characteristics of their environment), share with us a kinship (and an orientation) through the working of the same originating entity within them and ourselves. We can also imagine this actualization of the entity’s intent occurring on other occasions and creating other universes, which may be quite different from ours in their characteristics, but would share with us the systemizing and directional impulse of our common creator.

Whether we call this transcendent, systemizing and orienting entity God or some other appropriate name the basic human predicament remains the same. Our science, the tool constructed by our analytical and visionary minds, indicates to us an origin of our universe (and ourselves) where the physical processes that created it can be traced back only so far. Beyond this point, science can offer us no answer, no solution to the riddle of how something came to be from nothing.

We have the choice of stopping there and being content to be merely physical creatures in a physical world, or we can choose to believe that a non-physical cause started the physical process of creation, and that this transcendent entity not only caused our universe to come into being but also works within it (through the laws of nature and evolution) so that, instead of chaos, we live in a symmetrical, coherent, dynamic system, whose progression led to the creation of life, which finally evolved into human beings. Making this choice also entails the onus of recognizing and accepting the task that our evolution into humans implicitly imposes upon us, the task for which God (or whatever else we call this entity), has, in this manner, created us, the task that is revealed through a true reading of these many messages that have been perceived by humanity through the ages; namely, to assume responsibility for our world and ourselves, and to respond to the Creator’s call to shape our world into one of peace and plenty, beauty and harmony, freedom and justice.

In the final analysis, for us, the issue of God is really the issue of humanity. Accepting and acknowledging the fact of God is to accept and acknowledge our place in a universe that did not come into being by happenstance but through the purposeful unfolding of a measured intent; a cosmos with a thrust and direction which finally brought us into being in one of its far corners through a long evolution from inanimate matter into beings capable of unmatched thought, feeling and action. No longer, then, need we feel we stand on a flimsy perch looking out at the empty, meaningless darkness of unending space, but instead, from this azure orb, we can see unfolding before us the majestic handiwork of the Creator, a process of which we are a part and in which we have a role to play. Filled with grace and awe and reverence, we can raise our voices in praise and gratitude at the nurturing love the Creator showers upon his creation, not as acts of bestowal but as expressions of his very being.

We are called upon to express this gratitude by assuming the role that our human status offers us, by accepting and undertaking the task of stewardship in our world on behalf of God. Not only to preserve it but to continue to make it a better world, ever closer to what it would have been had its creator chosen to act in it. A task that we have so far not undertaken in a manner befitting its critical importance, since failure on our part could result in the destruction of human civilization and perhaps even the end of human life on earth.

In its picturesque language, the Quran puts it thus :

We did offer the Trust to the skies and the earth and the mountains, but they were afraid to accept it. Human beings, however, undertook to bear it, but surely they have ignored it, and indeed they have failed to accord it its rightful due (33:72).


*************************************



© Furrukh B Ali (2007)

[1] The major non-monotheistic religions existing today also have various concepts of deity, e.g., a Supreme Being whose different aspects are the many gods (Hinduism), or a universal force, soul or reality (Shintoism, Taoism). Even one form of the most “god-less” religion (Buddhism) considers the Buddha to be the earthly projection of an Ultimate Being. Like the monotheistic ones, all these religions have also developed elaborate dogma and ritual presided over and directed by a religious establishment.
[2] A distinction noted by Karen Armstrong in her A History of God (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1994), xvii.
[3] Notably Daniel C. Dennett, Breaking the Spell (New York: Viking, 2006) and Richard Dawkins, The God Delusion (New York: Houghton Mifflin Co., 2006).
[4] Such as the traditional Argument from Design, the Ontological Argument, the Cosmological Argument. Richard Dawkins also deals with a few more : the argument from beauty, the argument from personal ‘experience’, the argument from scripture, the argument from admired religious scientists, Bayesian arguments and Pascal’s wager.
[5] Believers often pick on chance or random occurrences as proof of God’s handiwork. However, chance and randomness are part of the natural system.
[6] String theory goes one step further : in it the fundamental particles are all merely different patterns of vibration of the one string. This theory also merges all the forces (reconciling general relativity with quantum mechanics), something that other theories accept as probable, though some are still wrestling with gravity.
[7] Such as the Big Bang theory, inflationary theory, string theory, superstring theory, M-theory, the braneworld cyclic model.
[8] Many individuals live virtuous, upright and humane lives without having a belief in God, but, for the great majority of people, and thus for human societies in general, such a belief, sincerely held, provides a strong foundation for organizing life on a moral basis.
[9] The God of religion is personified, and it is customary to use a capitalized pronoun in referring to Him (thereby also assigning Him a gender). The entity we have called God is neither a person nor has a gender. We are merely following linguistic convention in using such pronouns, but there is neither need nor justification for capitalizing them.
[10] Some recent research indicates that higher mammals may display some rudimentary volition. This would be entirely consistent with the evolution of the animal brain into the human one.
[11] The usual conception of “revelation” is that God reveals something to the chosen prophet. This sense does not apply within the concept of God that has been developed here. This God does not intervene in our world, and thus does not reveal or send anything to anyone. The “inspiration” that we are referring to is the direct, intuitive perception by a special human mind of the reality underlying God, the universe and our place in it. It is a human act (albeit of a very special human), of seeking and finding, not a specific divine bestowal.
[12] For an outline of the appropriate method of understanding the message of the Quran, see the author’s Rediscovering Islam.

REDISCOVERING ISLAM

By Furrukh B. Ali

It is necessary that we Muslims face up to the reality that the Islam that we profess, practise and preach today is not working. And has not worked for a long time. This is true both for our communal life as societies, and our personal lives as individuals.

In Muslim countries and communities around the world there is no shortage of mosques and preachers; prayer and fasting are common; millions perform the Hajj every year. Yet most of these societies are rife with corruption and injustice; poverty and illiteracy prevail; sickness and malnutrition are common. It is not just a question of resources; those Muslim countries that are lucky enough to have oil or other natural resources may have avoided some of these problems but face other serious ones (many of which are also common throughout the Muslim world) : lack of individual freedom and human rights; deep economic and social class divisions; materialism and consumerism; the status of women; the alienation of youth, etc.

This failure of Muslim societies to solve internal problems has been matched by their failures to deal with external challenges. In the 19th and early 20th centuries they were unable to withstand the European colonial and imperial tide that swept over them. Today, they are not able to effectively resist the external political, economic and cultural pressures to which they are subject, nor have they been able to keep up and cope with the rapid technological changes occurring in the modern world.

No Muslim society today, whatever its geography or history, can be pointed out as one where humanity has progressed, or as a model of how human beings should live.[1] There has not been such a one for centuries.

At the personal level, for each Muslim there is a fundamental paradox that, whether we face it or not (and most of us do not), undermines the central pillar of our faith. This pillar is our belief in Allah, in a Being who is all-powerful, all-knowing, all-just and all-merciful. But our daily observation and experience show that there is not much justice and mercy in the world; the strong and wicked prosper, the meek and innocent suffer; good deeds bear no fruit, bad ones reap rewards. Of course, not in all cases, not everywhere, not all the time, but frequently enough to raise the question : how can we reconcile this wide prevalence of injustice and suffering with our belief in a world in which a just and merciful God reigns supreme?

We adopt different methods to avoid acknowledging (much less dealing with) these problems and paradoxes in our personal and communal lives. Many of us resort to total denial, and refuse to believe that there are any problems at all. Others avoid these issues by plunging into blind belief, adopting dogma and ritual without any thought or question. Some acknowledge that there are problems, but believe that they are due to Islam not having been applied correctly or not fully (this open-ended argument ignores the inconvenient cases of Saudi Arabia, Iran and Taliban Afghanistan). For many others these problems do not matter because their adherence to Islam is purely formal : they pay it lip service, and practice it to the extent that is socially necessary or convenient. A number of Muslims blame all our problems on the “enemies of Islam”, and, in recent years, some of them have taken up violent jihad[2] against these “enemies”, a solution that does nothing to deal with the basic issue facing us all.

This basic issue is that the Islam we believe in and follow is not producing the results we expect in our communal and our personal lives, the results that the Quran itself has promised us. Islam cannot dodge this issue as other religions do by promising their rewards and punishments in the Hereafter. Instead of avoiding this issue in one way or another, we must ask ourselves : why is this so?

We know that this sad state of affairs was not always the case. When the Quran brought Islam into the world some 1500 years ago, it had a remarkable effect on the warring tribes and worldly townspeople of Arabia : it transformed them into a single people imbued with a transcendent vision for all humanity, and a sense of mission to spread it. The moral fervour generated in them carried them far and wide, sweeping away empires and kingdoms, and freeing their peoples. In the succeeding centuries the civilization that Islam created was as advanced as any that had existed so far, and certainly more broad-based.

The obvious question arises : could it be that the Islam we believe in and practise today is not the same Islam that raised its earlier followers to such great heights?

Islam Then and Now
For its early adherents Islam was a set of simple ideas and beliefs relating to Allah, and the relationship of human beings to Allah. This overpowering vision transformed them, and led them to transform their world. The essence of the vision was awareness of, and belief in, Allah, the creator and sustainer of the universe, and the role that Allah expected human beings to play in their world.

This original Islam had no dogma, no ritual, no complex set of do’s and don’ts, no special class of persons learned in the religion who guided and judged other believers; in short, none of the elaborate structure that now passes for Islam. This superstructure did not exist in the early centuries of Islam.[3]

The problem we face is that Islam today is a complex and rigid structure, frozen in time, which covers over and obscures the original and essential message that Islam brought to humanity. Further complicating the issue is the emergence of a class of self-styled religious authorities and “guardians”, so that there is now a virtual priestly class in Islam, where there was no place for one in its original version.

What has happened to Islam is not unique; in fact, this has been the trajectory followed by all the major religions. Each of them started off as a simple message of such power and relevance that it attracted significant numbers of adherents, whose lives were deeply affected and changed by their belief in this new vision. Over time, these numbers grew greatly, but also, gradually, the simple, original message was overlaid by dogma, ritual and hierarchical structures, directed and controlled by a priestly class (which usually allied itself to the secular authority in power in a mutually beneficial arrangement). Thus, the revolutionary vision that gave birth to this transforming movement became a static, institutionalized religion. That is what has occurred with Islam : it has become just another religion[4].

If we Muslims wish to rediscover the original essence of Islam, we must seek it in the Quran. All else that goes by the name of Islam today is superstructure created later by humans. The original message that Allah named Islam and conveyed to humanity through his Messenger (Rasul Allah) is now to be found only in the Quran, and nowhere else.

Understanding the Quran
The Quran is a record of the divinely inspired[5] utterances of Rasul Allah over a period of about 23 years; these were recorded and memorized at the time of occurrence and compiled in the Quran, though not in chronological sequence.[6] Because of this, and the long period over which the text gradually came into being, the Quran’s message cannot be understood by reading it as we would any other book. To understand its real message today we have to adopt a special method.
The first step is to discover the correct meaning of the terms and concepts that occur in it. To do this we need to take their meaning as it was understood in the Arabic of that time, which may not necessarily be the meaning developed for them later on. In the case of an important or ambiguous term or concept, we should put together all its usages in the text, and then deduce what meaning or meanings the Quran assigns to it.[7]

Secondly, since various subjects and issues are dealt with in the Quran at many different places, to discover the Quran’s position on any topic we must put together all the Quranic references to it and then see the coherent picture that emerges. (It is the failure to do this that results in Muslims holding significantly different views on some subjects to each claim that the Quran supports them by quoting one or two verses in proof thereof).

The third step is to deduce the overall ideology that the Quran teaches, within which its positions on all the major issues it covers fit in a consistent, logical manner. This process also requires revisiting the conclusions arrived at earlier in the second, and even the first, stage, to see if a modification (text-supported, of course) would enable them to fit better into the total picture.

However, merely understanding the meaning of the different portions of the Quranic text is not enough, we also need to understand the significance and relevance of these meanings for us today. The Quran deals with many different types of topics : some are about the fundamental issues affecting human beings, others deal with matters of contemporary daily life, while still others refer to other-worldly issues in metaphorical language, stories of earlier times, and allegories and parables. What should these various elements of the Quran mean to us? How do they apply to us? The answer to these questions is to be found in the Quran’s teaching on the system of divine guidance for humanity through wahy, which we shall consider next.

The discussion in this paper is based on a detailed analysis and study of the Quran using this method of interpretation and understanding, and on the resulting view of the comprehensive system propounded by it. References to Quranic passages are given below for many of the arguments made, but these are mainly for purposes of illustration, and are not the only basis for the positions adopted, which are based on the detailed study, and the complete picture that emerges from it.[8]

The System of Wahy
The Quran says that a particular human mind, in some fashion, is inspired with a consciousness of Ultimate Reality and Eternal Truth.[9] This can be understood as a direct, intuitive comprehension of Allah, and of the relationship of the universe, including humans, to Allah. This person is also imbued with an imperative urge to formulate this vision in words, and convey it to his fellow beings.[10] The Quran refers to this individual as a messenger.[11]

However, this messenger is no more than a human being,[12] and the mind through which this vision is given form and expression is only a human mind.[13] This mind is confined within the limits of its own specific knowledge as well as the general level of contemporary knowledge and thought. Thus, when it puts into words the consciousness of Ultimate Reality and Eternal Truth that it has acquired, this is inevitably in contemporary terms, which would also enable the message to be comprehensible and relevant to its immediate audience. Similarly, the application of this consciousness to practical affairs can only deal with the actual circumstances then prevailing.

The divine message conveyed by a messenger is a contemporary expression of Ultimate Reality and Eternal Truth. While confined within the limits of prevailing knowledge and comprehension, and dealing with existing circumstances, the details of the message conform completely to the initiating consciousness, and the truths and realities comprehended by the latter underlie everything it contains. In other words, where the message deals with abstract matters (e.g., the reality of Allah, the divine system, the Hereafter, etc.) it does so in terms which can be understood by its immediate audience, but this is nevertheless an expression of the reality of these matters insofar as the human mind (at that stage) can grasp them. Where the message deals with practical injunctions, these relate to contemporary matters, but conform to the fundamental principles and values that should govern all human conduct, anywhere, anytime.

For its own time and place such a message is completely true and valid, and applicable in all its detail. But in places where circumstances differ materially, and even in the same area after the passage of time, the message becomes of limited validity and applicability. The practical injunctions are no longer fully relevant since people's ways of living and their social structures have changed, while the descriptions of abstract matters no longer satisfy since human knowledge and modes of thought have advanced. Meanwhile, another messenger is inspired with wahy,[14] and conveys to his fellow-beings another message, which is an expression of the same Ultimate Reality and Eternal Truth, but one dealing with the issues of that time and place, and appropriate to the then prevailing level of human knowledge. Since this new message, though it differs in its details, is still based on the original truths and realities, it preserves and verifies them.[15] In turn, this message also becomes out-of-date, and is replaced by one more pertinent to the new human situation.[16]

This system of wahy has gone on throughout human history, with numerous messengers arising in different times and places. It came to an end with the message inspired to Rasul Allah in the 7th century A.D. (or the 1st century A.H.). The record of this wahy is now available to us in the Quran. This message is of the same type as all earlier wahy in that its expression is in terms appropriate to its own time and place, and its practical injunctions relate to the circumstances then prevailing. But underlying these surface forms is the same Ultimate Reality and Eternal Truth that has been the basis of all previous wahy. There is, however, one major difference between the Quran and earlier messages : it is the last of the series and no more wahy will occur to take its place. This means that for us, and for succeeding generations, the fundamental truths and realities that have always been conveyed through wahy can be discovered only through the Quran.

This aspect led some Muslim theologians to advance the view that every word of the Quran is applicable for all time to come, and this proposition has become a dogma among most Muslims. This is unfortunate, since not only is it impossible to implement this in practice, but it also contradicts the Quran's own teaching on the subject. What are valid and applicable for all time to come are not the words of the Quran but the truths, realities, principles, values, concepts, etc. that lie behind, and are the basis of, these words. It is these that mirror the Ultimate Reality and Eternal Truth (al-Kitab and al-Haqq) that were the initiating source of the Quranic wahy, and not the verbal constructions which had to be formulated within the limits of contemporary comprehension and knowledge, and mostly dealt with contemporary concerns in a manner appropriate to the immediate audience and their circumstances.

To take one example,[17] the Quran makes a few references to the slaves then existing in society in its time, usually in the context of prescribing measures to ameliorate their condition, or to urge their freeing. However, nowhere does it call unequivocally for the abolition of slavery. It is obvious that the Quran, while disapproving of the institution, tolerated it in the then prevailing form and circumstances.[18] On the other hand, the principles and values underlying the Quran (e.g., human freedom, the equality of all human beings) are totally opposed to slavery. Which, then, of these two opposite positions (one derived from its words, the other from its underlying principles) should one regard as the Quranic injunction valid for all time to come? The answer is obvious, and applies generally to the issue of which element of the message of the Quran is valid for us today (and for succeeding generations) : its words, or its underlying principles, values and truths.

The Quran itself makes this clear. There is a set of three passages[19] that introduce the term umm al-Kitab (the essence or core of the divine message), the only such usage of this term in the whole Quran. Read together, these passages say, in summary, that for every period there is a divinely inspired message and, when this period ends, the fundamentals of the message remain permanently applicable while the rest becomes nullified. These fundamentals are made clear in the Quran, and they are the permanent parts of the divinely inspired message, the rest is similar to the transitory elements of the earlier messages, as those with knowledge and understanding can discern. In several other passages[20] this basic concept of certain aspects of the Quran having lasting significance (as distinct from others) is expressed using the term ahsana (the best).

What, then, are these fundamentals, the essence of the message that the Quran brought into the world, which remain valid and applicable for us and for succeeding generations? We can usefully consider this in three parts : the fundamental truths underlying the system within which we exist; the principles of action that should govern human conduct; and the permanent values which we should adopt and uphold. These are the foundations and the fundamentals of Islam.

The Quran’s Fundamental Truths
These relate to the reality that underlies the universe, life and our humanity (issues such as Allah, Allah’s interaction with human beings, the system of the universe, the role of human beings, human accountability, human immortality). In a short treatment such as this we shall only highlight two of the most relevant and important ones : Allah, and the purpose of human life on earth.

Allah : The primary message of the Quran relates to the fact of Allah, and the need for human beings to believe in this fact, and thus accept Allah as the creator and sustainer of the universe and all that is in it, including themselves. But this belief and acceptance has to be an act of free will.[21]

The starting point of the Quran’s treatment of this subject is that there is (and can be) no proof of Allah’s existence; that is why it urges human beings to believe in it with such urgency and force, and at such considerable length. It urges us to study the universe around us, to look within ourselves, to ponder the consequences of our decision, and then, as free and rational beings, decide whether we should make the assumption that Allah exists, and believe in this. As part of this discourse the Quran seeks to convey to us a concept of Allah through His attributes (the asma al-husna) and “actions”.[22]

The Role of Human Beings : The Quran puts it thus :

And when your Rabb said to the malaika, “I am going to place in the earth a khalifa.....”.[23]

This passage (and similar ones[24] narrating the allegorical story of Adam) deal with a central theme of the Quran : the emergence of human beings on earth, and the special position and role that they have in their world. The message that this allegory conveys is that we achieved our human status when our minds reached a certain stage of development, and with these we acquired the potential to control and harness all the forces of nature. We were also endowed with free will, which enables us to use these great powers that we possess for any purpose we choose. However, the Quran reminds us that these potentialities and powers were given to us so that we could perform the special role of khalifa that Allah assigns us in our world, which requires us to use them on His behalf. To do this we will have to resist the constant temptation to use these capabilities for our own ends.[25] To assist us in this ongoing struggle, Allah will periodically send us guidance.

The basic meaning of khalifa is one who takes the place of another;[26] that is why it is used to signify a surrogate or substitute,[27] and also a successor. The key component of the term’s meaning is that the surrogate or successor functions in the other’s place, and on his behalf. This is the special role that the Quran says human beings are capable of, and which we are offered : of acting in Allah’s place in our world.

The Quran bases its doctrine of the khilafat f’il ard on, firstly, the proposition that Allah created our universe, and it, and all things in it, exist and function according to His laws.[28] Beyond this, however, He has chosen not to intervene; He withholds Himself from acting in this world as a causative agent, and does not interfere in the operation of His natural laws.

If we pause and think about this for a minute, we can see that this, in fact, is how things actually are in our world.[29] Everything in the universe is bound in a certain mode of existence and behaviour (with one notable exception). The mighty galaxies travel in pre-determined paths and speeds; the huge stars follow ordained life cycles; the planets move unwaveringly in their orbits. The microcosm is no less firmly determined than the macrocosm; each particle has its assigned properties and must conform to them; the sub-atomic universe appears to be as orderly and predictable as the wider universe. Life itself comes into being and develops according to evolutionary laws. Plants live and die in the established rotation of the seasons. Animals exist bound in the iron bands of instinct, their behaviour fixed within very narrow limits (the minor variations being determined solely by external circumstance rather than internal volition).

Nowhere in this orderly universe do we see a “divine hand” intervening to alter the operation of the system. As human knowledge has increased, the many inexplicable and seemingly random natural events that occur, which were once ascribed to God’s doing, can no longer be so considered. It is now known[30] that they all have natural causes, and occur according to natural laws.[31] The whole edifice of science and technology is based on this reality.

The second basis of the doctrine of the khilafat f’il ard is that the only entity in the world with complete freedom to act in any way it chooses is the human being; we have total freedom of choice, so much so that we even have the choice of refusing to believe in or acknowledge Allah.[32] Here again, as in the natural world, Allah does not intervene in or direct human affairs,[33] nor does He affect the outcome of human actions and choices.

This is also what we actually observe. Human beings, in contrast to everything else, appear free to order their lives and determine their behaviour in any way they choose. Recorded history and our own observation disclose human beings living, individually and collectively, in many different modes, according to the highest standards conceivable as well as the lowest, in pursuit of all kinds of aims and goals as well as none at all, performing actions which we can term superhuman or almost divine, and also those from which even the most brutish beasts refrain. This vast variety is proof enough that neither our inner nature nor any external directive compels human beings to live and act in any particular pattern or mode. How they live or what they do is for them to decide. It is true that not many of us are able, in practice, to make such free choices, but, in principle, there is no insurmountable barrier to prevent us from doing so. What any human has done, it is possible for other humans to also do.

We also see that the outcomes of human actions and choices follow no discernible pattern relating to their ethical or moral quality, or their conformity or otherwise to any divine or religious directives. However, influenced by religious teaching, many people still consider occurrences affecting humans and human societies to be due to specific decisions by God. When, as often happens, good deeds have bad outcomes while evil actions result in gains, the wicked prosper and the virtuous or innocent suffer, such believers are forced to resort to implausible excuses and arguments, ignoring the implications for the kind of God who would act thus, and for the omnipotence and justice of the divine system that they claim is operating in human affairs. Such a claim is neither supported by the Quran nor by our own experience.

The third basis of this doctrine is that Allah acts in our world through the agency of humans.[34]

Based on these premises the Quran expounds the doctrine of the khilafat f’il ard. Affirming that Allah withholds Himself from acting as a causative agent in our world, and acknowledging the freedom of choice and action that humans possess, the Quran offers human beings the role of Allah’s khulafa f’il ard. It urges us to assume the responsibility of acting as Allah’s surrogates, to act in His place as causative beings in our world, to work towards His goals, to do all that He would have done in our world if He had so chosen. Apart from the pivotal allegory of Adam, the Quran refers to this task, this role, this Allah-human relationship, repeatedly and in many different ways.[35]

The khilafat f’il ard is indeed a heavy burden for human beings to assume. In accepting it we agree to live our lives for Him, and not for ourselves. Whatever obligations He has assumed in our world, we undertake to fulfil. (For example, when the Quran says (6:11) that the provision of sustenance to every living creature is Allah’s responsibility, this is an obligation that we are required to discharge on His behalf). To be able to fulfil all these responsibilities we have to first develop the great potentialities with which He has endowed us, so as to achieve as many of His powers and qualities as apply to our world. With these we must strive, individually and collectively, to further His goals, not our own. We stand for Allah in our world, and must fashion ourselves and our actions accordingly.[36]

Principles of Action
Several principles that should govern human conduct can be derived from the Quran. However, the Quran also prescribes one overarching, comprehensive principle within which all the others are subsumed, and which covers every aspect of human behaviour. Here we shall discuss this one principle only.

The Quran refers to the conduct that implements this principle as amal as-salihat. The primary meaning of the root for islah is to remove a shortcoming, defect or handicap and restore something to its proper and rightful state. In the context of the khilafat f’il ard, this principle and its application, the amal as-salihat, require us to make good the deficiencies and imperfections in human beings, ourselves and others, so that we can achieve the stature necessary for beings who must act on behalf of Allah in our world. It requires us to act, individually and collectively, so as to remake this world into its rightful condition, and thus, through human instrumentality, to restore Allah as a causative agent to a world within which He has chosen not to act as one.

The overriding importance that the Quran attaches to this principle of action is shown by its linking of this conduct with the essential requirement to being a Muslim: iman (belief), and the frequent use of this formula as the conduct for which Allah promises the ultimate reward.[37]

Permanent Values
The values that should permeate our lives and govern our actions can be derived from the Quran, many of them from the attributes of Allah (of course, not all of the attributes are applicable to human beings). The most important of these are :

Freedom : This, according to the Quran, is the essential and distinguishing quality of human beings. Thus, maintaining our humanity requires us to promote and preserve this value for each and every human being.

Love : The love which the Quran extols is the one based on the term rahma. The root for this term is a name for the womb, and the term refers primarily to the nurturing, compassionate love that a mother has for her child. Maternal love is the foundation for our humanity; it is this (and the response it elicits in every human being : love of the mother) that enabled (even propelled) us to evolve to the human stage. Perhaps the most frequently used names for Allah in the Quran are ar-Rahman and ar-Rahim, signifying the nurturing love that the Creator has for his creation. (Unfortunately, when Islam became a religion, the concept of Allah was derived from the most powerful being then on earth, the absolute ruler who wielded his power according to his whims, unconstrained by any rule or law or other consideration. For his helpless subjects, the highest and most desirable virtue in such a ruler would be mercy, and that is what rahma came to mean, and has since remained).

Justice : In the Quran’s references to Allah’s dealings with humans the constant theme is that of justice. In our dealings with each other, and in the societies we establish, this is a value that should figure prominently.

The Final Word
The final word must remain, as always, with the Quran. And the Quran’s final words could not be clearer on this issue. Based on both external[38] and internal evidence (wording and meaning), the final substantive portion of the Quran received by Rasul Allah was :

For you this day have I brought to its culmination your way of life,[39] and bestowed upon you My final favour, and approved for you Islam as a way of life (5:3). [40]

What this passage tells us is that the way of life that the unfolding Quran and Rasul Allah were teaching evolved during that period, and reached its final form towards the end of Rasul Allah’s life. The Quran gives this way of life the name Islam. The root for this term has many different meanings, but most of these relate to conditions or states (e.g., perfection, security, peace, beauty). Among those that refer to actions the primary sense is to give or relinquish oneself to someone or something.[41] Thus, Islam means that way of life in which one is required to hand oneself over to Allah, to commit one’s being to Allah. This is precisely what the khilafat f’il ard requires : that we commit ourselves and our lives to fulfilling Allah’s purposes and obligations.

Incorporating the various meanings of the root for this word, we can define Islam as that way of life in which human beings surrender themselves to the role that Allah has given them, of being His khulafa in our world. Thereby we preserve Him in a world in which He has chosen not to act, and thus, preserving Him, we preserve both ourselves and the world. In this effort we climb upwards, shedding our inherited flaws, towards perfection and completion, and our world moves thus with us. It is in this way of life that we and our world can find peace, security and tranquility, and through it alone that human striving can be truly productive. A person who walks in this way is a Muslim (one who has committed himself or herself to Allah).

This is the Islam that the Quran offers all human beings. It urges us, as free and rational persons, to recognize the Supreme Being who is the creator and sustainer of our universe, and whose laws govern it. It tells us that we possess the potentiality to become the surrogates, the representatives, of Allah in our world, and offers us this role. To undertake this responsibility, to act for Allah in our world and fulfil His purposes and obligations in it, this is the way of life that is Islam.

For those of us who call ourselves Muslims today, this is the Islam that we have to rediscover from the Quran. But before we can do that we have to realize that the religion that we profess and practise is a far cry from the Islam that the Quran brought into the world some 1500 years ago. Until we recognize this undoubtedly painful reality, and return to the original guidance we received, we cannot hope to garner the rich harvest that our early forbears reaped so abundantly, so different from our fallen state today.

It is fitting to end this paper with two passages from the Quran, the first being one of its most powerful verses. Referring to the khilafat f’il ard, it says :

We did offer the Trust to the heavens and the earth and the mountains, but they were afraid to accept it. Human beings, however, undertook to bear it, but surely they have ignored it, and indeed they have failed to accord it its rightful due (33:72).

However, in the second passage we can discern a message of hope – if we can retrace our steps and rediscover the original message that was given to us :

Those who obscure the clear message and guidance that We have sent down, when We have made it so explicit in the Book, it is they who are banished (from Allah’s guidance), and deservedly so. But those who turn back and remedy this error, and make manifest (the clear message sent down), it is to them that I return; and I am oft-returning, compassionate (2:159-160).



*****************************


© Furrukh B Ali (2006)


[1] In the latest (2003) ranking of countries of the world on the Human Development Index by the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), the first Muslim country (excluding the special case of Brunei) occurs at No. 40. Excluding also the small but rich Gulf sheikhdoms, the first Muslim country (oil-rich but socialist Libya) comes at No. 58. Saudi Arabia, the richest and most religious Muslim country, comes at No. 77. The Arab Human Development reports (prepared by Arab scholars and issued by the UNDP) paint a sobering picture of the human condition in these societies. A telling statistic : the 2002 AHD report says that half of the young Arabs polled wanted to emigrate from their countries! In the latest Transparency International Corruption Index (for 2005), 13 of the 23 countries at the bottom of the list (most corrupt) are Muslim countries. From the top, the first Muslim country is at No. 28 (www.transparency.org).
[2] Since this article is for the general reader, I am not adopting fully the usual transliteration system for Arabic.
[3] The raw material and the tools with which this superstructure was later gradually constructed (the standard hadith collections and the doctrines of the fiqh schools) did not begin to be assembled and formalized until the third century A.H.
[4] The major religions have played a useful role in history, and still do in many respects. They promoted social cohesion, developed cultures, fostered ethical systems, sometimes resisted tyranny, and provided human beings with a strong faith to deal with the vicissitudes of life. But they also developed into institutions of control, often exercising their power in reactionary and negative ways, stifling freedom and progress. Even though the dogmas they profess enable many individuals to acquire a faith that enables them to become better persons and lead better lives, overall they are often an obstacle to human progress and development.
[5] The most accurate translation of the term wahy is “inspiration”, and not the commonly used “revelation”, which is a term borrowed from other religions. The primary meaning of the root for wahy is a swift signal, conveying some meaning or giving some indication.
[6] The placing of verses in the text was directed by Rasul Allah; this would have been necessary to enable the suras to be memorized in a standard format (also see Quran 75:17). Thus, their mixing up was deliberate, perhaps to break for future readers any link to particular events or circumstances, and thus generalize the message.
[7] For an example of how this method can reveal meanings quite different from those commonly accepted, see the discussion on the term fath in the author’s article, Al-Hudaybiya: An Alternative Version (The Muslim World, Jan. 1981: 47) [Reprinted in Uri Rubin, ed., The Life of Muhammad (Aldershot, UK: Ashgate Publishing, 1998)].
[8] The author hopes to publish the results of this study in due course.
[9] The Quran uses the terms al-Kitab and al-Haqq to represent these concepts in the context of wahy. Among many references in the Quran, typical are 2:213; 3:78; 10:37; 22:54; 35:31.
[10] The phenomenon can be understood as somewhat similar (though of far greater depth and complexity, and, of course, significance) to that of the genius inspired by a vision and impelled to express it in great art or music.
[11] The common usage in English of the term “prophet” is incorrect. The Quran uses the terms rasul and nabi, both of which mean a conveyor of a message or information.
[12] See, for example, Quran 12:109; 14:11; 16:43; 17:93, 95; 21:7; 23:23-50; 25:20; 41:6.
[13] There are many indications of this in the Quran, but the defining verse is 22:52. The term shaytan is used in the Quran for negative impulses, attitudes, thoughts, and other failings of the human mind.
[14] On the series of messengers, see, for example, Quran 2:213; 10:47; 16:36; 23:44; 35:24.
[15] On the preservation and verification of earlier wahy, see, for example, Quran 2:89, 97, 101; 4:47; 5:15, 46, 48; 6:93; 10:37; 35:31.
[16] On the replacement of an earlier wahy by a later one, see, for example, Quran 2:106; 5:44-48; 13:38-39; 16:101; 98:3.
[17] Other examples, to which the same argument applies, are the injunctions regarding the punishments for various offences, retaliation or qisas (2:178-179), polygamy, concubinage, women witnesses, etc.
[18] It was a relatively benign form of slavery, more akin to indentured service, and was an integral part of the social and economic systems. Slaves were lower status members of the families, clans and tribes that constituted Arab society. Most of them would have lost both livelihood and protection if suddenly freed.
[19] Quran 13:38-39; 43:2-5; and 3:6. Linked to these is 39:23.
[20] See, for example, Quran 29:46; 39:18, 55; 92:6-7, 9-10. 7:145 applies the same concept to Moses’ time. Also see 98:2-3 for the same meaning conveyed in a different form.
[21] See, for example, Quran 2:256; 10:99; 13:31; 18:29; 32:13; 43:20; 74:55; 76:3.
[22] The concept given in the Quran is one our minds can understand and relate to. It cannot convey the “reality” of Allah, since this is beyond the limits of finite human understanding.
[23] Commenting on this verse (2:30) Ibn Khaldun wrote in his great treatise on human history : This is the meaning of civilization (Al-Muqaddimah, trans. F. Rosenthal (New York, 1958), vol. I, 85).
[24] 2:30-38; 7:11-25; 15:28-42; 17:61-64; 18:50; 20:115-126; 38:71-85.
[25] The Quran uses the term malaika to represent the forces of nature, and the term Iblis to represent those elements of human nature that tend to lead humans away from Allah’s path.
[26] See, for example, Quran 7:69, 74, 142; 11:57; 19:59; 25:62.
[27] “An inscription from South Arabia (in a language cognate with classical Arabic) shows that the corresponding word was there used about AD 543 in the sense of ‘viceroy’ and this usage may have affected that in classical Arabic....” W. Montgomery Watt, Islamic Political Thought (Edinburgh: The University Press, 1968), 33. This usage is confirmed in Quran 7:142.
[28] See, for example, Quran 13:15; 16:49; 21:33; 30:25-26; 65:12.
[29] This, surely, is the primary test for the validity of a belief : that it is consistent with our observation and experience of the real world. It is to avoid this test that religions seek to distract and over-awe their followers through their otherworldly and supernatural dogmas and beliefs, which they are required to accept blindly.
[30] Of course, many still don’t know this, or refuse to acknowledge it. After the Katrina hurricane and the South Asian earthquake in 2005, some Christian and Muslim religious figures, respectively, claimed that this was God’s punishment on sinners. They blissfully ignored what kind of God it was (on whose behalf they were so smugly claiming to speak) whose wrath fell mainly on the poor, the helpless, and innocent children.
[31] We should remember that chance and randomness are part of the natural system. See, for example, Quran 3:139; 7:94-95; 10:24; 11:9-11; 21:35; 30:36-37; 53:43; 89:15-16.
[32] See, for example, Quran 10:108; 13:31; 18:29; 43:40; 74:55; 76:3.
[33] Even Rasul Allah is told that there is no guarantee that he will see the defeat of those opposing him, or that he will not die before the success of his mission (Quran 10:46; 13:40; 40:77; 43:41-42).
[34] See, for example, Quran 2:251; 4:75; 22:40; 36:47; 47:7.
[35] Some of the concepts the Quran uses are ahd Allah, auliya Allah, ansar Allah, shuhada l’illah, amana b’illah, dhikr Allah, sabil Allah, and others. It is not possible to discuss these in this paper.
[36] We have forgotten the real significance of the tradition followed from the earliest days of Islam whereby a Muslim commences every action with a bismillah : in the name of Allah.
[37] There are 25 references relating to the reward of al-janna (e.g., 2:25; 18:30; 22:14; 32:19; 45:30; 84:25) and another 24 speaking of reward generally (e.g., 2:277; 3:56; 35:7; 41:8; 103:3).
[38] This wahy occurred during Rasul Allah’s final Hajj, according to a hadith from Umar b.al-Khattab (Bukhari 2:33; also reported in other collections). He fell ill two to three months later, and died soon after.
[39] The term used is din, which properly has this broad significance. When Islam became a religion, this term was limited to mean religious dogma and practice.
[40] One reason, perhaps, why this passage has not received the attention it merits is that it has been placed in the middle of verse 3, which belongs to a much earlier period, even though the context is quite different. It is possible that, in those final days, Rasul Allah did not get an opportunity to designate the appropriate placing of this passage.
[41] When Islam became a religion, and the concept of Allah became that of an omnipotent ruler, the meaning adopted for this term was “submission”, the most appropriate attitude of a subject in a kingdom. It has so remained, allowing the many self-styled intermediaries to demand absolute obedience to their version of the “king’s” commands.