- In Surah al-‘Asr, when the loss the human beings are in is mentioned in addition to those who are saved, the rule is loss and the exception is escape; thus the exception confirms the general rule.
- The Shuyuukh mention that one of the particularities of Islamic Law is that there is no benefit in the law for the Lawgiver – that is, Allah does not benefit from the Shariah; this is besides His not benefiting whether we follow or discard Islam and the Shariah.
- It is clear that at the conceptual level, the root conflict between Muslims and others is whether Allah can and does reveal not only a religion that is practiced in houses of worship, but whether he can and does reveal a ‘Deen’ in the sense of a total way of life. This idea is thoroughly mocked at and de facto taken out of the discussion in many countries, but it serves as the very essence of the Islamic religion – thus conflict is bound to happen time after time: The cosmology/theology gap between us Muslims and others [even other religious groups] is quite substantial and cannot be “repackaged” away. Yes, many a times we will try to bring the fact that Muslims do live in the world, in the real world as we find it, yet one way or the other the conflict will come up again and again.
- A point mentioned by one of the Shuyuukh: The brain is a tool whose correct usage has to be learned, just like any other tool or instrument available to us. And I think one of the big tragedies facing the Muslim Ummah is how we have deprecated the use of our minds in looking at the world and in studying Islam: This is exactly why one routinely finds many Muslims believing every conspiracy theory that comes to their ears, and of not knowing how to construct a proper argument – let alone a method of discourse – whenever they discuss anything with Muslims or non-Muslims.
- I know that historically the lay Muslim was not generally called upon to didactically defend his religion, but if this is what he wishes to do or is compelled to do given the circumstances, then there is a course of action, mostly involving the proper use of one’s rational faculties, that should be followed; no shortcuts are allowed in these cases, at least not from our side. If our goal is truly Da’wah and defense of the religion, we cannot be lazy in looking for problems in the arguments of the opponents, since the opponents many a times are using quasi-logical statements to try and deprecate the Muslims, as I had mentioned before.
- After the victory of the Muslims in Badr, the phenomenon of idol-worship was finished in Madinah: People either converted to Islam in truth, or became hypocrites. Allah knows best, but as I have mentioned before, this also shows that power and victory has an effect in leading the community to view the victor favorably and of joining the cause of the victor– no one likes to be part of a community that is suffering defeats non-stop. Definitely, there are periods of difficulty, periods where men’s souls are tested, but if this keeps on going for one generation, two generations, and so on, then most people will simply shut down, since total hopelessness is not part of the things a human body and a human mind can take forever.
- Allah knows best, but it seems that engaging in Jihad in the proper Shar’i manner has, as one of its good consequences, the emergence of a feeling among the Muslim community that they are on the ‘march forward’. This is definitely not part of a logical syllogism to prove Islam as correct, but rather has to do with feelings and emotions of attachment to the Islamic Ummah and to the project of the growth of Islam in the world.
- If a person can understand that Allah is not obliged to enter anyone from among His Creation into Paradise, then it should be much easier to comprehend that Shar’i rules do not necessarily have to follow an “equality for everyone” basis. There is an obvious relationship between the two, since one is related to choices Allah makes in connection with rules that are to be followed in this temporal world, the result of which are a differentiation in ordinances concerning any given individual (taking into account his various relationships), while the other is with regards to eternal life, where the differentiation between individuals becomes fully demonstrated, since it is the ultimate manifestation of Allah’s Creative Will with regards to these individuals.
- We often hear about how the non-Muslims will always oppose the establishment of Islam, since this would lead to a total loss of freedom for the non-Muslims, which anyone would be unwilling to give up. I say that this is a recourse to an animalistic sense of survival within the human (What I call the “barbarian clause”: ‘We must destroy these barbarians or we ourselves will be destroyed’). The specific laws of Islam regarding establishment of its rule may be studied, and I am sure that non-Muslims would find some positives and perhaps some negatives as they see it, but crucially it would not be based on the animalistic fear being propagated above, which is meant to immediately shut down any investigation or research.
- On the issue of the term ‘barbarian’, we find some interesting which is that every community calls the outsiders ‘barbarians’, it was as common to the Japanese viewing the Americans as it was to the Europeans viewing the Africans.
- A thought about the term ‘Islamophobia’: It seems to denote in my mind at least a phobia or a dislike of a natural characteristic, and natural in here means ‘ethnic’ like Jewish and its relationship to Anti-Semitism. But for us Muslims, the crucial factor is our beliefs and tenets, so it should be asked why more obvious terms like ‘anti-Islam’ or ‘Islam-hater’ are not used for those who purposefully deride Islam. I for one do not think ‘Muslim’ should be used (as in anti-Muslim or Muslim-hater), since unfortunately the term ‘Muslim’ has been watered down to the level of a pseudo-ethnicity. However, Islam as a way of life can still be identified as something that people will be for or against, that they will either love or hate.
- Synonyms in Arabic are never connotations of the exact same meaning, as opposed to what we see in English, so one has to endeavor to find out what the difference in the meaning is.
- Muaamalaat (Jurisprudential rulings regarding interactions between individuals) is always based on the ‘Urf (custom), and the language of the people as well (again, dictated on customary usage). Definitely, certain words and phrases give an automatic effect, but many a times the interactions are not based on these few words and phrases, and this is also why the Qaadhi (judge) must be someone from the locality, who knows how the people customarily interact with each other.
- People are often annoyed if you say that everyone is a slave and he needs to choose his master properly and prudently; but then, if one is annoyed, this means they are taking a basically atheistic viewpoint of reality (i.e. that they are equal with everyone else, while at the same time they are in absolutely no relationships of dependency with others, and similar contradictory propositions).
- If one reads history he will see how many times in the past few centuries (well before the end of World War 2), the French, Russians, Germans, and British were shredding each other into pieces, even as they forwarded so-called “enlightened ideals” unto the rest of humanity. In this sense, seeing Muslims as uniquely belligerent makes no sense. What happens is that most of us have a black hole when it comes to something other than World War 1 or World War 2, and this is lamentable, and plays right into the hands of the non-Muslim opponent. (What I mean to say is that there were many more World wars than these two, its being named as such seems to indicate all was well and dandy before 1914, which is definitely false).
- It seems that whenever warfare is carried out, there is a very slick usage of terms and concepts, sometimes a wholesale repackaging of linguistic terms. “Collateral damage in the theater of operations” is a phrase that comes to many of our minds, which is a certain way of talking about a bomb that killed an entire non-combatant family, for example. It is all fine that the existence of non-combatant deaths is acknowledged, but terms like ‘collateral’, ‘damage’, and ‘theater of operations’ seems at least to me, to implicitly say that non-combatants are legitimate targets in this play, this game: otherwise how did they become ‘collateral’, which seems to be very much like ‘equivalent to’ the combatants? Perhaps there is an attempt at some level to conflate the equivalence in humanity between non-combatants and combatants to the equivalence in belligerence, since the audience cannot differentiate how and why the term is being used as such. [Of course, Islam has its own rules about warfare, but here I am just looking at how the other side is using terms and presenting the whole ‘enterprise’].
- It is asked that how can one reconcile the traditions mentioning that the Prophet ﷺ appears to people in their dreams in truth in reality, with the fact that no two people have ever witnessed the Prophet ﷺ in the same form? The answer is that the soul of the Prophet ﷺ is malleable according to the dreamer’s spiritual reality – so depending on the purity or lack thereof of the person experiencing the dream (plus other factors of that person’s soul), then the Prophet ﷺ will appear to him in that form and manner.
- Also, in Paradise, when the beatific Vision occurs, one will see Allah according to his knowledge of Allah; again the distinction between Basar [the physical eyes] versus Baseerah [the knowledge/discernment which Allah has created within the person] comes up.
- If we say that secular republican democracy advances and does take into consideration the wrongs that have been previously done through changes in their constitution, yet there seems to be no provision to recompense those to whom repeated wrongs had been done in the past [for example, Native Americans, even if they receive reparations, it would be impossible for them to go back to their former condition ever, since they are irreparably at the mercy of the governments that now rule them]. The death of ancestors cannot be paid back, especially after so many generations, in addition to the impossibility of bringing to the present the fruits that so many generations would have produced, had they remained alive.
- Which also brings us to the issue that, despite what might be said against it, robust engagements (let us say Jihad) generally does alter the conquered peoples and conquered lands into the image of the conquerors in one way or the other; think of Spanish, French, and English languages, of Christianity, Hinduism and Islam, or of secular democracy – these would not have been possible without aggressive military incursions, invasions, colonialism, imperialism, and so forth.
- Granted that in many cases the result is not exactly what the original invaders would have wished for, but the interaction generally does change the invaded into the image of the invaders. One can think of countries that are formally secular in Africa, Latin America, or Asia, had the Europeans never invaded, they would most probably have retained their monarchies, tribal-based systems, or other similar forms of government; even though they are not now part of any empire, yet they took up the secular, non-monarchical types of government after their independence struggles achieved their required results. That is, they saw that the only way to successfully “throw of the yoke of Imperialism” was to adopt fundamental tenets of the imperialists’ abstract ideals.
- Allah knows best, but it seems that if a Muslim is pushed to study secular subjects, it is best if he pursues history and other humanities-oriented subjects, rather than mathematics, biology, and engineering. This is because in the latter case he would not gain insight into how the world powers think out global strategy with regards to Muslims. But with history and the social sciences, he will very easily see that there are patterns at work in terms of how one nation seeks to conquer and subdue other nations – he will understand much better the Qur’anic and Prophetic injunctions as to how the Muslim body should interact with other nations, and why they make sense in the context of global power politics [which is the same now as they were centuries ago, since again, human nature changes very little across the ages].
- We constantly hear of the “evils” of religion, I suggest that “national interest” has become much more potent as an ideology used to eliminate opposition, or is starting to become in places here such line of thinking was not forwarded even a few years ago. So when looked at from this angle, ‘national interest’ is a major component of the ‘Deen’ in a land.
- Very importantly, there are characteristics of “national interest” that are purely faith-based, I would say even mythological. For if any given country has certain borders, with certain laws governing what happens within these borders, there is no logical reason to say that these borders or laws should remain or change, either through war or peace. It seems then, that the matter, from this perspective, is circular in its reasoning (i.e. the statement: “We need to wage this war or pass these laws in order to expand, maintain, or break up these lines on the world map and what they stand for”).
- And also, the laws in any country are not formulated in a vacuum. Rather, there is a constant battle to create facts on the ground in terms of formal legislation, so that custom and other factors can solidify the legislation already in place, or create enough pressure for legislation to be revoked.
- I do not say that secular nation-states are neutral with regards to religion: Rather, they are very much against organized religions in general, since the maxim of ‘religious freedom’ in fact denotes implicitly and perhaps even explicitly the permission to set up mock-religions, a setting up which will be protected by the secular nation-state. This is definitely not a neutral position, rather it is in favor of those who wish to denigrate what is established in organized religion.
- Thus, I may be mistaken, but the current path of legislation in many countries seems to be towards establishing/solidifying the extreme autonomy of the individual to enter into ad-hoc partnerships with other individuals or groups at the expense of formal organizations and institutions, be they concrete or abstract. Thus, the nation-state seems to become the vanguard of the individual in connection to the establishment of ‘mock religions’ as opposed to ‘serious organized religion’, and of the individual in connection with ‘casual sex’ as opposed to ‘traditional marriage’, and other similar dichotomies.
- There seems to be a type of ‘soft fascism’ with regards to how Muslims’ allegiances are being “doctored”: That is, we are told to give up all strict/absolute obedience to the Islamic Shariah (basically to Islam itself), and substitute this for adherence to the values and norms of the country in question (this is above and beyond the obligatory obedience to the constitution, failure of which can lead to formal, legal repercussions). So it seems to be a ‘soft fascism’ at work in here rather than what former theorists of republican, secular democracy may have put forward [i.e. of a nation that could accommodate various pluralisms of belief and outlook in its midst].
- Then, again, this seems to be a very ambitious and even unattainable project, since the people may have different ‘absolute allegiances’ other than to their nation-state, and it is contradictory to expect every citizen to place his absolute allegiance in two conglomerates at the same time (their religion and their country).
- If we wish to gain a better understanding of the Qur’an, we should find out the different groups within which the Surah under consideration belongs to (such as Makkan/Madinan, Hadhari/Safari, Layli/Nahaari, Naasikh/Mansuukh, etc.) so that we do not focus only on one aspect of the Chapter but rather see how it relates to a wider interconnection within the Qur’an.
- People ask that how can the spiritual world be taken as true when the masses do not have direct access to it. We say that every field or specialty has a corridor that needs to be passed in order for someone to directly experience its reality. When naturalists speak of scientific findings, this is in fact something not available to the laity, but rather to those who have taken the steps to carry out the research and given us the reports of their results.
- With regards to Islamic spirituality, there is a method as well to achieve the state where one can sense the spiritual world: This is why the Companions (RAA) said they could hear the praise of the pebbles in the hands of the Prophet ﷺ, or they could hear the food praising Allah while they were eating it, or when they heard the stone which had just fallen to the bottom of Hellfire, and other similar reports.
- But why could they hear it? Because the pathway of communication between themselves and that world (that specialty) was open to them much more than it is open to us, either due to their own spiritual position, that of the Prophet ﷺ who was in their midst, or a combination of the two. The important thing is that this pathway is open to us in this age as well, which is why one today also hears of those whose limbs and hearts are mentioning the name of Allah, or one may hear the name of Allah being mentioned supra-materially in the presence of certain pious individuals, and other such things – they can see a portion of the spiritual world through this same “pathway of communication”, even if its intensity is not as great as it was in the previous generations. Thus, it is not something restricted to reports or “tales”, but rather with the proper methodology and channels, it may be perceived directly even today.
- From a lecture delivered in the 1990’s, it was said that Christian preachers had stopped admonishing their congregation with regards to adultery – it was so common there was no point talking to them about it. But now we see that even homosexual practices are being formally accepted by a number of churches…who knows, maybe even incest and bestiality may be formally accepted/tolerated in their “church constitutions”, if future cultural traits dictate it. It also seems to indicate that some religious organizations see their relevance as more important than proclaiming what they believe to be the truth.
- People are generally of two temperaments, Jalaali and Jamaali. The first group are those who are (for lack of a better phrase) geared towards the Attributes of Allah that signify His Majesty, while the latter are more oriented towards those attributes that signify His Mercy and Beauty. One should not seek to change a person of one temperament to the other, but he should work with what he has; it is also mentioned that if he has a large preponderance towards the “Majestic” attributes, he should try to incorporate some of the Jamaali traits as well, so that he may become more like the Prophet ﷺ, who had a balance of both temperaments, with a slight predominance for Jamaali traits.
- Concerning knowledge, it was mentioned that this is a Jalaali trait; this is why one notices Qur’an teachers always stern and serious when listening to their students, since we are talking about the proper transmission of revealed knowledge. Also, when one learns the basics of the religion and what is to be necessarily attributed to Allah and is to be necessarily not attributed to Him, there is also a lot of Majesty in this, since one realizes the incapability of humans to understand the reality of Allah the Exalted.
- We may see that a Hadeeth has a dozen or so chains of transmission, and that due to this it is classed as Mutawaatir as per the definition of a certain scholar. But, a crucial question is, does this mean that the certainty of this narration is like that of well-known Islamic practices (Like how many units of prayer there are for each prayer)?
- In fact, no, the narration is not as certain as the question of the Rakaats, since the practices are much more common and well-known than what can be ascertained from a dozen or slightly more chains. To explain this a little more, if it is asked that one should bring the proofs that Dhuhr prayer is 4 Rakaats, someone may collect all the chains, and say that they have found 200 chains for this. But this is in fact an injustice upon the issue at hand: The entire community of Muslims from the time of the Prophet ﷺ numbering in the thousands knew and practiced this, then transmitted this to tens of thousands, and so on until we have millions of people who know that Dhuhr prayer is 4 Raka’ats.
- And very crucially, this is also the case with the Qur’an. One might find written that there are a thousand chains for the Qur’an. But if we think about it, how many people know Chapters like Al-Kawthar and Al-Faatihah? Hundreds of millions now, who took it from others all the up to thousands of the Companions of the Prophet ﷺ.
- We see that almost everything mentioned in the Qur’an ‘in theory’ is related one way or the other with the Prophet ﷺ and his household – even adultery and how this process is to be formally presented and evaluated, as seen in the charge raised against Ayesha (RAA).
- Shaykh Ahmad Zarruq (RA) mentioned that one needs to make Tawbah (repentance) even for having delayed making the original Tawbah. There is the sin, then the Tawbah that should be made for this sin, and this repentance should be done immediately after recognizing the sin as such. But if there is a delay, then we should make an additional Tawbah for the delay. Also, we know that the committed sin should not be mentioned to anyone (in the sense of boasting about it, talking about it in a good way, etc.). If such is done, then according to many scholars, one must make Tawbah again.
- From an advice of the Shuyookh: Even if part-time studies are all we can do, we should go for it. Additionally, the scholars say to the effect that we will never have “sufficient” or “optimal” time or money for studies, because this idea is a trick from the Shaytaan to keep us from formally learning the religion and being a preserver and defender of the Deen. We need to know that things in the world are never “perfect” or “proper” if we wish to keep ourselves from doing something; but when we have the determination, we will find the way to push through with our endeavors, regardless of our situation throughout the journey.
- It is a fallacy to think that because someone accepts the many positive qualities and high ranks of the Ahl ul Bayt, then he must despise the Companions such as ‘Umar and Abu Bakr (RAA). Rather, the middle path is the correct one, where there is no hatred or enmity for anyone who the Prophet ﷺ ordered us to love, respect, and follow. Of course, there are technical issues of the Usool of Sunni belief as to why certain narrations which are presented are taken in a certain light and not in another one, but I am just talking in brief in here.
- The Battle of Uhud was like a drill in some ways; importantly, it trained the Muslims as to what to do when the Prophet ﷺ would eventually pass away. Thus, Allah informed them of the right and wrong things they did when they heard the rumor of the Prophet’s ﷺ passing away. Then, when the Prophet ﷺ really did pass on to the next world, the Muslims did feel it to be a disaster, but were able to sustain Islam as a religion. Otherwise, with the events that unfolded around them (wars of apostasy against many tribes, engagements against other non-Muslim foes, etc.) the Islamic polity and Islam as a religion could have very easily been wiped out, since Madeenah could have been easily overrun under ‘normal’ circumstances, or if the Muslims were ambivalent about the protection of the religion. So we see how a seemingly negative incident became in fact a positive point for Islam and the Muslims in general.
- According to a Saheeh Hadeeth, the reason why people were created differently and with different ranks is so that Allah may be thanked.
- Ayaat (miracles) have a lot of Jalaala (Majesty associated with Allah) about them – since one is forced to believe in the Prophet on whose hands they have been manifested; otherwise, punishment is certain in this world and/or in the next.
- If we consider the matter properly, we would know that the nurturing of the Sahaabas at the hands of the Prophet ﷺ was in itself an amazing miracle, since he took those who were either very simple or very rough people and made them into conquerors of the world and universities in their persons, only in the span of one generation; while this is something never before seen in the history of mankind – This I would say is one of the additional miracles of the Qur’an and of the Prophet ﷺ, and this cannot at all be ignored.
- It is said: If an ‘Aalim tells you that he is knowledgeable in only Tafseer or only Fiqh or only Usool, then this is a sign that he is in fact not knowledgeable either in his own field or in other fields of Islam; the reason being that all the specialties of Islam grow together within a person as he is formally learning the religion, and they cannot be disassociated from one another.
- Normally, if someone asks about the reason as to why Person A (who is from a Muslim household) goes to Heaven while Person B (from a non-Muslim household) goes to Hellfire, the answer might be that Allah shows Mercy to the first and Executes His Justice upon the second. While this is indeed correct, yet we also need to realize another answer, which is that every Person (whether A, B, C, …) must intellectually be convinced of Islam as his religion, and only then will his faith be considered as proper (and this is an opinion of a large segment of the Muslim scholarship). So we should look at it from different angles, not only from the point of view of what Allah bestows upon any of His Slaves, but also from the viewpoint of what every person born anywhere in the world is required to know and believe as his necessary obligation.
- We see that if a person who is totally cut off from the world comes to the independent conclusion that Allah exists and that He is the only Deity to be worshiped, we Muslims would consider him as a believer (a Mu’min) and part of the body of Muslims.
- But it might be asked that if he eventually does come into contact with civilization and specifically with Muslims, how would we be sure that he would pick our religion as opposed to other religions out there? From what I understand, the answer is quite simple: He will see that Islam is the only religion that conforms to his previous conclusion in terms of theology/cosmology, while other ideologies, philosophies and religions fail in this regard. So the transition from “lone believer” to “Muslim within the larger community” would in fact be quite seamless and smooth.
- Many people ask about contradiction where the term ‘the entity cannot exist at the same time with different attributes’ is brought up. This has to do with time being a ‘quantity’ indicating change, so the contradiction as far as I see it is in saying that there is change yet no change.
- It is mentioned that the ‘Aql (intellect) is the sign of the Meethaq (covenant taken from the Children of Adam in the world of Arwaah).
- A lot is made by anti-Islamic persons about the violence that was supposedly unleashed by the Prophet ﷺ during his lifetime. But if we study the Seerah, we see that the full death toll in the battles of Islam during the Prophet’s ﷺ time was 1018 deaths, about 700 unbelievers and 300 Muslims; a figure definitely much lower than many other ‘battle-oriented states’ in history.
- Many scientists and naturalists belittle Muslims for speaking of “hidden, magical powers such as gods”, saying that whenever we do not understand something material we fall back on a ‘God of the Gaps’ explanation. With respect to Islam this is in fact inaccurate, but even if we step back a little and see some of the forces and energies postulated by scientists, we hear of ‘dark matter’, ‘black holes’. It seems to be a ‘Dark of the gaps’ explanation by science, that if something is not currently reducible to formulas and material explanations, the label ‘dark’ or ‘black’ can be applied to it, the scientists can move on with their work, and no one questions why these ‘magical terms’ are being employed.
Muslim Answers 
How should Muslims deal with the massive wave of anti-Islam website send videos? Some of them are obviously funded by right-wing groups. But there are some done by real Ex-Muslims and spear to be “intellectual”, (some of them are clueless, but some at least deserve a response). Why do you think there is a massive anti-Islam movement made by Ex Muslims, and how did you It get so massive? Don’t get me wrong some ex Muslims keep to themselves and even respect the religion, but some go out of their way to really demonize Islam as best they can.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Wa Salam Alaykum
I can only answer based on what I know, it may not be articulated on the basis of the formal Usool of Islam, so bear with me, and Allah knows best:
There is always an effort to undermine and destroy Islam and this has been going on from the beginning of the Prophetic call. While there was a strong presence of Islam and the Muslims we could say that many of the opponents of Islam would be intimidated or awed, but for the past few decades especially, this awe or ‘fear’ has mostly left the hearts of the opponents, and you are right; even leaders, converts in Western countries report that for the first time ever they are hearing of youngsters saying that they are ashamed to be Muslims, that they do not want to be Muslims anymore.
I do think that there is an intellectual issue involved, but there is also the element of how the opponent ‘smells blood’ right now, that they can remove what they see more as a nuisance that a real threat. Perhaps the two are interrelated, in that we do not have the strength and power as Muslims in order to confidently justify who we are, and this submissiveness many a times plays right into not having the strength and power we should have.
In terms of academic answers, I think there are two matters: If we wish to remain laymen, we should obviously learn what is necessary for our own faith and practice, and if possible, formally look out for all the objections and questions that the non-Muslims throw at the Muslims, and present the same to the traditional scholars who one has access to. However, even this requires some knowledge of how to extract what is a real objection from what is a pesudo-objection or a rant, or how to extract the objection from the rant, etc., and this may not be possible for everyone, since it requires concentration, peace of mind, and extreme restraint (so one would have to first prepare one’s self for this, I know for one that I am not ready to swim directly into every objection). In any case, it seems that a proper counter-refutation effort will not get off the floor properly until there is a whole institution or full-time academy with proper scholars only for this purpose, along with its funding, etc. [while right now, we only have the efforts of individuals who try to do what they can based on their time and efforts].
The second point is that we can also go for learning the religion formally, since this will definitely help in the process and I think we can better parse the objections of the non-Muslims with the rules of Islam and the scholars of Islam. Just as a suggestion, there is a free English ‘Aalim program at: http://nurulilm.com/courses/courses-for-brothers/english-alim-program.aspx, you may want look into it [I am mentioning this to you since most Muslims who contact me are those who simply do not have the money for a full-time program, yet the administrators in this ‘Aalim program would be quite flexible with the time along with the advantage of no course fee].
This is what I can say for the time being. Sorry if I was somewhat unclear, but I can give more insights if necessary.
Wa Salam.
LikeLike