Is THEM Guilty of Shirk? - Dr. Wesley Muhammad

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Many minds have not been unlocked for the second reading, especially the anthropomorphists and those of empirical thinking. You need Allah's help to open for you the second readings.‖ What is your proof, Beloved, that your‘s is one of the minds so ―unlocked‖ by Allah so as to know the implied meanings and thus to know that these negate the explicit meanings of the Ayat al-Sifat or verses mentioning Allah‘s anthropomorphic Attributes? With due respect, there is a lot of pontificating here. So those of us who strive to think empirically are especially those with locked minds? Oh, I thought this was M.A.L.I., the Muslim American LOGIC Institute? Did I make a wrong turn somewhere and stumble into the Muslim American DOGMATIC Institute? Or, less cynically, the ―Muslim American Institute of Those Special Minds Unlocked By Allah In Contrast to the Fools Who Lock Their Minds Chasing Empirical Data‖? And if the empirical data supports their anthropomorphist theology, this is but proof of the folly of empirical thinking? Wow. Really, Beloved? Imam Salim says in conclusion, on a more personal note: ―Most of the followers of Imam W. Deen Mohammed and Minister Farrakhan are too sensitive to debate whether Fard Muhammad is G-d or not. That's why Dr. Westley has to deflect. He is not ready to scrutinize the teachings of Fard Muhammad and the Honorable Elijah Muhammad in comparison to the Qur'an. I am ready to take verse by verse of the Qur'an from the Arabic text and compare it to the teachings of Fard Muhammad to prove that Fard Muhammad did not write the Qur'an and He is not the G-d of the Qur'an. Let's start with Al-Fatihah. The Qur'an is the best argument for us or against us. So let me know when you are ready to start. Otherwise i will continue to watch and appreciate your research.‖ Sensitive? Please present evidence of this charge from any of my responses thus far. From what am I deflecting, Bro Imam Salim? If you have read my responses, you know that I deal directly with the Arabic Qur‘an and Sunna. I don‘t understand your charge against me. On what basis do you judge me as ―not ready‖ to scrutinize the Supreme Wisdom in the light of the Qur‘an? Have YOU scrutinized my public works in which I do just that and have you found them demonstrative of my lack of readiness? If so, please share your findings with your brother that I may benefit from your, not erudition (forgive my previous insult!), but divinely unlocked mind. For the record, We in the NOI do not at all claim that Master Fard Muhammad wrote the Qur‘an. No sir. Nor do I claim that HE is the God speaking in the Qur‘an. It is my claim, however, that the God of the Qur‘an is a divine man (shakhs). I thought we were already having the discussion about whether the Arabic Ayat of the Qur‘an justifies or condemns this claim. You are free to join this ongoing discussion at anytime. You are right though: the Qur‘an is the best argument. What I have been repeatedly pointing out, however, is that what you and Bro Mubaashir and others are juxtaposing to our claims is NOT the Arabic Qur‘an itself but your own idiosyncratic reading of the Qur‘an. I anxiously await your pointing out to me and us the Arabic Ayat that explicitly denies that Allah Ta‘ala is a shakhs (elevated or divine man). If it is in Surat al-Fatiha, as you seem to suggest, I certainly missed it! Bro Muhammad Abdur-Rahman, thank you for your contribution to this discussion. You made several points I would like to respond to. First, you raise the question to your a-alikes: ―So what should we do in the face of such attacks against our religion?‖ implying that my part in this discussion is tantamount to an attack against YOUR religion. Let us be clear: I am not over here to attack or even discuss YOUR or anyone else‘s religion: I am here to discuss MY religion, which is Islam; the Islam that Allah Ta‘ala revealed to the Seal of the Prophets Muhammad b. Abd Allah and is codified in the Qur‘an. That is NOT YOUR religion. Or rather, it is no more YOUR‘S than it is MINE. We have divergent understandings of this religion and that is what we are discussing. But please don‘t anyone for a second assume you have 32
ownership rights over this Islam that I don‘t have. You have ownership rights (and responsibilities) only over your particular understanding of the religion, as do I, mine. Secondly, you state the following: ―You are presenting us with these hadiths that have no relevance to God being a man in the Qur‘an. When Allah makes mention of His Hand, Tree, Animals, Ants etcetera. These are languages that speak in metaphor, and a metaphor is the concept of understanding one thing in terms of another.‖ Where is your proof, Beloved, that the Ayat al-Sifāt are metaphors? You have here, as is often done (e.g. Bro Mubaashir and Bro Imam Salim), made an assumption about Allah‘s word based on your own theological preferences, but offer no empirical evidence to justify that assumtion. You have the right to make such an assumption, but don‘t presume that I or we are contradicting the Qur‘an because we reject your theological preference and the assumptions about the Qur‘an that derive from it. Show in the Arabic Qur‘an where Allah identifies the Ayat al-Sifat as mutashābihāt (ambiguous) and therefore as metaphors? Or, show me where the Prophet Muhammad identified these as metaphors that are not to be taken as literal representations of God. I have provided evidence indicating that the Prophet expected us to understand a REAL eye and a REAL hand, etc., when he recited the Ayat al-Sifat. What evidence has anyone here provided that can impeach or impugn the evidence I have provided? I have also provided evidence that it was the Classical Sunni (Traditionalist) position that the Ayat al-Sifat were in fact among the mukhamāt verses and therefore are to be understood according to their apparent meaning, not majāz or metaphorical. You chose not to address that evidence. Instead, as is often done, you chose to ‗wax dogmatic‘ by insisting with no evidence that these verses are metaphors. Your case, Beloved, is totally unpersuasive. The hadith I cite are indeed relevant because, as Imam Ahmad and others have affirmed, ―The Sunna clarifies the Qur‘an.‖ While the Qur‘an is somewhat ambiguous – it neither explicitly affirms or denies that Allah is a man – the Sunna of the Prophet clears up that ambiguity: Allah is a divine man(shakhs) who is incomparable - laysa kamithlihi shay‘. While I do agree with you Bro Muhammad that the ―Qur‘an is our first source, contact, reference before we go to any other book for clear understanding,‖ the issue here is what do we do when the explicit words of the Qur‘an do not provide us with clear understanding? Your claim that ―all we need is the truth (Al- Qur'an) and we do have the truth‖ is to be summarily dismissed. If, when you go to Juma‘ and, while making salat, do qabd (clasp your left hand with your right), why do you do this? Or, even if you are a Maliki or a Shiite who does sadl (hands held freely by the side while praying), where do you get these practices from? Not the Qur‘an. The Book of Allah tells us to pray, but it never tells us exactly HOW to pray. The manner of our obligatory prayers derive almost wholly from the Sunna, either via hadith (e.g. qabd) or amal (the practice of Medinia - sadl). If all you had was the Qur‘an, Friday afternoon in the masajid would look profoundly deferent than it does now. In fact, ISLAM would look profoundly different. So let us not act like we can easily dispense with the Sunna – you know well that we cannot. Finally, you address the important aya in the Qur‘an, Surat al-A‟rāf [7]:143, which reads: And when Moses came at Our appointed time and his Lord spoke to him, he said: ―My Lord, show Yourself to me that I may look upon You.‖ [God] said: ―You can‘t see Me (lan taranī); but look at the mountain. If it remains in its place then you will see Me. So when his Lord appeared (tajallā) to the mountain He made it crumble and Moses fell dumbstruck on account of the lightning (sa‟iq an). Then when he recovered, he said: Glory to You! I turn to You, and I am the first of the believers! 33
Page 1 and 2: Is THEM Guilty of Shirk? The Long O
Page 3 and 4: ARGUMENT 1 First, Dr. Wesley refers
Page 5 and 6: your Allah is one Allah. So stand t
Page 7 and 8: "He ran the race." "He ran up the b
Page 9 and 10: He adds to his case by saying that
Page 11 and 12: Allah, only to turn around and say,
Page 13 and 14: In his review Bro Mubaashir display
Page 15 and 16: 1. Imam Ahmad Ibn Hanbal affirmed t
Page 17 and 18: came to the Prophet as a young man.
Page 19 and 20: Sunna is a formless, invisible God
Page 21 and 22: Salaam Bro Dr Wesley Muhammad 3.] D
Page 23 and 24: ―When the Prophet tells his peopl
Page 25 and 26: This issue of the significance of t
Page 27 and 28: ―So if it is said (by the believe
Page 29 and 30: When Imam Mubaashir stated; ―As a
Page 31: 7.] Dr Wesley Muhammad - Response P
Page 35 and 36: secondary meaning ―He manifested
Page 37 and 38: 9.] Dr Wesley Muhammad - Response P
Page 39 and 40: people say, ―He (God) is solid,
Page 41 and 42: ―Within the pages of the Holy Qur
Page 43 and 44: Salaam 12.] Kyle J. Ismail -Respons
Page 45 and 46: 14.] Dr Wesley Muhammad Response As
Page 47 and 48: To negate an act of the past we may
Page 49 and 50: Fakhr al-Din Razi (d. 1209) who, am
Page 51 and 52: which He bestowed on Mary, and a sp
Page 53 and 54: After all, how could we believe thi
Page 55 and 56: things, whoever says any of which,
Page 57 and 58: We are all familiar with the Greek
Page 59 and 60: Your positions were well laid out a
Page 61 and 62: Muslim and thus was an advocate of
Page 63 and 64: different opinions between the Saha
Page 65 and 66: Ru‘ya, with one possible exceptio
Page 67 and 68: In the Pushkin State Museum of Fine
Page 69 and 70: the sociological enigma of the mode
Page 71 and 72: 23.] Imam Salim Mu‟min Response t

Is THEM Guilty of Shirk? - Dr. Wesley Muhammad

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?