5 months ago

Islams Reformers

The bigotry of the religion reformers or bigots of science who surfaced lately to blame all previous scholars, basic fundamental beliefs or practices

sûrat al-Fil, displays

sûrat al-Fil, displays some of his heresies, which can be outlined as follows: 1. Thinking that the wisdom and the religion were different from each other, he claimed to be the first man to unite them. 2. He said that the Islamic scholars before him had not studied logic, mathematics, history and geography, that it had been deemed as a sin to learn sciences, and that he would introduce these sciences into Islam. He denied that, for many centuries, these had been taught in every madrasa and that thousands of books had been written in these fields, thus he tried to put an end to the teaching of the Ahl as-Sunna books and to spread the irreligious propagandas written by the enemies of Islam under the name of philosophy in Muslim countries. When the professors of Jâmi’ al- Azhar raised objections to these propagandas, he stigmatized them with “retrogression and enmity against knowledge, science and logic”. 3. He attacked against marrying four women in the official paper in 1297/1880. 4. He said that, before him, thousands of Islamic scholars had introduced into Islam things which had nothing to do with Islam, that they had gone wrong in understanding the Qur’ân and Hadîth, and that he had been correcting them. 5. In his book Islam and Christianity, he wrote that all religions were the same with the exception of some minor façade differences, and recommended that Jews, Christians and Muslims support one another. He wrote to a priest in London, “I expect that the two great religions, Islam and Christianity, will shake hands and embrace each other. Then, by supporting one another the Torah, the Bible and the Qur’ân will be read everywhere and will be revered by every nation.” He believed that Christianity was a right religion and awaited the time when Muslims would read the Bible. 6. He said that the believers had abandoned the right path and thereby lapsed into a pitiable situation, that the religion would shake hands with knowledge and then Allâhu ta’âlâ would complete His Light. To him, Allâhu ta’âlâ had not completed His religion in the time of our master Rasûlullah (sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam) and Islamic scholars had not shaken hands with knowledge. 7. He wrote in his book Islam and Christianity, “If a person is heard to say a statement which shows his unbelief in a hundred – 180 –

espects and his belief in one respect, that person will be accepted as a believer. It is idiocy to think that any philosopher or man of idea would say a statement which does not show belief even in one respect versus unbelief in a hundred respects. Then, they all should be acknowledged as believers. The word ‘zindîq’ does not exist in Islam. It has been invented afterwards.” Misrepresenting the rule, “One [sign of] belief in a statement of a Muslim who has not been seen openly to have a sign of unbelief will rescue him from unbelief,” he accepted all unbelievers and philosophers to be believers. Because he himself was a zindîq, he did not like this word to be used. He denied the hadîth, “Zindîqs among my umma will increase,” which is written in Kunûz ad-daqâ’iq and ad- Daylamî’s Musnad. 8. In the interpretation of the âyat, “He who does goodness as heavy as a mote will get its reward certainly,” of the sûrat az- Zilzâl, he wrote: “Whether a Muslim or an unbeliever, everybody who does good deeds will enter Paradise.” This wrong, unjust claim, which would be sneered at by the most ignorant and most block-headed people, has been admitted neither by his admirers nor even by the simpletons who have been following him. Sayyid Qutb, one of his strict followers, in his interpretation of the 124th âyat of the sûrat an-Nisâ’, had to say, “Master Muhammad ’Abduh does not ever remember the clearness of the âyats contradicting his thought. These âyats contradict ’Abduh’s ideas.” In fact, the dosage of the masonic opium which Abduh was made to swallow in Paris was so strong that his mind and conscience were too upset to see the relations between the âyats. 9. In the interpretation of the sûrat al-’Asr, he said, “Îmân does not mean an imitative belief in the things which mind and conscience cannot grasp. It is not îmân to memorize and say some words which one has heard from his parents. Islam is against imitation. It is of no value to have come before, so everything must be solved by one’s investigation through reason.” In his Risâlat attawhîd, [1] however, he wrote: “If reason cannot grasp something in the religion, it has to believe it,” thus his words disagreed with each other. 10. Georgy Zaidan, the proprietor of the Hilâl Publications in Egypt and author of The History of Islamic Civilization, wrote [1] A compilation of his propagandas directed to the students of Almadrasat as-Sultâniyya in Beirut in 1885, published a year after his death. – 181 –

Priest of Nature: The Religious Worlds of Isaac Newton (Rob Iliffe)
Belief and Islam
Islam and Christianity
Advice for the Muslim
Answer to an Enemy of Islam
Sahaba - The Blessed
Documents of the Right Word
Confessions of a British Spy and British Enmity Against Islam
Seadet-i Ebediyye - Endless Bliss First Fascicle
Seadet-i Ebediyye - Endless Bliss Second Fascicle
The Sunni Path
Discovering Islam
Why Did They Become Muslims
The Proof of Prophethood
Seadet-i Ebediyye - Endless Bliss Third Fascicle
The Origins of Islamic Reformism in Southeast Asia ... - I-Epistemology
Islamic Law Reform - Institute for Social Policy and Understanding
Islam The Religion Of Submitting To Allah
(or, “Now That I've Found Islam, What Do I Do With It?”) - Knowledge ...
Christian Encounter with Islam - Reformed Theological Seminary
Confessions Of A British Spy