2 weeks 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

against the scholars of

against the scholars of tafsîr and kalâm? By saying, “They should have known,” he attempts to give lessons to these exalted scholars. By saying, “It should not be forgotten,” he imputes ignorance to the most prominent people of the auspicious century praised by Rasûlullah (’alaihi ’s-salâm). This passage shows that he has not heard about the subtle knowledge in the books Islamic scholars wrote about time and space. If he had read and understood the books of Islamic scholars, he would not have spoken ill about Islam’s most beloved personalities, and he would have known his place and behave himself. It is true that, like in his novels The Thorns, A Child from the Village and The Magic City, he gives the impression of being a scholar to the youth in his Qur’ân commentary which he wrote with a fluent style and deceptive words, thus attaching young minds to himself; but those who have woken up from unawareness by reading the blessed writings of Islamic scholars notice at once his poisonous ideas and aberrant attitude which he interspersed among these attractive writings of his. 5) Like in his statment, “To me, this experiment was made in order to train the person who would become the caliph of the world,” he sees himself in a magnifying mirror by saying “to me” at many places of his tafsîr book. It is understood here that he is not ignorant, but vulgarly ignorant. If he had learned the zâhirî knowledge of the Qur’ân by reading al-Baidâwî’s tafsîr and its annotation and at-Tafsîr al-kabîr and understood something from the mysteries in the Qur’ân by reading Ni’matullah’s Tafsîr and the tafsîr book Rûh al-bayân by Hadrat ‹smâil Hakk› of Bursa, he would have known his place and perhaps behave himself. 6) When interpreting the 117th âyat of the sûrat al-Baqara, he says, “The Creator does not have any match. And here the philosophy of Wahdat al-wujûd remains completely outside Islamic conception, and Islam refuses the concept of Wahdat alwujûd of non-Muslims,” thus showing that he knows nothing of tasawwuf. He supposes that the inspirations and kashfs of the great men of tasawwuf were only philosophy. He goes to an extreme in insolence by saying “non-Muslims” about the ’Ulamâ’ ar-râsihîn, for the teachings of Wahdat al-wujûd that had existed before Islam also had been put forward by the men of tasawwuf belonging to ancient revealed true religions. Greek philosophers – 228 –

and the unbelievers of the Alexandria school had appropriated these teachings stealing them from the religious men of tasawwuf. The knowledge of Wahdat al-wujûd is not an invention of philosophers, but it is the ma’rifa and kashf of those believers who occupied high grades in the religion. [1] 7) In the tafsîr of the third âyat of the sûrat az-Zumar, he says, “One who has tawhîd and ikhlâs does not ask anything from somebody other than Allah. He does not trust in anybody who has been created. People deviated from the tawhîd preached by Islam. Nowadays, awliyâ’ are worshipped in every country. People ask intercession of them just as the pre-Islamic Arabs worshipped angels and statues. There exists no intermediary or intercession between Allah and men in respect of tawhîd and ikhlâs revealed by Allah,” With these words, he announces that he is a Wahhâbî. 8) This socialist writer thinks of himself as a scholar of tafsîr and misinterprets many âyats. For example, he says in his interpretation of the seventh âyat of the sûrat an-Nisâ’, “Men have one share from what the parents and the close relatives left. Women also have one share from what the parents and the close relatives left. It is, little or much, one share, as prescribed...” On the other hand, Islamic scholars said about the same âyat, “Men have shares from what the parents and the close relatives left. Women also have shares from what the parents and the close relatives left. Whether the property left is little or much, they will be given their shares in the prescribed amounts.” Its reason also has been explained in al-Baidâwî’s tafsîr. Especially about the âyat following that one, he says, “We do not see any evidence of abolition here. To our opinion this âyat is explicit. It is fard as prescribed,” and thus he does not feel shame to write that he interprets according to his opinion. However, the scholars of tafsîr, chiefly al-Baidâwî, said that this âyat was mustahab, though there were also those who said that it was wâjib. And it has been applied accordingly in all Islamic countries. After quoting the preceding âyat, he says, “Allâhu ta’âlâ has distributed possessions and property to society. Society is obliged to use these possessions well. Society essentially owns all possessions. Heirs [trustees] have the right to use these [1] For details on Wahdat al-wujûd, see Endless Bliss, I, chapter 40, and III, chapter 56. – 229 –

Priest of Nature: The Religious Worlds of Isaac Newton (Rob Iliffe)
Belief and Islam
Islam and Christianity
Answer to an Enemy of Islam
Advice for the Muslim
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
Discovering Islam
Seadet-i Ebediyye - Endless Bliss Second Fascicle
The Sunni Path
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
The Forgiveness of Sins - The Religion of Islam
(or, “Now That I've Found Islam, What Do I Do With It?”) - Knowledge ...
Islam ~ Its Basic Practices and Beliefs - Wynne Chambers
Christian Encounter with Islam - Reformed Theological Seminary
Confessions Of A British Spy