The Revenge of Radical Orientalism?

According to the Holy Qur’an, Islam abrogates earlier religious laws. It has repealed the religious laws revealed before it. Indeed, none of those laws was universal. All were regional and revealed to particular peoples. When our Prophet said, “I was sent as a prophet to all peoples,” he pointed to Islam’s universality.^[1] In short, the only universal religion is Islam, which was revealed to our Prophet. It should also be understood that no living religion other than Islam is divine or heavenly in nature. Those who use the expressions “heavenly, Abrahamic and divine” for corrupted religions are problematic individuals unfamiliar with the spirit of the Qur’an, the Sunnah and Islam’s primary sources, and ignorant of scholarly methodology.

The Holy Qur’an does not view the People of the Book favourably, and dozens of hadiths have also been transmitted from the Prophet exposing their true nature and character. In this context, it is worth briefly identifying the People of the Book. Regrettably, some people who have neither developed a deep understanding of the Islamic disciplines nor learned their methodology translate the term People of the Book into our language in an overly simplistic way. According to them, anyone possessing a book is among the People of the Book, a group that therefore includes Jews, Christians and Muslims. This approach puts truth and falsehood on the same footing, equating religions and their adherents. It seeks to make Muslims and unbelievers indistinguishable. Seen in this light, such an approach smacks of missionary activity. By presenting Muslim children with the notion that “Judaism and Christianity are also true religions,” they seek to turn them into infidels. For a Muslim, this constitutes treason against the homeland and the nation. Yet if the concept is examined in the context of the Qur’an as a whole, it becomes clear that the People of the Book means Jews and Christians. This is how it is used throughout the Qur’an, without a single exception. Not a single verse or hadith can be found that refers to Muslims as People of the Book. Those who fail to understand the matter properly approach revelation piecemeal or under someone else’s direction, with no grasp of the language or methodology.

Have those who wish to classify Muslims as People of the Book ever considered this verse? “قُلْ يَا أَهْلَ الْكِتَابِ تَعَالَوْاْ إِلَى كَلَمَةٍ سَوَاء بَيْنَنَا وَبَيْنَكُمْ أَلاَّ نَعْبُدَ إِلاَّ اللّهَ وَلاَ نُشْرِكَ بِهِ شَيْئًا وَلاَ يَتَّخِذَ بَعْضُنَا بَعْضاً أَرْبَابًا مِّن دُونِ اللّهِ فَإِن تَوَلَّوْاْ فَقُولُواْ اشْهَدُواْ بِأَنَّا مُسْلِمُونَ” “Say: ‘O People of the Book! Come to this common principle between us and you (established by Almighty Allah): We shall worship none but Allah, attribute divinity to no being other than Him, and accept no others as lords alongside Allah! If they turn away, then say: Bear witness that we have certainly submitted to Him.’”^[2] When you include Muslims among those meant by the People of the Book, you impose contradictions on the verse, whereas revelation is free from and above any such contradiction.^[3] It also amounts to accusing Muslims of associating partners with Allah. When we surveyed the Musannef collections and the entire Kütüb-ü Tisa, we found that the People of the Book referred to Jews and Christians. We can add the Zevaid collections to these as well. Here, through hadith sources, we are presenting the interpretation of our Prophet, to whom revelation descended. This information is extremely important for those who do not presume to second-guess the Prophet’s interpretation. Only Fahreddin Razi (may Allah have mercy on him) said that those who claim to be Muslims while accepting part of the Holy Qur’an and rejecting another part are the Muslims’ People of the Book, meaning apostates. The expression has a negative meaning. There is a narration that supports Razi: “The people of the book and the people of milk from my community will perish.” When Ukbe b. Âmir, the narrator of the hadith, asked, “Who are the people of the book, O Messenger of Allah?”, the Prophet gave this answer: “They are a group who learn Allah’s Book and then use it to contend against those who believe.” This was his reply.^[4] Calling those who learn the religious disciplines and use them against Islam, who make room for modernity, who seek legitimacy! for ideologies in the verses, and who set Allah’s verses against one another “People of the Book” is a significant statement that deserves reflection. It is also possible that the explanation here describes those who know the Qur’an but fail to do justice to their knowledge. 

When our Prophet said, “Do not ask the People of the Book anything…”^[5] he surely did not mean Muslims. Throughout his commentary, İbni Abbas (d. 68/ 687-688) emphasised that the People of the Book means Jews and Christians.^[6] This commentary is a work that discusses the Jews in great detail. Hasan el-Basri (d. AH 110), one of the early Qur’anic commentators and jurists qualified to exercise independent judgement, also explained the People of the Book as Jews and Christians.^[7] İmam Şafi (d. AH 204) defined the People of the Book through their characteristics. In this account, their characteristics are changing Allah’s rulings, denying Him, concealing the truth, squandering the revelation sent down to them and mixing falsehood into revelation.^[8] Because they altered and corrupted revelation, Almighty Allah prohibited following them and placing them in positions of authority in this verse: “يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوَاْ إِن تُطِيعُواْ فَرِيقًا مِّنَ الَّذِينَ أُوتُواْ الْكِتَابَ يَرُدُّوكُم بَعْدَ إِيمَانِكُمْ كَافِرِينَ” “O you who believe! If you obey a group of those (Jews and Christians) who were given the Book, they will turn you back (from Islam) after you have believed and make you unbelievers.”^[9] It must be understood that Muslim scholars have defined the People of the Book as a technical term in different contexts, drawing on the meanings arising from its use in the Qur’an and hadiths. These meanings can be seen in Islamic jurisprudence’s treatment of the law governing protected non-Muslim subjects. Drawing on all this, the People of the Book means Jews and Christians: those who believe in the existing Torah, Psalms and Gospel (even though corrupted), a designation that distinguishes Jews and Christians from polytheists. Although Jews and Christians corrupted the original books sent to them by Allah, they were called People of the Book because they retained, in part, beliefs such as those in Allah, prophets and the hereafter. The Holy Qur’an insistently calls on the People of the Book to abandon the errors in their beliefs and enter Islam. We consider it useful to reiterate this point once more: there is not a single verse in the Holy Qur’an praising Jews and Christians/the People of the Book. Yet there are hundreds of verses praising Muslims. In light of this truth, it is forbidden to regard Judaism and Christianity as true religions like Islam.^[10]

The conceptions of God, the hereafter, angels, prophets and scripture in Judaism and Christianity contain profoundly serious problems. Treating these groups, whose beliefs and practices contain deviations, as authorities to consult is contrary to the spirit of Islam. Because they are misguided, the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said: “Do not ask the People of the Book anything. Since they themselves are misguided/astray, they cannot lead you to right guidance. If you ask them, depending on the answer you receive, you will either affirm a falsehood or deny a truth. Even if Musa were among you, it would not be lawful for him to follow anyone but me.”^[11] To someone who suggested asking the People of the Book about a verse, our Prophet replied: “I have no doubt about Allah’s Book that would lead me to ask.”^[12]  İbni Abbas warned those who wished to ask questions by saying, “How can you ask them when Allah’s Book stands intact among you?”^[13] Abdullah b. Abbas then explained why they should not be consulted: “…They wrote the book with their own hands and corrupted it. Then they said, ‘This is from Allah.’ (They lied.) They sold the truth for a small price. Allah’s pure word is with you. Nothing (of human speech) has been mixed into it…”^[14] For the Jews were reading the Torah in Hebrew and explaining it in Arabic for Muslims. The Messenger of Allah instructed Muslims: “Neither deny nor affirm it; say, ‘We believe in what Allah has sent down to us.’”^[15]

The following event in Islamic history is interesting. Ömer, who was eager to pursue scholarly study and research, said that he had been taking lessons from one of the Kureyza Jews, who had written some things for him, and that he could present them to the Messenger of Allah if he wished. The Prophet’s face changed colour with anger. After Abdullah b. Mesud, who recognised what was happening, warned him, Ömer said the following to appease the Messenger of Allah: “We are content with Allah as our Lord, Islam as our religion and Muhammed (peace and blessings be upon him) as our Prophet.” Pleased by these words, the Messenger of Allah then said: “By Allah, who holds my soul, if Musa were among you now and you abandoned me to follow him, you would have gone astray. Of all communities, you have been allotted to me; of all prophets, I have been allotted to you.”^[16] Another great Companion who disapproved of asking Jews and Christians questions was Abdullah b. Mesud. İbni Mesud said that if you have to ask, “Accept what accords with Allah’s Book and reject what does not accord with Allah’s Book.”^[17] For the Qur’an is “a guardian/an overseer and arbiter” over earlier scriptures.^[18]

To offer a brief assessment after this explanation: the answers the People of the Book give to religious questions are the product neither of sound reason nor of reports from the Messenger, the most important form of truthful report and a source of knowledge for Muslims. Most are based on information written by their religious leaders themselves.^[19] It is unsound information. They may also have plans to make Muslims abandon Islam and sow doubts in their minds. Sensing possible dangers, both those we know and those we do not, the Messenger of Allah issued this warning for the future of his community. The Companions who understood the Messenger of Allah well hardly ever consulted the People of the Book. In particular, those who transmitted material from the People of the Book were not regarded as acceptable transmitters; the individuals who served as their sources likewise became known for transmitting Israelite traditions and failed to secure a place in reliable sources. So much so that the quantity of Israelite traditions in a Qur’anic commentary is directly proportional to its degree of reliability.

Members of the People of the Book in earlier times never settled their accounts with Islam and Muslims. After the Industrial Revolution, through the colonial order they established, they used their economic superiority to begin shaping scholarship as well, adding new entries to their old, unsettled accounts. Just as they shaped the world through the social and technical sciences, they also moved Christian propaganda onto a different footing through Orientalist activities. They opened institutes and faculties devoted to Muslims’ fundamental Islamic disciplines and stressed the objectivity of studying there. They imposed on Muslims the idea that using Orientalist sources in these institutions was objective and scientific. They argued that studies of this kind were “inadequate” unless Orientalists appeared in their bibliographies.   They used their political power to make the world accept these claims. They accused those who had not completed master’s degrees and doctorates there of being inadequate and criticised their works as subjective. Those heading the research institutes and institutions devoted their lives to blighting Muslims’ future. Ultimately, they produced a scholarly mentality(!) at odds with Islam’s God, religious law, scripture, Prophet, Companions, religious institutions, Qur’anic commentary, hadith, jurisprudence, Sufism, Islamic culture and history.

As circumstances changed, they claimed that the Holy Qur’an was not original, that “at least part of it was the Prophet’s own words,” and that hadith and Sunnah were Arab customs and culture compiled centuries after the Prophet and confined to the years 610-632. They reiterated the absolute historicity of the verses and the claim that Islamic law had been plagiarised from Rome. Their remarks disparaged everything deserving of respect, from our Prophet’s family to his Companions. They slandered the leading Companions who were pillars of hadith, jurisprudence and Qur’anic commentary. They tried to shape our thinking according to their own epistemological outlook. They declared war on proposals for political authority/guardianship that strengthened Islam’s presence, and on jihad. To pave the way for capitalism, they declared interest lawful and found verses! supporting economic liberalism. They frequently repeated that religion had no claim to rule. They promoted the description of jihad as “the cancer of religion.” They fiercely opposed Islamic modest dress, saying it would prevent the machinery of exploitation from turning. To keep their accredited operatives in societies with Muslim populations, they declared war on the verses concerning authority that form the essence of Islamic politics. Thus they first made Muslims an inseparable part of the world system, integrating them into capitalist or socialist thought; then, to ensure that they could never rise again, they made it impossible for Muslims even to utter the word jihad, the most important act of worship. They linked every bloodstained project of their own around the world to jihad. Eventually, those heading our country’s largest religious institutions briefed their hand-picked politicians by saying, “Jihad is not a fundamental act of worship.” They tried to set Muslims against one another by singling some out as “jihadists.” In the end, academics and politicians who judged Allah’s commands on behalf of unbelievers came to shape the country. Self-centred, insecure, mentally disturbed latter-day antinomians, devoid of methodology, scholarly depth and the dignity of being Muslim, came forward and said, “If only there were no verses on jihad in the Qur’an.” Let it not be forgotten that those who reject jihad can only save their homeland, their martyrs’ blood, Jerusalem and occupied Mecca by transferring capital to unbelievers through “SMS prayers”(!). Yet everyone who opposes jihad is a lackey of the infidels who wishes to destroy Muslims’ means of defence and leave Muslims’ homeland defenceless. 

In short, as stated in the hadiths, it is not right to acquire knowledge from “base people,” from unqualified people. We must be especially careful about whom we learn the religious disciplines from. Knowledge is not to be acquired from those who are not truly Muslim, those who wish to render the Messenger of Allah irrelevant, those who reject hadith and Sunnah as an institution, sinners who have strayed from the straight path, proponents of religious innovations, “Balaams” unable to bear the weight of knowledge, those who place knowledge at the service of pharaohs, oppressors, those whose sources are not authentic and sound, those who know no methodology, those who do not perform their acts of worship fully, sinners, those who habitually swear, those who mock religion, those who think ideologically and those who take ideologies as their religion. There are still worthy teachers in this world. Whoever seeks will find their Lord. If these points are disregarded, can we still speak of love and respect for the Messenger of Allah?

Here we have discussed some of the ethical principles that should govern our conduct towards our Prophet. More such principles could be listed. What must fundamentally be understood is that the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) is Almighty Allah’s messenger: we must grasp this properly, understand him in that light, and give meaning to words and actions by following his example in every dimension of life. Let us not forget that he is the messenger of Allah Most High. Every word he spoke and every deed he performed are lights of guidance coming to us from our Lord. He is the Prophet who is engaged in everyday life and whose comprehensive example guides his community. The Qur’an has presented him in terms of his personality, morality, character and function. Thus the Messenger of Allah became a living Qur’an. To leave no place for him in life is utter misguidance. To harbour hatred towards him personally and towards what he brought is outright unbelief. He is the only person a Muslim must take as an example at every moment of life, until death. His life is the measure of legitimacy and uprightness. A life that does not accord with the Sunnah is neither ideal nor legitimate. Our Prophet’s words, conduct, morality and politics are binding. To reject him is to refuse to accept the One who sent him: Almighty Allah. If his worth is recognised and life is given meaning in a spirit of excellence through his words and deeds, then our ethical duties towards him will also have been properly fulfilled.

Footnotes

^[1] Nesai, Sünen, Dry Ablution, Hadith No: 21, vol. I, pp. 209-210.
^[2] Âl-i İmran 3/64.
^[3] See: Nisa 4/82.
^[4]Hâkim, Müstedrek, vol. II, p. 406.
^[5] See: Abdürrezzak, Musannef, vol. VI, pp. 110, 112, 126, vol. X, pp. 312, 314, vol. XI, pp. 110, 160; Ahmed, Müsned, vol. III, p. 338; Beyhaki, Sünen, vol. II, p. 17; Hâkim, Müstedrek, vol. II, p. 289; Heysemi, Zevaid, vol. I, p. 192.
[6] See: Tenvir’ü-l Mikbâs min tefsir-i İbni Abbas, Mecdüddün Muhammed b. Yakub, DKİ. Publications, Beyrut, 2022.
^[7] Hasan el-Basri, Tefsir, vol. I, p. 128.
^[8] Şafii, Muhammed b. İdris, er-Risale, p.8.
^[9] Âl-i İmran 3/100.
^[10] El-Basrî, Hasan, vol. I, p. 37.
^[11] Ahmed, Müsned, vol. III, p. 338.
^[12] Abdürrezzak, Musannef, Hadith No: 10211, vol. Vı, p. 126.
^[13] Abdürrezzak, Musannef, Hadith No: 12918, vol. X, p. 314.
^[14] Hâkim Müstedrek, Qur’anic Commentary, Hadith No: 3041, vol. II, p. 289.
^[15] Hazin, Lübab’u-t Te’vil, vol. I, p. 89.
^[16] Abdürrezzak, Musannef,  Hadith No: 19213, vol. x, p. 314.
^[17]Abdürrezzak, Musannef, Hadith No: 10162, vol. VI, p. 112.
^[18] Buhari, sahih, 66, Qur’anic Commentary, I, vol. VI, p. 96.
^[19] Darimi, Sünen, vol. I, p. 133.

Mehmet Sürmeli

More articles by this author

Mirat Haber – YouTube