MUSLIMS & THE STRAIGHT PATH: Part - 1-P - Muslim Umma, 'People of the Book' and KAFIRS

Muslims & The Straight Path  [Published 2010]

Part - 1-P

MUSLIM UMMA, 'PEOPLE OF THE BOOK' AND KAFIRS

Muslim Umma was the central concept of Prophet Mohammad throughout his life, and it has been suggested that Mohammad’s insistence on regular congregational prayers was to inculcate cohesiveness in the new community and to humble the fierce Arab pride as much as to instill reverence for God.

Prophet Mohammad’s abiding wish for Muslim solidarity was perhaps articulated most clearly in his famous ‘Last Pilgrimage’ address at Ghadeer-e-Khum, in which he said: “O ye people, a Muslim is another Muslim’s brother and thus all Muslims are brothers among themselves.”

Mohammad’s policy, it can perhaps be assumed, was to unite the warring tribes through a common belief in Islam; to forge a super-tribe out of minor states.

This Muslim Umma was told in clear terms how to deal with the ‘People of the Book’. The term ‘People of the Book’ has been used several times in Quran and most clearly refers to the people who had been given revealed books or scriptures from God before Prophet Mohammad and Mohammad was to be the last of the innumerable messengers and prophets sent by God for guidance of humans and jinns. This clearly shows that Quran acknowledges the Divine relationship of several other major religions of the world. This included Zoroastrianism, Judaism and Christianity. There are references to the revered Prophets of these religions in Quran and it has been clearly spelt out that Prophets like Moses, Jacob, Joseph, Aron, Noah, Abraham, Isaac, Ishmael, Solomon and Jesus too were divinely chosen Prophets. Muslims were asked to treat the ‘People of the Book’ with due respect and the famous Charter of Medina is a clear example. Except for the fact that these ‘People of the Book’ were made free from fighting in wars, in lieu of which they were to pay a small tax, they were to be given treatment as equal citizens of the State and enjoyed all the rights that a Muslim would enjoy.

An example from the life of Salman – the Persian would reveal the manner in which Islam wants Muslims to treat the ‘People of the Book’. Salman, though a free man, became a slave due to adverse circumstances. He was the servant of a wealthy Jew from the Qurayza tribe, who lived in Medina, when Prophet Mohammad immigrated to the city from Makkah. When Salman embraced Islam, Prophet Mohammad suggested to him to ransom his freedom. Salman broached the subject to his master hoping that he would agree to set him free for a ransom. But the latter who knew that Salman had become a Muslim, refused to ransom him, and said: “If I set you free, you will most probably become a soldier in the army of Mohammad, and then you will fight against us. I shall, therefore, never emancipate you, and that will mean one enemy-in-arms less for us.”

It is remarkable that despite Salman’s master acknowledging that Muslims were the enemies of Jews, Prophet Mohammad who by then had become the sovereign ruler of Medina, saw no other way of Salman’s freedom but through payment of ransom upon the master’s own willingness. Salman was to remain a slave of the Jew master for several more years. During this period, wars of Badr and Uhud were waged on the Muslims. In both these wars, Muslims were far outnumbered than the enemy. Salman wanted to take part in these wars but couldn’t do so because his master didn’t give permission. Will any other sovereign of State act in such a manner? Mohammad could have easily asked Salman to come to fight, whether permission or not? But Mohammad was also to give a lesson or two about employer-employee relationship. There was no denying the fact that two of the three Jewish tribes living in Medina did all that they could to see the Muslims on the loosing side. Jews of Medina had not adhered to the treaty signed with the Prophet of Islam. There was no treaty or pact signed between Salman – the slave – and his master. Yet, this code was not to be broken. This was the Islam presented by the Prophet.

A few years later, when Salman broached the subject of paying ransom for his freedom once again, his master agreed to give freedom for three hundred young date-palms to be planted in his gardens and payment of 40 oz. of gold. Despite the fact that Muslims were the rulers of Medina, 300 saplings were collected and planted on Prophet’s order; the first of these saplings was planted by none other but Prophet himself. Salman gained his freedom a few weeks later only when the 40 oz. of gold, given by the Prophet, was paid by Salman to his master.

The subject of Kafir has been widely discussed but least understood by Muslims as well as the non-Muslims. While it is common practice amongst Muslims in India to label another Muslim, belonging to a different sect than him, as Kafir, the Hindus feel the most offended since Muslims, who do not stop calling each other’s sect as Kafir, call Hindus as Kafirs too. Actually this tendency was a byproduct of Indian Muslims’ self-created isolation, which eventually led to unforeseen separatist repercussions. The term Kafir has not been understood by the Muslims themselves, leave alone the Hindus. Since there are clear instructions in Quran, exhorting Muslims to convert or to exterminate, Hindus have reasons to feel bad.

Term ‘Kafir’, literally meaning ‘to hide’ can best be understood from the aforementioned term ‘People of the Book’. As per Muslim belief, divinely chosen Prophets and Messengers were sent to all parts of the world. Whenever a particular group of people got wayward or digressed from the teachings of earlier Messenger, truth got trampled and evil gained force, a Messenger was sent to those people. Several of these Messengers left divinely revealed Books and Scriptures (which had their source in ‘The Book’ in heaven) for guidance to their people. All these people who were given the ‘Book’ or ‘Its Part’ were referred to as ‘People of the Book’.

See Chapter Ar’Rad (The Thunder), which says:

013.036

Those to whom We have given the Book rejoice at what hath been revealed unto thee: but there are among the clans those who reject a part thereof. Say: "I am commanded to worship Allah, and not to join partners with Him. Unto Him do I call, and unto Him is my return."

013.037

Thus have We revealed it to be a judgment of authority in Arabic. Wert thou to follow their (vain) desires after the knowledge which hath reached thee, then wouldst thou find neither protector nor defender against Allah.

013.038

We did send messengers before thee, and appointed for them wives and children: and it was never the part of an apostle to bring a sign except as Allah permitted (or commanded). For each period is a Book (revealed).

013.039

Allah doth blot out or confirm what He pleaseth: with Him is the Mother of the Book.

These verses categorically reveal that the Mother Book is in heavens and the Book revealed as Quran in Arabic is part of it (“but there are among the clans those who reject a part thereof”). In another verse in Chapter V, you will find that Quran refers to the Jews being given ‘a part’ of the Book. And Vedas categorically state that they are revealed scriptures and the true book is up in heavens.

Needless to say, since the source of their religion was divine, all these people believed in One God. The term ‘Kafir’ can never be used for anybody who believes in One Absolute God of the Universe.

Writes Baig: “There were, during Mohammad’s life, still in the Arabian peninsula pagan tribes which resisted Islam and attacked Muslims. Recent research by Muslim scholars suggests that the Kafir in the Quran, whom Muslims were exhorted to convert or to exterminate, implies these pagans and not all idolators. But this word was used by later zealots to cover all who were not ‘people of the Book’.”

A cursory reading of the various Upanishads or the deistic spirit of Bhagvad Gita is ample proofs to suggest that Indian Hindus can not be termed as Kafirs. On the contrary, this compiler firmly believes that the Vedas and Gita are divinely inspired books and hence Hindus, as per Islamic terminology, should come under the category of ‘people of the Book’.

To the Muslims in general, studying a religion other than Islam was unthinkable. They were activated more by religiosity than religion to regard Hindus as Kafirs. This has contributed greatly to the social and cultural gap between Hindus and Muslims.

But even if present-day Muslim Indians do not study and appreciate the Hindu scriptures, scholarly and humanist ancestors of theirs certainly did. Al-Biruni (AD 973-1048) was perhaps the earliest and his ‘Tahqid ma li’l-hind’ made available to medieval Muslims’ knowledge of Hinduism, especially of the Vaishnavite School. He was also responsible for the translation of the Patanjali Yoga into Arabic. Though interrupted by several gaps of time his example was followed by Amir Khusru, Dara Shikoh, who translated the Upanishads into Persian, and many others. It was orthodoxy and illiteracy which conspired to prevent such works making any impact on Muslim thought. Among illiterate people the most effective medium of transmitting knowledge is the pulpit and it is hardly likely that those who preached read such books, much less appreciated them.

There were, however, some prominent exceptions who considered the Hindu scriptures to be ‘revealed’, very much like this compiler. Fact remains that the first Arabs in India, like Mohammad bin Qasim, did not treat Hindus as the Kafirs of Arabia but accepted that they possessed a religion of their own.

If even now Muslim Indians will try and understand the spirit of Hinduism, a great wall of misunderstanding will be demolished and it will be easier for Muslims to assimilate into India. Furthermore, if they can learn to consider the believers in the impersonal Brahman not as buttparasth but as khudaparasth, a great cause of Hindu resentment, the missionary urge, will be curbed. Conversion from free choice and conviction should always be permissible, but this is very different from organized missionary effort as a religious duty. Proselytization is sheer spiritual arrogance whereas one should feel humble before the depth and profundity of higher Hindu thought.

No Muslim has ever tried to understand why Quran has given special mention of ‘People of the Book’ on so many occasions. Studying Quran deeply, one can find several ‘Huroof-e-Muqatta’at’ or abbreviations given at the beginning of several chapters. After each such ‘Huroof-e-Muqatta’at’, there is mention of a certain book. Quran is referring to several other revealed books and then describing in short the content of that particular book. It is giving clear indication to Muslims that if they wish to enhance their learning further on that particular subject, they should read previously revealed book. It appears that the content of the previously revealed books has not been repeated in detail in the Quran.

A cursory look at the Hindu scriptures reveals the great emphasis that these scriptures have put on personal spiritual development. Furthermore, Quran has only talked about the incidences from the time when Adam was created. Hindu scriptures go beyond that and talk at length about the process of evolution from the time when there was nothing in the cosmos but an invisible Absolute God, mention several more creations prior to our own creation and go at length to reveal Absolute God’s relationship with us, through the Manifest Self, talk about the role of the Manifest Self in our life and also in our salvation (moksha).

Divine plan, it appears has been very similar to the progress of our academic pattern. Student who learns English alphabets in Nursery is taught ‘A for apple’ in the next class and go on to learn the rules of grammar, then learns to make complex sentences and only when he is thorough with the learning, that knowledge becomes beneficial for him. Only an insane would, at this stage, forget that ‘A is for Apple’ and so on.

Muslims committed this mistake when they left the books revealed earlier to the Prophets they claim to be their own. Muslims committed this mistake when they left the books revealed earlier to the Prophets they claim to be their own. This was despite the fact that the term  ‘people of the Book’ and not ‘books’ made it evidently clear that all supposedly different ‘books’ owed their origin to one ‘Mother Book’ in heaven.