Can We Separate God from Government?

In the name of God, the entirely merciful, the especially merciful

"So direct your face toward the way of life that is pure, the nature of God  is the nature of the people upon which He has created them. No change should there be in the creation of God. That is the established way of life, but most of the people do not know." ( Quran 30:30)


John Locke’s second treatise of civil government is one of the turning points in world politics, because most of the governments before his writings professed a state religion and ruled under the laws of God. However, he argued that although authority comes from God, the laws come from men and nature, and hence religions should not be mixed with government. If we want to know the impact of his writings on the west, we should count the significant size countries today, in the west, which derives their constitution from God’s laws, and implements. Answer is none. There is no significant western government left today, who defies John Locke’s ideology. John Locke’s theories did overlap with goals of Islam, and in some cases can be the model of Islamic countries to follow, but his argument to remove God’s authority in legislation brings it odds with Islamic Creed, where all power rests with Allah (God). Since this topic is very large to cover, let us look at two major areas where John Locke’s treatise were very effective  His focus on separation of religion and state and nature of slavery are the two prominent themes that worth discussing.

John Locke’s second treatise is an attempt to explain the rationale behind a civil government, and its authority. He establishes the theory on something called “state of nature”, which men are born in, where they have absolute freedom. However, he, then, points out that absolute freedom by everyone is not sustainable, so he argues that an alternative has to be achieved to maximize the freedom. In theory, he admits God’s authority over men to create law, as he says “In transgressing the law of nature, the offender declares himself to live by another rule than that of reason and common equity, which is that measure God has set to the actions of men, for their mutual security” (Chapter 2 Second Treatise). So, he is admitting that men are born in state of nature which is created by God, and hence God’s laws govern men. This is in complete accordance with Islamic understanding that every human is born in the state of “fitrah” (nature), as the Prophet (PBUH) stated “No one is born except they are upon natural instinct; then his parents turn him into a Jew or Christian or Magian;” (Sahih Muslim, Book 33, Number 6423).

In reality, John Loche never argues for a secular government free of any religion, but instead he argues for a civil government free of tyranny, which, he thinks, can only be achieved through civil government, where men coming together and setting up laws based on “reason” and “natural law”. While describing the legislative process that would govern a society, he says “for the law of nature being unwritten, and so nowhere to be found but in the minds of men” (Chapter 11 Second Treatise). This is where he makes the mistake that many of us make on a daily basis. We consider our senses and reasoning to be the basis of reality, but there is a lot that we can’t sense and understand in the nature, so how can people come together and create a government, when none of them knows the affects of polygyny (a man marrying two women) on the society. Should that be allowed? Or should it be banned. Of course not. What about Polyandry (a woman marrying two men). Should it be allowed? New scientific research can find the true father of a child, so is that ban from God obsolete now? Of course not. God has given us certain rules that defy our reasoning, but in his infinite wisdom are good for us. John, after admitting that God is the source of nature, he omits to mention how he knows that. Of course, he is a man of faith, which is clear in all of his writings. His theory coincides with Islam in all aspects, except the fact that, God has given us some basic rules, and they cannot be overruled by civil government. So, Islam is not a religion, but the laws of original state of men, which John Locke admires, and no government should have an official religion, agreed, but, at the same time, no government can establish laws that go against laws of nature set by God, some of them we cannot perceive completely, but are defined in Islam.

Chapter four of John’s treatise exclusively discusses about slavery, and he makes the point that Islam makes to humankind, which is that free will is not to do as you like, but to have limited freedom under the law that balances the rights of everyone. He says, “Freedom then is not what Sir Robert Filmer tells us, … a liberty for everyone to do what he lists, to live as he pleases, and not to be tied by any laws: but freedom of men under government is, to have a standing rule to live by, common to every one of that society…” (Chapter 4 Second Treatise). Furthermore, John distinguishes between slavery under Judeo-Islamic Law and slavery by trans-Atlantic traders, because slavery by itself is not oppression, as the slave in Judeo-Islamic law becomes slave by a concession given to them by the conquering army by sparing their life in return of their service to the master, and the master has limited rights, and cannot kill him or torture him. So, slavery is an extension of laws governing the debt and war, and man is not absolutely free, because most of us are always under a command of someone else (e.g. government), and slavery if regulated properly is part of that obligation (Locke and Slavery Article). In Judeo-Islamic slavery, a slave was treated as part of the family, and had certain rights, and the owner might work alongside the slave. However, in America, slaves were treated as non-humans, and they have lost all their human rights completely. Islam did not prohibited slavery, but established rights of slaves and owners to an extent that, slavery was no more than a service contract, and an alternative to killing and imprisonment during wars and indebtedness. Judaism and Islam forbid the type of slavery that existed in the America.

In conclusion, western civilization is in decline due to the materialistic ideals they adopted from John Locke and other like him, without understanding his context and adapting his theories as a whole, who argue that the laws are based on reason and laws of nature tangible to us, and since this world govern by the laws of nature, God’s laws are not proven as the truth, and hence the safety limits that God placed on us were removed. How can one admit existence of God, and not the laws he gave in Islam, which were the foundations of the golden age? For example, men are being allowed to rent money and speculatively trade a single property multiple times, which creates a self eating cycle that can only be controlled by keep increasing the rate of “riba” (renting money) and “gambling trades”, but it can reach a critical mass and explode, as it happened in 2008. John Locke’s second treatise is a very impressing and foretelling piece of writing, but his lack of understanding of the connection between nature and God’s laws renders it a flawed theory, in the end. Islam already encapsulates all the good contained in John Locke’s theory, and is the best solution for humanity today.

Thanks,
Law abiding citizen
AbuArman (Adnan) Jumani

References

1. The Second Treatise of Civil Government: 1690: John Locke
2. Locke and slavery: An Article: http://oregonstate.edu/instruct/phl302/distance_arc/locke/locke-slavery-lec.html
3. http://www.constitution.org/jl/2ndtreat.htm
4. Sahih Muslim: Compiled by Imam Muslim ibn al-Hajjaj

Importance of Electronic Communication in Islam

In the Name of Allah, the Entirely Merciful, the Especially Merciful.

"Verily, we have sent down the Reminder, and, verily, we will guard it" (Quran 1:59)

Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) was the final prophet to come, Quran is the final revelation, and Islam is the final set of rules from Allah, and there will be no more amendments, or updates coming. If we think about this for a second, this is a very important part of the message of Islam. Every other religion came before it was localized in time and place, and then another Prophet will come to replace the earlier one, and new set of rules may come down to match the situation of that nation. However, it changed with Prophet Muhammad (PBUH), and he was given something that had to last until Qiyamah. So, how can an Arab living in a desert, who can not read or write, will set an example for all humanity to follow until the end of days?

Answer is very simple that Allah chose Islam as a religion for mankind, and he is the Most Wise. He selected the best of the human being to present the best way of life. Islam has survived more than 1434 years because, it does not prohibit scientific research and development, rather it makes it part of faith to benefit from new ideas and inventions, as long as they don't go against the principles of Islam. Following ahadith shows this point clearly.


Narrated Zaid bin Thabit al-Ansari, one of the scribes of the Revelation: Abu Bakr sent for me after the casualties among the warriors (of the battle) of Yamama (where a great number of Qurra (memorizers of the Quran, were killed)...Abu Bakr said to me (Zaid bin Thabit): You are a wise young man and we do not suspect you (of telling lies or of forgetfulness) and you used to write the Divine Inspiration for Allah's Apostle. Therefore, look for the Qur'an and collect it (in one manuscript)'...So I started locating the Quranic material and collecting it from parchments, scapula, leafstalks of date palms and from the memories of men (who know it by heart)..." (Bukhari 6:201)


Narrated Anas bin Malik: Hudhaifa bin Al-Yaman came to Uthman at the time when the people of Sham (Syria) and the people of Iraq were waging war to conquer Armenia and Azherbijan. Hudhaifa was afraid of their differences in the recitation of the Quran, so he said to Uthman, 'O chief of the Believers! Save this nation before they differ about the Book (Quran) as Jews and Christians did before'... 'Uthman then ordered Zaid bin Thabit, 'Abdullah bin Az-Zubair, Said bin Al-As and Abdur Rahman bin Harith bin Hisham to rewrite the manuscripts in perfect copies (in Qureyshi tongue)... Uthman sent to every Muslim province one copy ... and ordered that all the other Quranic materials whether written in fragmentary manuscripts or whole copies, be burnt..." (Bukhari 6:510)

 When Umar (RA)  and Abu Bakr came to Zaid bin Thabit, and asked him to compile Quranic verse in a single text, they were basically recognizing that Islam will not be preserved if it is not recorded in its entirety in one place as a back up copy. (Bukhari 6:201) Then, Uthman (RA) recognized that oral recitation of the Quran is being debated, and there is a need to standardize the Quran as a written form. He asked Zaid bin Thabit and a few others to make several copies and sent to all corner of the world.

Similarly, we have to recognize that if we want to survive as a community, we need to take the aid of everything available. In our generation, every organization and community is using electronic media to preserve, and share their message, which is very powerful than other forms of primitive communication. Just like many of us have text of Quran at home now, which was the adoption to new medium,  it is an obligation of the muslim community to "upgrade" the Ummah to the 21st century. Websites, emails, and other software and internet based portals are very powerful tools, and not utilizing in the service of a masjid is like not having any text of Quran in the masjid. There are basically three benefits of using websites and emails for a muslim community, which are the most convincing ones.

First benefit is the power of availability and accessibility of the internet, which means if there is an effort requiring funds for the masjid, anyone around the world could know about it, and respond to it. Also, community members can access the information they are looking for from anywhere at anytime. Events can be organized with a simple effort, and notification can be sent to people without any expense to the masjid.

Second benefit is to preserve the message and communication. In fact, it is an obligation for every Muslim to practice Islam, and make every effort to preserve Islam for the next generations to come. If properly setup, electronic media is much more reliable and long lasting than physical media. If there is a message posted on a notice board of the masjid, it will be replaced soon, or fall off, or wear of. However, a website post will stay there for as long as we want it to be available.  For example, prayer time table can be posted on the website and accessible easily. This sounds an obvious thing, but it is worth mentioning.

Third but not least benefit is that message of Islam and community can be reached to people who don't come to masjid that often, or do not have enough time to volunteer. It is vital to reach out to people who are available online, and attract them to the masjid, and having a website and electronic communication can do that. Every organization in the world has a web presence now, and not having a website for the masjid, is like not having any sign or markings outside the building of the masjid that people can use to find the masjid.

Actually, these benefits are so common now that almost everyone is aware of it. Moreover, these are just top three benefits of electronic communication within Muslim community, but we could list hundreds of them without covering all. If the Prophet (PBUH), or Umar or Abu Bakr were alive today, they would have certainly taken advantage of internet and electronic media to preserve, share, and preach Islam. Many of us struggle to keep up with the community, so bringing the community closer to the Muslims will serve the purpose, which Allah has assigned to us.

JazakAllah Khairin

How doubts can lead you astray?

In the Name of Allah, the Entirely Merciful, the Especially Merciful.

Following is a very common but important discussion, in the words of a scholar himself.

I had an informal discussion a few days ago with former Muslim from Chennai who had become an atheist and the first question he asked me was why Allah created human beings and this world. So, I suggested to him that, perhaps there was an even bigger question that he should ask, as the earth and its inhabitants are less than a speck in the galaxy, which is itself only a speck in the universe. I proposed that, instead, it would be better to ask why Allah created.

The athiest from Chennai then said to me, "Okay, so why did God create?" I responded saying, "He created because He is the Creator. Creators create. Creation is the natural consequence of having the attribute of being the Creator." A creator who creates is superior to a creator who doesn't create. For example, if someone told you that she was a painter and you asked her to show you one of her pain
tings and she said she hadn't painted any, you would probably think to yourself, "Is she kookoo, or what?" He still wanted to ask, "Okay, but why did He create?" I wanted to ask him, "Why did the Sun shine? Isn't that just what suns do?" But he switched the topic back to why did God create human beings, before I could verbalize my thought.

The purpose of telling the atheist that Allah created because He was the Creator - that the act of creation is a manifestation of His attribute of being the Creator, was to remove the concept of creation out of need from the discussion. As human beings, we make or create things out of a need we have for them. Allah, the Almighty Creator, has NO NEED. All creation needs Him and depends on Him for their existence, sustenance, etc. However, inspite of making that clear from the beginning, we will find the atheist coming back to this point, time and time again in the course of our discussion.

So the atheist from Chennai cut my response and asked me, "Let's go back to the original question, 'Why did Allah create human beings?' " I told him, "God created human beings for Paradise, but He gave them a free will to choose to go or not to go." However, because that was a fair reason and the act of a benevolent God, he went to the answer he wanted to hear me say, "I thought God created humans to worship and serve him? Isn't that what the Qur'aan says?" I answered, "Yes. That is true, but it should be understood within the context of His creating them for Paradise." He tuned out the second part of my answer and then said what he wanted to say from the very beginning of our conversation, "I can't believe in a God that needs people to worship him. Like a dictator who takes pleasure in his subjects blindly obeying him or a like tyrant who, due to his own insecurities, forces his people to bow down and worship him."

I reminded the Chennai Atheist that I had already pointed out earlier that God did NOT create out of a need. Creation is only a manifestation of His attribute of being the Creator. Furthermore, tyrants and dictators demand obedience for their own agrandizement and material benefit, and what they demand obedience to is mostly not good. On the other hand, Allah prescribed worship, which is a way of life and not merely prayers, in order for people to live good lives and thereby facilitate their paths to paradise for which they were created.

The atheist then digressed saying that there was no need for obedience to religious laws as all countries now had legal systems. So I pointed out to him that many man-made laws are subjective and not objective. Each ruling party makes laws in their own interest, and when they are overthrown, the new party or ruler changes the laws to suit their own interests. Only God, who created humankind and knows their natural needs can make laws which are truly objective, as He has no bias or special interests.

The Chennai Atheist then changed the topic to the concept of evil in a world created by a good God. He asked, “How do you explain AIDS babies? What fault is it of theirs that their parents had AIDS and they are born into this world in suffering only to die before maturity? What did they do to deserve such punishment?” I responded saying that I agreed with him that AIDS was not the child’s fault. The AIDS babies become a test for the adults around them. Either the challenge of looking after such babies will bring out their higher human qualities of love, care, sympathy and concern for the welfare of the less fortunate - which would earn those who displayed them immeasurable rewards - or it was a wakeup call for those who had become heedless to the realities of life in the same way that death sometimes wakes people up, or it was a punishment for those who had caused their infection due to their corrupt lifestyle. However, it was not a punishment for the children as they had done nothing to deserve it.

“How is that fair?” the atheist asked, “How is that fair that an AIDS child suffers and dies in childhood?” I thought for a moment, “In the larger scheme of life, we really don’t know what would have happened if the child grew up. We have no idea of what evil he or she might have done later or what greater evil might have happened to them, so that dying early spared others from their potential evil or they were spared from the potential evil of others.” But before I could discuss this thought, the atheist from Chennai went on to another related point, “Some people are put on an easy track to paradise by being born in Muslim families, while others are put on a swift track to hell by being born in non-Muslim families. How is that fair?” I responded saying, “Being born in a Muslim family is no guarantee of Paradise, because Islam cannot be inherited like a nationality or ethnicity. Islam is a spiritual choice and decision which each and every Muslim must make for it to be real and of benefit. Due to the fact that so many Muslims today are cultural Muslims who only practice Islam externally according to custom oftentimes mixed with shirk (worshipping others besides God or along with God), finding real Islam may be even more difficult for a “born-Muslim” to find than for a non-Muslim. As quiet as it is kept, there will be many many people in Hell with the names, Muhammad and Fatimah.”

I went on to explain that the Prophet (pbuh) had explained that at the end of the world, while the mass of humankind are being resurrected for judgment, all those children who died before puberty and maturity along with all others who did not hear the true message of Islam – whether in the times of the previous prophets (may God’s peace be upon them all), or after the time of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) – those who were retarded, deaf or senile, or to whom the message came so garbled that they could not possibly understand its truths, all would be resurrected together in the prime of their youth and with all of their faculties. After their resurrection they would see before themselves a wall of blazing fire and a messenger will come out from the fire and explain in detail the main message of all the prophets of God; to worship God alone through obedience to His commands. Following that, he will instruct them to enter the fire from which he came, and they will all move towards it, but its roaring heat and burning flames will turn many back. In spite of that, some people will walk into it and appear to be burned up completely. Others will try to enter repeatedly, each time running back from fire’s ferocity. Eventually, when all who entered were finished and only those who did not remained, those who remained will stop trying and simply refuse to enter. The Prophet (pbuh) explained that those who entered would go straight on to paradise, while those who refused to enter are those who, had they received the clear message in this life, would have rejected faith and died disbelievers.

The atheist from Chennai then questioned the validity of Islam in general saying, “Islam existed only 1400 years ago, so why should we follow this message which has obviously been extracted from previous older books of Christianity (2,000 years ago) and Judaism (5,000+ years ago)?” I replied, “According to Muslim belief, Islam did not come into existence 1,400 years ago with Muhammad (pbuh), but with the first human beings. It is the same manual of life given to the father and mother of humankind, and reintroduced whenever people strayed from the message over the generations of human existence. As to the Qur’aan being extracts from Torah and the Gospels, that is one possible interpretation of the similarities. The other interpretation is that due to all of them coming from the same source, there will be shared information. At any rate, higher criticism of the Bible and modern research have revealed that the “Torah” was written by more than one author and contains many contradictions, and the over 5,000 manuscripts of the Gospels have no two manuscripts agreeing on all the details. Furthermore, these manuscripts are in Greek, and Jesus and his disciples spoke Aramaic and the very authors of the Gospels are unknown. On the other hand, the Qur’aan, which has only one version, has withstood all academic scrutiny thereby confirming its originality. Also, the Qur’aan’s many verses containing modern scientific data strongly and clearly point towards its divine origin. So following it instead of the earlier revelations which have become distorted and changed simply makes good sense, if one is to choose a revealed book to follow. Finally, if one were to look historically at what happened to Christianity in terms of following the teachings and practice of Jesus (peace be upon him), it would become very clear that Christianity is a different religion from what Jesus (pbuh) brought and taught. Islam on the other hand, has remained virtually unchanged over the centuries. The way Muslims pray today is the same way that Muhammad (pbuh) taught his followers 1,400 years ago. Likewise, the way Muslims fast, perform pilgrimage, etc. have all remained in their original form. The final revelation of Islam has remained in its original form and will remain that way until the end of this world.”

The final parting question which the Chennai atheist asked me questioned the logic of the Qur’aan’s divine preservation. He said, “If God is all powerful, why didn’t he preserve the previous books of revelation when he could have easily preserved all of them?” I responded saying, “Of course if Allah wished to preserve all of them He could easily have done so, just as He could have prevented Satan from tempting Adam and Eve. However, because the earlier prophets (may God’s peace be upon them all) were sent to particular people, in particular locations for particular periods of time, and prophets were sent after them, there was no need to preserve them. Allowing them to change the texts of the earlier scriptures was part of the test faced by the earlier generations. However, since Allah decided to end the line of prophets with Muhammad (pbuh), his book of revelation had to be preserved along with his living interpretation of the scripture called his “way” (Sunnah), in order for the eternal message of Islam to remain accessible to humankind until the end of the world. Furthermore, the final scripture was also divinely preserved as the Last Prophet’s standing miracle for people of this world until the Last Day. The main miracles of the earlier prophets, which were tangible proofs to the people of their own era that they were in fact prophets of God, can no longer be witnessed today (e.g., Noah’s Ark, Moses’ staff, parting of the Red Sea, etc. and Jesus’ revival of the dead, giving sight to the blind, etc.). So, Allah made the main miracle of the final prophet, a literary miracle which would remain as proof for all the generations of human beings and the Jinn to come.”

Time ran out, and the Chennai atheist and I parted gracefully. No, he did not return to Islam as far as I know, as this discussion took place only a few weeks ago. Do pray for him. At any rate, the goal on my part was not his conversion, but merely providing reasonable and logical Islamic answers for his Islam-related questions which he could not find previously. Whether, he accepted them or not, was not my responsibility, as Allah told Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) and all the believers, “You cannot guide those whom you would love to guide. Allah guides those whom He wishes.” (Soorah al-Qasas, 28:56) And He also said, “Your responsibility is to convey the message, and it is I who will take people to account.” (Soorah ar-Ra’d, 13:40)

Dr. Bilal Philips