The (Im)morality of Shirk (Polytheism, Idol Worship) in Islam
By
Arshad Alam, New Age Islam
24 December
2022
Would An
All-Powerful Creator Be Vengeful Towards His Creation?
Main Points:
1. The concept
of Shirk is central to Islam; simply put it means that only Allah is worthy of
being prayed to.
2. Wahhabis
think that even the intercession of Pirs and Sufis is not allowed in Islam;
Barelwis of course think differently.
3. But they all
agree that all those who pray to anyone other than Allah are destined for
hellfire.
4. Can this
religion inspired attitude promote any kind of religious or social
solidarity?
------
The
dominant theology of Islam informs us that Shirk is the most reprehensible act
in the sight of God. Shirk is normally understood as associating partners to
Allah. In other words, the Muslim belief should hinge only on the grace of God,
his pleasure or displeasure. This theology informs us that nothing can happen
without the permission of Allah; that even a leaf cannot flutter without his
will. It follows therefore that seeking help from anyone except Allah should
normally be forbidden in Islam. And if we follow the Wahabis, this is the
doctrine that we very much get. Within this doctrine, asking for any help or
intercession is forbidden; it does not matter whether the intercessor is the
Prophet himself or Sufis whose graves dot the various parts of the Muslim
world.
On the
contrary, subcontinental Islam has made a huge place for intercession. For the
vast majority of Barelwis, intercession is in fact the preferred mode of
experiencing Islam. They argue that the Almighty is too exalted to be
approached directly and only those with plain hubris would attempt to do so.
They say that just as a ladder is required to reach high places, Sufis and Pirs
are required to reach the nearness of Almighty. For them, the vast majority of Wahhabis
are egotists who think that a mere mortal could have the power to reach and
access God directly. However, this does not mean that the Barelwis have no
conception of Shirk; simply that their notion is different from that of the Wahhabis.
Both these
groups have different boundaries when it comes to defining what constitutes
Shirk. For the Wahhabi, a Muslim goes out of the pale of Islam when he requests
a saint to intercede on her behalf; while for the Barelwi, a human being gets
condemned to hellfire when he accepts the intercession of anyone who is not a
Muslim. The concept of Shirk therefore becomes central to what constitutes a
Muslim. It is therefore important to dwell on this concept and see its possible
implications.
Imagine a
Muslim going to a Hindu friend’s house who has organized some puja. The Hindu
offers Prasad to everyone present but this constitutes a dilemma for his Muslim
friend. Human courtesy dictates that he should accept the Prasad as a
mark of respect for his friend or because he does not want to offend the
religious sensibility of his Hindu friend. But for the Muslim, this very
acceptance and consumption of Prasad constitutes Shirk, which will make
him suffer in hellfire till eternity. Both the Barelwis and the Wahhabis are unanimous in condemning this Muslim man for having consumed the Prasad.
They would advise this Muslim to seek forgiveness from God if he wants to
escape his wrath. All this, simply for consuming some sweet which was offered
to the deity. If the Muslim man knows about the dictates of his religion, then
he would outrightly refuse the Prasad, or make some excuse not to have
it. Chances are, either he will offend his Hindu friend or will be unable to
partake whole heartedly in the function. In both these scenarios, it is his
religion and its dominant interpretation which is directly responsible for creating
a wall separation between friends. We can multiply such examples to argue that
Islamic theology outrightly discourages going beyond religious boundaries. Can
this attitude be helpful in forging any form of social solidarity?
More
importantly though, what kind of a God would become upset simply because a
random believer bowed in obeisance to some other deity? Arguably Allah is the
very cause of creation; there is nothing before or after him. How does it
affect these qualities of his if a Muslim goes to a shrine or a Hindu prays in
front of an idol? Does it behoove the Primary Cause of the known and unknown
universe to be annoyed with a creature like man who is infinitely powerless in
comparison? Would a God, who is Most High, Most Powerful and Most Exalted, be
bothered that men are not paying attention to Him? Clearly, these do not appear
to be characteristics of all an powerful and omnipotent God but simply the
reflection of crass human traits. Islamic theology has projected these human
traits on God and have made her into a jealous and vengeful God. Very much like
us mere mortals.
Islamic
theology tells us that God can forgive every possible sin but not Shirk. What
this simply means that those who die Muslim will eventually be forgiven but
those who die in the state of being non-Muslim will forever be roasted in hell.
A Hindu, according to this reading of Islamic theology, despite being a gentle creature, will go to hell because he did not exclusively pray
to Allah. It does not matter whether the person had done acts of immeasurable
charity or social work; he will simply be condemned for eternity for
associating with Gods which the Islamic God does not approve of. It is not
surprising therefore that Mohammad Ali Jauhar would publicly proclaim that even
a venerated Hindu like Gandhi was “inferior to an adulterous and fallen
Musalman”. Now one can certainly have differences of opinion regarding the
persona and character of Gandhi, but Mohammad Ali Jauhar continued to believe
that the Mahatma was a noble soul and yet, because of his Islamic lens, he was
unable to comprehend and embrace Gandhi’s religiosity. Not just that, when he
wore his religious lens, Mohammad Ali had no option but to condemn Gandhi
simply because the latter did not pray to Allah alone.
Now imagine
a situation wherein a Hindu who has plundered and murdered people, has a change
of heart and converts to Islam. What will be the fate of such a person
according to Islamic theology? One would think that despite his conversion, God
would judge him harshly. This is true but only partly. For ultimately, he will
be forgiven, his sins will be cleared and he will have a place in heaven. This
is the promise of God. No matter what evil you have committed; if you die on
Iman, then you have an assured place in heaven. On the other hand, if you have
done nothing but good on this earth but you were in ‘error’ of belonging to
some other faith, then you can never even have a glimpse of heaven. What kind
of a God would think like that? And why should Muslims pay obeisance to such a
partisan God? Or is it that this God is just a reflection of our own baser
emotions?
-----
A
regular contributor to NewAgeIslam.com, Arshad Alam is a New Delhi based
independent researcher and writer on Islam and Muslims in South Asia.
URL: https://newageislam.com/islamic-ideology/morality-immorality-shirk-muslims/d/128706
New Age
Islam, Islam Online, Islamic Website, African Muslim News, Arab World News, South Asia News, Indian Muslim News, World Muslim News, Women in
Islam, Islamic Feminism, Arab Women, Women In
Arab, Islamophobia in America, Muslim Women
in West, Islam Women and Feminism