Religious History As Is Wrote Is Not Sacrosanct: They Say They Believe In Quran But They Do Not Believe
By Rashid Samnakay, New Age Islam
13 October 018
(They Say They Believe In Quran– But They Do Not Believe)
History of conflicts is written by historians who after all are humans. They have their biases, axes to grind and or the knowledge that they have of the historic events, may not be complete and so history cannot be taken as the absolute truth. There is always an element of doubt, particularly so if the history is viewed with tinted vision, religious fervour, beliefs and prejudices.
With religious biases such conflicts are disguised as 'God's Will' and therefore presented with labels of just wars, holy wars, crusades and jihad. The irony being that, often the inter religious wars, are waged in the name of the same 'God' that all combatants in the conflict fight for.
Consider the case of the sectarian jihads waged during the very early establishment of Muslim community, when the Arabs stepped outside Arabia, the drive towards the East, giving rise to what developed as Sunni Shia sectarian divide, politely called 'conflicts', which till today is entrenched as religions acrimony. Historians have lased it with beads, braces and bells to adorn the pages of that history glorifying Muslim on Muslim bloodbath. Some say, in the two battles of Jamal and Siffin 656/657 CE, thousands and some say hundred of thousands people were killed in the conflict.
The cafe culture of Iran during the beginning of the month of Muharram commemorating events of Karbala 680CE is to be seen to be believed. The passion of Ashura recital and enactment as naghali and marsiyeh soraei - is an art-form of “story telling”, in its fluidity and flight of fancy imagination of the performers, surpassing that of passion of Christ in the most catholic of Catholic countries.
But common sense allows us to ask a few questions to this history as presented to the world.
- Were there so many Muslims to be sacrificed at the altar of religious divide within the first five decades of the community's establishment, after its founder Muhammadur- Rasulullah's death?
- If so, then who was left to undertake the so called 'miraculous spread of Islam' over the wide area of West to East in such a short period of time?
-On what basis of religious belief the pioneer believers undertook these wars?
One needs a solid base to stand upon to form an opinion on anything. In this case we have the original source Book Quran that all the feuding parties in the conflict believe in and take oath on. However they may also believe in “others books” added much later, just as it had happened to previous messengers' teachings.
Fortunately, the Quran promptly discards those other books, and additionally giving us the Right to question – the basis of intellectual freedom:
28-85: He (God) had made only the Quran binding on you,... and
25-73: And they who, when reminded of the messages of the Lord fall not down at them (accept not) as deaf and blind.
The Book, though does not name the pioneers and companions of the Messenger Muhammad during his prophetic mission but it says:
48-29: … and those with him are of strong hearts against the disbelievers but compassionate among themselves... ...and has this to say about them and their first generation growing up in the hostile environment:
3-102: … And remember God's favour to you , when you were enemies, then He joined your hearts, so by His favours you became brethren (that is, a community of believers).
And then guides them and warns them:
4-93: And who ever kills a believer intentionally, his punishment is hell...
-Does not the above make the combatants 'disbeliever', when they disobey the warning?
The personalities involved in the sectarian 'conflicts'; if thousands or so deaths of Sunnis and Shias can be called as that; were not only the pioneers and companions of the Messenger but those who were nurtured by him, grew playing in his lap, his own flesh and blood, kith and kin who are alluded to in the above quoted verses e.g. 48-29 and 3-102 and the soldiers and helpers – believer – who according to the chequered history of this conflict, allegedly fought and killed each other in God's and in the Messenger's name, contradicting 4-93.
-What and whom then to believe?
The 'what' bit is easy as seen from the above verses. The original document is the Quran, common to all feuding parties. So Quran it is to be believed. The 'whom' bit; historians, their history, and spurious documents to be disbelieved, or at least accepted with a handful of salt.
-Then, why did it happen?
A difficult question to answer. But some evidence is there today to help form intelligent opinion.
Not only the Shia Sunni conflict but also many other religious sectarian feuds among Muslims are glaring us in the face. The religious brigade would have us believe that, according to the reported saying of Muhammad that there would sprout after him seventy two factions in his Ummah. So it has to be established as truth or else the reporting system becomes 'unbelievable'. But then the Book comes in the way of that assertion, rendering it 'unbelievable':
6-159: As for those who divide their Deen and breakup into sects you (Muhammad) have nothing to do with them in the least.... Refer also to 30-31,32,
What can be concluded is that the feuding parties must be profiting from the 'divide'. For that is the nature of the power game played by the triumvirate of Pharaoh, Karoh and Haman to have control over ordinary people:
28-4: Surely Pharaoh exalted himself in the land and divided its people into parties to weaken them....
The conflict is often asserted as a positive attribute in intellectual terms by the priesthood, of their religions they insist it is Islam. But the Book says differently as given above. On the contrary the Book says:
2-213: Mankind is one single nation. So God raised Apostles and bearers of good news and warnings (against divisions) and He revealed to them the Book with truth that it might judge between them in what they differed in. And none but the very people who were given it differed about it after clear arguments had come to them envying one another....
That is the history of Religion as established by priesthood, the Hamans. Religions cannot exist without its operatives and its various institutions – the Churches. True to mankind's nature, perhaps more so through its ignorance, when these entities came into existence, that is when it all happened. Islam on number of occasion eliminated these elements previously too. Abraham, Moses, Jesus and others, all faced it, only that the clergy succeeded to re-establish themselves again and again.
2-205: When he holds power, he endeavours to cause mischief in the land: ...God loves not mischief - Fasaad. … at many other places is repeated that God loves not Mufsidin, the mischief mongers.
Today too the spectre of death and destruction in most parts of the Muslim world is being enacted in the name of the same God - Allah, to achieve their peculiar strategies with the help of others for dominance of one religion over the other. Can it not be deduced from the Book then that the source of the mischief - Fasaad is:
- The priesthood and its institution, the Church!
10-19: Mankind was (created) but as one nation but differed later. Had it not been for the 'Word' that went forth before from your Lord, their differences would have been settled between them....
The differences remain till today despite the 'Word'!
Why so?
Because they say “They Believe In Quran – But They Do Not Believe”!
You be the judge:
10-35: … … .what then is the matter with you, how do you judge!?
URL: https://newageislam.com/islamic-ideology/religious-history-wrote-sacrosanct-they/d/116615
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