Islam's Reformers - The Truth Part 1

Islamic religion is built upon knowledge and is conformable to reason in every respect. On affairs declared inexplicitly in the Qur’ân al-kerîm and the Hadîth ash-sherîf, to pass new rules compatible with reason and knowledge, that is, to make qiyâs or ijtihâd, is one of the main sources of Islam. Yet this job devolves on a Muslim possessing the necessary knowledge. If the reformers, instead of meddling with the fundamental books, thought of annihilating superstitions which have become established among the ignorant, nothing would be said against them. They would be serving Islam. But, if we are supposed to believe that they bear such good thoughts, first they have to prove that they are real and sincere Muslims. A non-Muslim’s pretending to be Muslim and attempting to attack us with our own weapon is very unjust, shameful and disgraceful of him. The religion reformers should not only pretend or claim to be Muslims, but also prove to be Muslims.

It is not permissible for a Muslim to feign irreligiousness, unless there is the fear of death. As for the irreligious reformers, does ‘irreligiousness’ mean ‘hypocrisy, mendacity’ so that they pretend to be Muslims when it suits their purpose? It is not permissible to question a person who says, “I am a Muslim,” and we have to know him as our brotherin-Islam; but he should not play tricks with our faith. If we see him speak ill of and belittle the fundamental teachings of our religion, it will be not only permissible but also necessary to question him and to call him to account. We do not force the reformers to adapt themselves to our religion or madhhab but only want them to say frankly whether they are Muslims or not and their deeds to be in agreement with their words, for Islam has certain and unchangeable rules and Muslims have to talk in comformity with these rules. While some people who say that they are Muslims do not regard it a guilt that they dissent from Islam by holding the basic teachings of Islam of no account and making fun of them, they become angry when they are told that they have dissented from Islam. They mean that Islam should be attacked and the attacker should not be told that he attacks Islam and becomes a disbeliever; it should be free to attack Islam, and those who do so should not be told anything! They insult those who refute them in such terms as “retrogressive” or “fanatic”, which have been made up by communists. And about those who, like themselves, attack the religion, they say “modern, enlightened.” The truth is that they themselves are fanatics.

Those who pretend to be men of religion are the bigots of religion and those who attack Islam as scientists are the bigots of science. Alteration in the basic teachings and books of Islam and to adapt them to the present time means the defilement of Islam. A Muslim is a person who believes and reveres these basic teachings and who has promised not to attempt to alter them. And ‘democracy, freedom and secularism’ do not come to mean ‘not keeping one’s word or giving up one’s belief’. Islam does not command that the non-Muslim compatriots should be forced to be Muslims. Is there a democracy more egalitarian than this?