By Syed Shahabuddin
On the eve of elections, many forgotten issues are revived and many old graves are dug up and many questions which have been answered many times in the past are raised once again by Hindu chauvinists and extremist elements to draw out and malign the Muslim community. Sometimes, they ask religious scholars for a ‘fatwa’. Some religious scholars, perhaps with publicity in their mind, respond, although, it is well-known that a ‘fatwa’ is nothing but the personal opinion of a Mufti and may not represent the considered view of Islamic scholars. The purpose of this exercise is, first, to confuse the Muslims by involving them in an avoidable controversy and, secondly, to raise the communal temperature by projecting them in the eyes of the Hindu community as an obscurantist or anti-national group.
Ever since the writer entered public life, he has been
facing another question, but that has not been raised this time: what comes
first religion or country? The two questions that have been raised are: whether
Some public responses as published have created a confusion in the mind of the Muslim community and do not correctly depict the theological, lexicographic or even the historical position.
As regards the status of the Indian state in the Shariat, it
is absolutely clear that
The Indian state is governed by a Constitution which grants
religious freedom not only to profess a religion but also practicse it and
propagate it. There may be local or occasional interference here and there but
the state is fully committed to religious freedom in every sense of the term.
Such a state simply cannot be Dar-ul-Harb. Moreover, today international
intercourse is bound by international law. All states are bound by the UN
Charter. Differences among states have to be resolved through prescribed
procedure and not by force. Neither can any state act unilaterally. Therefore,
no foreign state which claims to be Muslim or defender of Islam can intervene
in the internal affairs of another state on the plea that religious freedom of
Muslim is being curbed. Of course, it has an option to raise the matter in the
UNO. In any case, intervention depends on balance of power and influence. For
example, no Muslim state has intervened in support of Palestinian rights or against
The Indian state may be viewed as a social compact among its
citizens. Muslim Indians enjoy equal political and legal rights. They have the
freedom to place their grievances before the legislature and the executive or
take recourse to the judiciary. So far from being
Meaning of the word ‘kafir’
The second issue relates to the meaning of the word ‘kafir’ which appears many times in the Holy Quran. Allah asserts in the Quran that it was within his power that all mankind have a common faith and in His wisdom he bestowed the gift of knowledge and free will on human beings and prescribed that there can be no compulsion in matters of religion. Thus, a human being is absolutely free to choose his faith or even to change it, if I may add. But all human beings are accountable for their beliefs and deeds on the Day of Judgment.
The root of the word ‘kafir’ is ‘k‘fr’ which has a wide
range of meanings but in essence, it means ‘to deny’ or ‘to canceal’. A similar
word is ‘munkir’ whose root is ‘n‘kr’ which means, ‘to refuse’. The essence of
Islam is belief in Tauhid (monotheism), Risalat (Prophet-hood) and
Akharat(accountability). One may perhaps (I confess I am not a Qurani scholar)
distinguish between the two terms ‘Kafir’ and ‘Munkir’ on the basis that one
set of people deny the very existence of Allah (God, by any name) and the other
refuses to follow the path shown by Him through His Prophets. The Quran uses
both the words interchangeably for the non-believers of
Under Islamic theology, ‘kafirs’ or ‘munkirs’ or ‘mushriks’ are not Muslims but nowhere does the Quran or the Hadith prescribe that ‘kafirs’ or ‘munkirs’ or ‘mushriks’ be killed or even penalized for their beliefs in any manner by a human agency. So, these lexicographic terms make factual statements about the beliefs of those who do not profess Islam. Even the Holy Prophet was told in the Quran that he had been sent down as a messenger and not as a custodian of others. How can any living Muslim take up a role which was denied by Allah to the Holy Prophet?
Allah says in the Quran that He sent Prophets to all peoples in various parts of the world at different times and that no one shall be penalized on the Day of Judgment unless he had received Allah’s message and then willfully rejected it. This also means that after the death of the Holy Prophet who was the last Prophet, the message of Islam should have been communicated to him by the Muslim community.
Islam does not vest the authority in anyone to pronounce any one as Kafir and consign him to hell and anticipate Allah’s Judgment in the Akharat.
Many Muslims believe that Allah could not have ignored the
people in non-Arab lands and must have appointed prophets to a subcontinent
These words ‘kafir’, ‘munkir’ or ‘mushrik’ are no more than statements of fact. In Indian society, there are many religious groups which believe in one God, do not worship any other deity and do not attribute divinity to it. Sikhism or the Arya Samaj or the original Vedanta, believe in the oneness of God who is formless and timeless, who is the creator of the universe and who manage it without any assistance from anyone and will do so, till the end of time. In this sense, this religious concepts come very close to those of Islam. To Muslims, the universal essence of DIN is wahdaniyat, risalat and Akharat
If may be added that Allah in the Quran uses a derivate ‘Kaffar’ for Himself, meaning One, who conceals the wrong doings of the people. In Persian and Urdu poetry, ‘Kafir’ is a term used for the beautiful and the beloved. In prose it is also used for lack of gratitude for a blessing (‘Kufran-e-Nemat’).
To sum up the above discussion;
Please report any
broken links to
Copyright © 1988-2012 irfi.org. All Rights Reserved. Disclaimer