SURAH AL-IKHLAS
Last week we began with the Surah Al-Ikhlas. I used the word remembrance since in the Qur’anic literature the term polemics, discussion is not manifested. Polemics is one term deriving from Greek philosophy which in itself it encompasses discussion, a debate which generates enmity in order for one to dominate in the discussion. There is a group of Greek philosophers known as Sophists, it is the Greek philosophy of the pre-Socratic period, the teachers of Socrates, which for ultimate purpose have had the triumph in debates, in dialogue with people.
In the history of justice they are known as the founders of the justice, the fathers of advocacy. Polemics is one of the categories which Aristotle mentions to a great extent in his works, whereas in Islam, in religions in general, but specifically in Islam discussions are undergone through remembrance.
Hence even when the Qur’an turns to man, when God turns to us, He says: “O you who have believed, remember Allah with much remembrance” Surah Al-Ahzab, verse 41 or it has been said: “So remember Me; I will remember you. And be grateful to Me and do not deny Me.” Surah Al-Baqarah, verse 152.
Why to encounter in remembrance? One matter which is very hard to elaborate and comprehend is memory; what is memory? When we recall something, do we learn it for the second time, or what? For at one particular moment, many things which are found in our memory we are still not aware of them, something ought to take place in order for us to recall them. Simultaneously the belief in God, the acceptance of God’s assigned destiny for man, we have this within our affixed memory. We are in need of a rekindle, in order for that memory of ours to renew the moment it has been forth Allah Almighty. In that predestined dimension, in pre history, even prior to the creation of the universe, prior to the creation of man, and the material, the physical dimension of existence, Allah Almighty gathered the spirits of the entire human kind before Himself and said:
“And [mention] when your Lord took from the children of Adam – from their loins – their descendants and made them testify of themselves, [saying to them], “Am I not your Lord?” They said, “Yes, we have testified.” [This] – lest you should say on the day of Resurrection, “Indeed, we were of this unaware.” Surah Al-A’raf, verse: 172
I shall delineate on a matter which has to do with the semantics of the revelation. The revelation has its own semantics. Semantics means roots, the genesis, the origin of words; this dimension has received high proclamation in the Revelation. Muslims, especially in the last period, have delineated merely the formal dimension of the revelation. This has been one weakness of theologians, for each word of the revelation has its origin. Precisely to this, we say that ibadah is not conducted with a translation of the Qur’an, since in translation, the translation carries and transmits the matter as he has understood it, and under no occasion could he transmit the revelation as it is in essence.
I had one professor of philosophy in Sarayevo, prof. dr. Hilmo Neirmalija, may God grand him goodness (he has been one very good professor, and he still is) he used to say: “I have learned German only in order to read Goethe, for I could not understand him in the other languages, meaning that the translations of Goethe were not enough to me.” Imagine when for understanding one author such as Goethe learning his language is required, imagine how much effort is needed to comprehend the revelation.
This reflects that if we rivet in semantics, in the origin of the proclaimed words, then a number of important truths appear before us. The answer bela, when God says: “Are I not thy God?” it is used here also as an interrogative with negation, this reflects that God in a negation manner puts front a question; He could have said: “Am I your God?” but He did not. “Am I your God?” enforces it “Are I not thy God?”. When the question is shaped as “Are I not thy God?” in the questioning fashion, then we have a strengthening. When the answer shall be given, it ought to be an answer coming with a strengthening, hence in the Arabic language this manner of questioning is answered with Bela. bela means yes, indubitably that You are our God, and this the first, initial sajda – the prostration, which all the spirits have undertaken.
Precisely to this on this world we are in need of a rekindling which shall recall to man this predestined moment, this pre historical state upon which only Allah Almighty was found in order for his faith to be regained in a direct manner on Allah Almighty. Henceforth the Surah Al-Ikhlas is one remembrance for us, for the moment we have been before Allah Almighty, when our spirits have been before Allah Almighty.
Al-Ikhlas means sincerity, and sincerity is one of the most crucial elements of faith. In faith, sincerity is the platform upon which the shape has been built; ibadah, worship, fasting, all of these other elements consist no weight if the genuine connection amid the servant and Allah Almighty does not exist; amid the creature and the Creator. This truth is the most exulted matter and the reality which enables man to experience religion. One Arabic poet has said: “I have gone to visit the house of God (you may know that Beytullah or Kaaba means the house of God, and one of the obligations of the Muslims is for them at least once in their life to visit the Kaaba, Beytulah and to conduct a number of worshiping rituals, counterclockwise circumambulation of the Kaaba, to conduct Tawaf) Kaaba, and there I came across a group of people who had come to visit the house, yet I did not come to visit the house, I had come to visit the Owner of the house (Sahibul beyt), meaning the host, and as long as I did not come across the host I did not go counterclockwise circumambulation of the Kaaba, I did not experience it (God cannot be perceived with the eyes, but is perceived with the eyes of the heart) as long as I did not experience the presence of God, I did not conduct tawaf”.
One day Hazrati Ali had been with his friends (Hazrati Ali is the fourth halif after the Prophet (PBUH) but he had been predominant in knowledge and thus the three other halifs have instead consulted him on all religious matters; The Prophet (PBUH) says: “I am the city of knowledge, whereas Ali is its door”) and had asked: “Is there anyone among you who has seen God?” all the accompanying stood silent and shocked. One young man from the corner said: “Yes, I have”. The accompanying group began to accuse him and had said: ”how dare you say that you have seen God?”. To say that you have seen God means you associate form to Him and this is forbidden from the religious frame.” Hazrati Ali said: “do not haste! Let us see and let him explain what he means by these words? Where have you seen Him? How have you seen Him?” The young man had said: “One day I went to the neighbor in order to steal grape from the vineyard and when I went inside I saw that He stood in the end of the garden and told me: Do not steal, since it is not good to steal.” And I returned, I did not steal”. Then Hazarati Ali had said: “Shall you remain with this faith!” This shows that the moment when something turns you back from an evil deed, be assured that it is the presence of God. The shape and manner of return from a wicked deed does not behold importance, but rather the essence of returning from evil is important.
I am working on a classical book from our literature. When our classic authors have delineated on matters have they conveyed a sense of drama, a manner of description as if it is being watched on television. The book speaks on the relation between Abraham (PBUH) and Nemrud.
Nemrud was a Babylonian emperor who considered himself as God and Abraham (PBUH) is a messenger of God who has been sent to that nation and is the first one who has confronted the polytheist institutionalized belief, more precisely with the belief in idolatry and he alone in a direct manner has confronted this.
One day Nemrud and his people had gone out of town in one manifestation and Abraham (PBUH) had had then the occasion to go into their monastery, where he found many idolatry to which people bowed. The latter destroyed them whereas with the tool which he destroyed the idolatry figures he hang it on the most gigantic figure’s neck. When the group returned from their eventful night and went into the monastery they noticed how their idol figures had been destroyed, and began to ask themselves that who could have done this. The Qur’an explains this event by delineating: “So he made them into fragments, except a large one among them, that they might return to it [and question] They said, “Who has done this to our gods? Indeed, he is of the wrongdoers.” They said, “We heard a young man mention them who is called Abraham.” They said, “Then bring him before the eyes of the people that they may testify.” They said, “Have you done this to our gods, O Abraham?” He said, “Rather, this – the largest of them – did it, so ask them, if they should [be able to] speak.” So they returned to [blaming] themselves and said [to each other], “Indeed, you are the wrongdoers.” Then they reversed themselves, [saying], “You have already known that these do not speak!”He said, “Then do you worship instead of Allah that which does not benefit you at all or harm you? Uff to you and to what you worship instead of Allah. Then will you not use reason?” (The Qur’an Surah Al-Anbiya verse: 58-67).
They take Abraham and bring him before Nemrud, he then had asked Abraham (PBUH): “Were you the one who broke the idolatry figures?” The latter had answered: “Why do you ask me? Look the tool hangs on the biggest statue, perhaps he got mad at the rest and broke them. Ask him?” They themselves declare that they cannot cause harm nor be beneficial then how is it possible for me to break them?”
Furthermore semantics receives importance here as well, for idolatry figures are not merely statues, are not merely sculptures, these figures can be a number of things in their inner representation, in most cases the greatest idolatry to man is his own ego, his own self. Are you aware that we can destroy an entire society when we feed our ego? We can destroy our families, our children, our wives only if we prostrate to our ego as much as when we seek its cultivation. Our ego can become an idolatry to us. At times even namaz, ibadah become an idolatry to the person when they conduct them in pretentious way. We do not pray in order just to pray, we pray namaz in order to conduct deity on God, in order to be present in devotion. We do not give zakah for people to say “oh look he is very courageous”. When we do good things to others for various self interests, then all these deeds lose the dimension of sincerity, all of these grow into idolatry statues, they are the very same idols which Abraham broke which in addition we ought to also destroy even in our innerness, if we wish to approach Allah Almighty in encompassing sincerity.
And in this book our classics claim that Nemrud owned a town. In the entrance of this town there were two birds and when people would enter into this town the birds would announce to Nemrud reveling the purpose have those two persons for instance had entered in the town and thus Nemrud would correspond to them subject to that purpose. Moreover even Abraham (PBUH) says that Allah Almighty gave him a town of essence upon which two birds were found. One of the birds had been his conscience, the other one had been the revelation. Do have in mind that all the encompassing elements of the Qur’an, the Revelation are in correct correspondence with the conscience of man. I do not say reason here since reason is relative. For instance, those who have a Machiavellian reasoning can reason the act of stealing in order to gain their purpose, the act of killing they will reason in order to gain the purpose, to sell drugs will be reasoned in order to gain the purpose, yet again conscience cannot allow this and hence the initial bird is always the voice of conscience, whereas the second is the voice of the Revelation.
The young man, as we mentioned earlier, in the top of the garden had apperceived and heard the voice of his conscience which had told him’ Do not do this for it is not a beneficial deed”.
Kiyamah will take place when wickedness becomes ordinary and a casual event, when wickedness takes the place of our conscience within us. There is one popular saying among us which says: “God sees me regardless that people can also see me.” This is not right. It is true that God sees you and then people also see you, but there is another issue here. With such a reasoning one becomes subject to evil becoming common. Stealing cannot be normal, lying cannot be considered normal. Surely man can commit to injustice at times, but under no occasion can he permit to transform wickedness into normal, as if nothing had ever happened. Whereas, the two birds, the conscience and the revelation, in continuum commit to function only then when we have sincerity as well as when we have a direct link with Allah Almighty. In order to establish this link we ought to have good receptions. From there on the emission is transmitted by God, but it is rather important that the receiver, the connector to be opened within us, in order for the transmission coming from Allah Almighty to be obtained.
Allah Almighty does not cut, prevent the connection with His sincere creature, hence it is required that through the revelation, through conscience, through the activities which we commit to in the course of our lives to entail in the element of sincerity. Simultaneously this is the rekindle which shall recall us of the predestined moment, when we have told God: we avow and take you for our God.
Indubitably that in order for one to accept something one ought to be acquainted with that. As long as we do not know somebody, we cannot develop a social relation with them. As long as you do not know me, you will approach me with prejudices. Alike it happens with the ones who do not know God, they approach Him in prejudices. Under all occasions man ought to be acquainted with God, man ought to meet with Him, man ought to speak to Him. The revelation acquaints us with God. For instance the initial element, the first verse of the Surah Al-Ikhlas by Allah Almighty says: “Say (Huwallah) He is Allah (who is) one!”
Allah Almighty in His revelation reveals Himself to us through a number of names and their attributes. The crucial attributes of God in Islam are 14 attributes in total, which are then divided onto two crucial subcategories. The first group are essential al- sifaat, the attributes of God, which in the Islamic literature are known as dhiyati sifatah – the personal attributes of God. The second group are the attributes of ath-thubutiyyah attributes or also known as the attributes of nuances, the reflections of God in the universe.
Aside from these the Qur’an mentions another 99 names of God which are known as Asma Ul husna- the beautiful names of Allah Almighty and in the Qur’an in regards to them it is said: ” And to Allah belong the best names, so invoke Him by them. And leave [the company of] those who practice deviation concerning His names. They will be recompensed for what they have been doing.” (The Qur’an Surah Al-A’raf verse 180).
For instance several of the names we use in the course of our prayers, as for example the name Ar-Rahim, Ar-Rahman, Al-Malik, Al-Hafeez, Al-Quddus, Al-Mu-imin, Al-Muhaymin are names of Allah Almighty which simultaneously reveal their meanings. They acquaint us with God, as at the same time they serve as codes which connect us with the spiritual world, which moreover soothe the spirit, and as we read them when we pray to Allah Almighty we feel this spiritual dwelling.
We will begin with the attribute Dhatiye, with the personal nouns and then we shall encounter the rest.
The initial attribute of God is Al-Wujud. Wujud means: God exists; the unity of existence.
We can perceive the existence of God in the universe through a number of ways. In all the religions as well as in Islam there is one scientific discipline which is known as Kalam – akaid or apologetics. Apologetics is one scientific discipline which exists even in the ancient Greek philosophy and it refers to defense, protection; speaking in defense of. ‘The Apologetics of Socrates”, for instance you might have heard of the book or naming “The defense of Socrates”, this is one very good read. I suggest you read it but also as you read it think about the elements of our discussion, keep them in mind.
Socrates was punished (since we are here now) regarding two matters. The first issue was that he advocated to put astray the young generations. He was punished for the identical reason as Abraham got punished; and the second matter is that he spoke on matters which the general public was not acquainted to hear, he was an avant-garde (all the prophets have been avant-garde, have in mind that they have been against decaying traditions of the populations upon where they had been sent). To these two reasons Socrates was punished, you will come across this in the “Defense” and when they ask Socrates: “From where do you know these things?” “Who taught you these things?” his reply had been: “Orakul warned me on these matters.” “Who is Orakul, have you heard of him?” In the Greek philosophy there is not a single philosopher by this name, Orakull is something which comes to Socrates from another source. The extent beyond the apprehensible.
This reflects that even in the Greek philosophy we have apologetics as a discipline, as in all the other religions. That one with the representation of arguments on the existence of God. The argumentation of God is not faith, have this in mind, Faqir does never intent to bring argumentations of God. God can neither be protected nor augmented. God is not in need of a bodyguard yet indubitably that the process of faith is one complex process, it is not a simple one. In order to obtain the taste of genuine faith, we ought to undertake a process of knowledge, which is not faith, but a path, a method leading hither faith. Since there is a great number of orientalists who are well introduced to the Islamic apologetics, even better than myself, but they cannot be considered for believers. There are many people that once you sit with them you see that they are well read on matters of religion and can be pretentious yet once you ask them: “okay what have you done for God today?” and if throughout the entire day they have lied, deceived, all that knowledge is a waste. This shows that argumentation of God and knowledge on God are not the actual religiousness of man.
One scholar Shaykh Tustar, a Sufi, one Muslims spiritual scholar who was once sitting with his friends in Bagdad and nearby another scholar had passed, it had been Imam Bakilan (he is one proclaimed scholar of akaid, Islamic apologetics, the science which has to do with the argumentation of God) and one of the students of Tustar had said: “Shaykh (scholar, master) there is one great scholar passing by, Bakilan, he knows 10001 argumentations on the existence of God.” Tustar had replied: “But when is He not amid our crowd that we have the need to reason Him? Not even in a single moment have I felt His absence. He has always been there, why do we need to bring an argument on this?” This reflects that faith is not argumentation, it is neither knowledge, if it would have been knowledge God in the revelation would have said “Know me”, instead He said “Believe in me” and all of those who think that merely through logic we can attain faith, are wrong.
Logic is one tool, and logic as discipline in itself is a tool, is a tool in order to reach sciences, expect for here among us Albanians people without reading anything conclude subject to their subjective logic. Logic is not science, logic is one tool which teaches, appoints the ways and methods through which we can attain to knowledge or another discipline. Even religion cannot be acquainted merely through reflection and empty logic. I am not saying this only to those who are non religious, I am saying this both to those who are religious, since they also, through their logic, strive to speak on religion. This is not right, it is not possible through this way.
Religion is one complex discipline which requires a great profound analyses without speculations. This portion is highly important, without any prejudices. Regardless of whether you will avow to one matter or not, there is a possibility for one to accept, but most importantly it is predominant that once we discuss, when we shall undertake to remind each other, to remind to ourselves, then we ought to motion further in analyses without prejudices. Nevertheless, Wujud means God exists. For the existence of God in the history of Islamic thought there have been given a great number of arguments, which later even in the Christian literature and the Hebrew literature these forms of argumentation of God have become the basis of their argumentation.
For instance one of the scientists, one of the crucial Jewish apologetics of the XIII century, the argumentation of God was systemized among the Jews, is Maimonides. He has been a student of the University of Cordoba, where his professors were Muslim. Thomas Aquinas is one proclaimed philosophers and one very renewed Christian theologian; he brings front 5 arguments (5 paths, where he says) upon which he speaks on the argumentation of God, these are direct links taken from the work of Imam Ghazali.
Faqir shall strive to speak on a number of these arguments in the course of several lectures.
The foremost argument is the ontological argument. Ontology is the scientific discipline which speaks on the being, on being. The ontological argumentation is one argument which arises from the absolute being and motions hither the relative ones. This shows that God exists and as a result we exist as well. There is not a possible way to explain neither your existence nor mine without accepting the existence of a super power.
For instance do we exist by ourselves only? Has anyone asked us where we have come, where have we been born? If somebody would have asked us a great number of us would choose not to have been born at all. Has anyone asked when we shall die? No, we are not asked this. Can we behold guarantee for our lives at this moment? We are not sure. Not for a single thing can we be assured on this life, we do not know what shall take place with us. A person who has all these weaknesses, the creature which has all these weaknesses cannot commit existence to himself. Then how do we manifest our existence? The evidencing of our existence is obtained by accepting the existence of the Creator. Descartes had once said: “Cogito, ergo sum” “I think, therefore I am” Yet the essence of this word is: I am the mere one who can dwell in thought on God. When man is able to think around God, his being as existential attains meaning, otherwise it does not behold any meaning. Have you ever thought why on a portion of philosophers, in their philosophy reincarnation is manifested? What is the basic element, that philosophy of reincarnation? Do you know what reincarnation is? Reincarnation is one faith of the Eastern religions, especially of Buddhism, Confucianism which affirms that the spirit is transmitted from one body onto another, it is as a continuum of faith upon karma on them. Karma is the belief in causality, cause-effect, meaning that everything is a result of an effect, each consequence is a consequence of one cause on this world. As a result the spirit motions from one body onto another; if he has been a good person on this life he shall pass as even better, he shall become an angel or God, or if he has been wicked then he will turn into a frog, a cat and so forth.
As a result we can conclude that to man framing existence within the existential 50 years is rather improbable to him; how many years could one live on this world and afterwards nothing. If man does not trust the metaphysical, that which is unseen, then it becomes inevitable for man to seek another solution to his existence and the answer to this is reincarnation. The mere ideology which does not encounter the beyond physical state has been communism and materialism, as a result it has arrived to remain for only 50 years and has left. Man cannot possibly accept to live for 50 years and post that nothingness to take place, rather he has a need to believe in a continuum of his existence. Hence the ontological argument fills the need for the continuum of our existence, and once this corporeal dimension of ours is accomplished, the immanent, then we ought to proceed with the transcendental, the outer worldly one. Regarding this particular matter the Qur’an says: those who believe and commit to good deeds, shall always be found in Jannah.
We have always understood Jannah as a concept belonging only to the other world. Jannah means garden, the garden is a metaphor for peace and serenity. Jannah is also this world. In one verse of the Surah Al-Rrahman it is said: “But for he who has feared the position of his Lord are two gardens – “Surah Ar-Rahman, verse: 46. One of the Jannahs is peace and life in contentment as a believer on this world and this peace you cannot buy or acquire with anything else, thus Jannah is peace for this world as well.
The individual who approaches God in encompassing sincerity, and in deity turns to God, he becomes eternal since the Qur’anic verse says: “those who have believed and who have committed to righteous deeds, shall be in Jannah forever more” this shows that since this moment on the good deed making conveys man as eternal, attaches him to the eternal chain of existence. Thank you.