Featured post



Wednesday, 14 December 2022



How can one understand any new language book without any external help? Quran alone followers or Quranist claim that they only follow the book Quran without taking any extra help from anywhere, how can this be true or possible?

Words, sentences, paragraphs, articles or signs are not just for cursory reading but they are food for thought. If we want to know the right message of any pre-classical book we need to think, ponder, contemplate on its vocabularies and context to crack its actual intent. For that we need to refer literatures of that period or closer to that period. If we are relying on traditional translations alone and amending some words as per our convenience then we are deceiving ourselves.

It is natural when we are deeply interested in any subject we tend to look, search in every nook and corner so that we find the right direction or perspective of that particular topic. The genuine researchers entire life revolves around thinking about that subject. Decoding any primitive non-native language is not easy, it needs focus, total dedication, honesty and unbiased approach. The subject becomes more crucial when the stake holders or the followers of that message are in billions.

The subject of Islam is very vast and I can never confine myself to a single book or rely on my old belief, although Quran is my main book of research and I consider it as the only valid document to understand the subject called Islam. But to understand it thoroughly I have to take help from many sources outside of the book that may facilitate my learning process. My main intention and focus is to decode the archival book Quran that I dearly love, to get that breakthrough I am prepared to cross any boundaries and even forgo my old beliefs plus even ready to access doubtful Hadiths and Bible too if it is helps my overall inference. I don't want to miss anything due my aversion for other literatures, who knows if it may have some very crucial hint in them for my research. A true researcher will leave no stone unturned. 

I can't understand how people interpret the contents of any book whose language is unfamiliar or foreign without any outside aid? In my 30 years of journey of research I have referred many books related to the subject of Peace, Islam, Shanti, Shalom and I found most of the religious scriptures are victims of wrong interpretation and translation. Muslims generally think that the subject of Islam or peaceful way of life is only their monopoly and others have no idea about how to spend a good peaceful life. My only purpose to look into other literatures was because I wanted some clue or help to dig into the essence and understand the true spirit of the book Quran. 

I am a product of my years of efforts that eventually evolved my thought process. The key to analytical thought process is that we have to completely erase our years of long education, upbringing and unlearn learn then unlearn again to restart from scratch. In the process of learning it is important that we reached correct understanding rather to see what source helped us to reach there. 

The main hurdle in understanding the book Quran is the belief that this is the only book of guidance in the world rest all other sources are it's adversary. Such superiority complex hinders the followers of Quran to come out of their utopian feeling of exclusiveness or enjoying the status of specialized privileged class suffered by them due to the virtue of their own sectarian credence in comprehension of the book Quran. I have seen the same level of confidence and superiority complex among other religious community about their own holy scriptures. The process to understand the book Quran opened up my vision so much that I am more than happy to learn from anywhere, actually it made me secular and respectful towards all the religious scriptures of the world. 

Common sense does not have any value in this pedantic academic world. People ignore their own divine common sense in lieu for precedents, references, quotes, one liner from other popular sources as it carries more weightage or acceptance in the eyes of scholars and general masses. This style or approach of presenting precedent references curbs the progress of Pioneers with new ideas and concepts. The absence of easily available precedent from popular authorities makes the research less appealing to the masses and the scholars. Treading on ready-made references is not research; it only validates their own comprehension and belief that their thinking coincides with the other so called authentic or reliable sources.

In order to understand some terms like Allah, Rabb, nafs & ruh of the book Quran and Islam I have read some Christian, Jewish, Hindu, Buddhist and Jain literatures. With respect to all those philosophies but that does not mean that I am following those philosophies, it means I am open to learn from everywhere. I don't understand what Quranic is and so called Islamic way of life, or Christian way of life of Hindu way of life? Permanent moral values are somewhat same in all major religions and culture. People say me only Quran is sufficient and we don't need to refer any other source outside of the book Quran. For some even lexicons and dictionaries are also outside source. My question to them how can we deduce the right context of the message if we do not refer lexicons and grammar books?

The essence of Islam is based on the recognition of terms like Rabb, Allah, Rasul, Shaitaan, Iblees, Malaikah, Jannah, Jahannam but people will jump quickly to say please provide Aya'ats to back your claim that it is important to understand these key terms? When I say Iblees, Shaitaan, Jannah, Jahannam is also makhluq (creation) of Allah so are they holy?, Then they would assert, nowhere in the Quran does it say that Iblees, shaitaan are makhluq of Allah. When I say Quran is taught by Rehman and nowhere it is written in the book that you must learn Arabic, they know it is written in the book but still they won't be able to digest this simple statement because they think Quran is an Arabic book so how can Rehman teach us without learning from human coach? The problem with them is they have not understood the key terms and their knowledge is based on pure rhetoric and speculations. 

The Quran alone brigade or Quranist think taking help from any other source to understand the book of God is tantamount to shirk. They believe words of God cannot be understood by the words of Men. They believe that the book is complete and crystal clear. This notion arises due to not comprehending some key terms like Allah, Rabb, Rehmaan, Subhaan in the correct essence. Books must be treated like books; there is nothing holy and unholy about books.

People don't understand the essence of the parables. If we go with the traditionalists logic of shirk then Shaitaan was the first Muslim who did not perform Sajda to Adam, according to Shaitan and today's Muslim sajda is only meant for Allah. We the so called Muslims submit or surrender to unknown Allah whereas we ignore or do not serve mankind whose symbol is Adam as we think service or worship or all praise belongs only to Allah and service or adoration to mankind is shirk. If we are not humbly or willingly serving Adam then we are Iblees and come under the category of Shaitaan as we are not showing respect to mankind, i.e. Adam.

We have not understood the essence of Allah so we think associating anything with Allah is greatest sin. The book Quran kept Adam and Allah on the same pedestal that's why all malaikah (powerful forces) where directed to become humble towards Adam.

Obey Rasool and Obey Allah means if we obey Rasool we are obeying Allah according to a verse in the book Quran, again Rasool and Allah are equated on the same platform, isn't it shirk according to the traditionalist or Quranist's logic?

If the book Quran says Allah is Noor it signifies Allah is that light which guides to siratal mustaqeem, which brings us from darkness towards light. Everyone of us has the light of Allah with them, in short all believers have Noor of Allah or Allah is with them.

If we say Rasool is noor or light we don't equate Rasool with Allah but it means Rasool is guiding force that direct us towards siratal mustaqeem if we follow its light. For me Rasool is not any personality but voice of Allah within us. That's why Rasool and Allah are on the same pedestal. There is no shirk. Shirk is when we think Rasools are human personalities. Shirk is when we blindly follow the physical book whose language we don't understand and thinks it is from God send to his Chosen Servant Mohammed bin Abdullah of Mecca, by this we are actually accusing God of nepotism or favoritism.  

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.