MANAGEMENT BOARD CONTENTS CHIEF EDITOR … · Exploration of the reason why Rushdie’s work has...

MANAGEMENT BOARDMr Munir-ud-din Shams (Chairman)

Mr Mansoor Shah (Secretary)Mr Naseer Ahmad QamarMr Mubarak Ahmad ZafarMr Mirza Fakhar AhmadMr. Abdul Baqi Arshad

CHIEF EDITOR AND MANAGERMansoor Ahmed Shah

EDITORIAL BOARDBasit Ahmad

Bockarie Tommy KallonFareed AhmadFazal Ahmad.Fauzia BajwaMansoor Saqi

Mahmood HanifMansoora Hyder-Hanif

Navida ShahidSarah Waseem

Saleem Ahmad MalikTanveer Khokhar

SPECIAL CONTRIBUTORSAmatul Hadi Ahmad

Farina Qureshi

PROOFREADERSAbdul Ghany Jahangeer Khan

Shaukia Mir

DESIGN AND LAYOUTTanveer Khokhar

PUBLISHERAl Shirakatul Islamiyyah

DISTRIBUTIONMuhammad Hanif

All correspondence should be forwarded to the editor at:The Review of Religions

The London Mosque16 Gressenhall RoadLondon, SW18 5QL

United Kingdom

Email: [email protected]

© Islamic Publications, 2007ISSN No: 0034-6721

Views expressed in this publication are notnecessarily the beliefs of the Ahmadiyya

Muslim Community

August 2007, Vol.102, No.08CONTENTSEDITORIAL – Nobel prize and Rushdie?Exploration of the reason why Rushdie’s work has been offensive and the correct response to this situation.By Arshad Ahmedi – UK. .................................... 2

ESSENCE OF ISLAM – Part 22 – Arabic, the Mother of Tongues The importance of the Arabic language as a vessel for the transmission and dissimenation of spiritual commandments.Hadhrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad(as) ...................... 10

BLASPHEMY IN ISLAMNo authority has been granted to any man to inflict any punishment for blasphemy. Yet Ahmadi Muslims have been sentenced to death for blasphemy in Pakistan. Dr Iftikhar Ayaz, OBE ......................................... 24

IBN’ ARABI – SUFI AND SAVANT The life, travels and works of the great Arab mystic from Spain and his journey toenlightenment that led him to the Middle East. By Zakaria Virk – Canada .................................. 36

THE PURITY OF THE TEXT OF THEHOLY QUR’AN - PART 6 Was the order of the chapters of the Holy Qur’an arbitrary and is our current order of chapters the same as the original?From the Review of Religions, 1907 ................... 49

RATIONALISATION Analysis of responsibility related to sin, andwhether ignorance is an excuse.By Rizwan Khan – Silver Spring, USA ............... 60

2 The Review of Religions – August 2007

Arshad Ahmedi – Stevenage, UK

EDITORIAL

Nobel Prize and Rushdie?In June 2007, the unexpectednews filtered out from the UKthat Salman Rushdie was to beknighted by the Queen in herHonours list for his services toliterature. Going by the euphoriathat normally surrounds thesubject involving Rushdie, itcame as no surprise that differingreactions reverberated around theUnited Kingdom and the Muslimworld. Whereas on the one handthe western media justified suchan honour with the usualaccolades, on the other handcertain elements of the Muslimfraternity reacted in the way theyknow best: by remonstrating andburning effigies.

Who is right, and who is wrong?The fact of the matter is thatneither is right, but the way thatfeelings have been expressed orjustified leaves a lot to be desired. What has prompted the out-goingPrime Minister Tony Blair to putRushdie’s name forward for such

an honour normally bestowedupon someone who has made agreat and positive impact uponBritish culture? As a BookerPrize winner, has Rushdieachieved such high statusamongst other writers, whoincidentally have also won thisprize, that a knighthood is anappropriate and a just reward?

And what of the reactions of thehandful of ‘so-called Muslims’,who are ridiculing the good nameof Islam by their unacceptablebehaviour, which is guaranteed toget the headlines all around theworld?

It seems that the knighthood is areward for Sir Salman for‘stirring things up’ between Islamand the West through his writingover a few decades. He is a manwho does not take criticism ordefeat well at all. Philip Howard,the literary editor of The Times,mentions the debacle thatfollowed the failure of one of

Rushdie’s earlier novels, Shame,to win the Booker Prize after itwas made the favourite to do so:

‘It (Shame) was the favouriteto win the Booker. When itdid not, Rushdie took it badly.He leapt to his feet andharangued the judges andpassers-by.’ (The Times, 15 February1989).

Perhaps it was this intensepassion and desire for fame andglory that Rushdie flaunted whichmade him the target for theJudaeo-Christian conspiratorsagainst Islam, who then took himunder their wing and slowly butsurely nurtured him to becomepart of their spiteful andimplacable crusade to furtherdefame and distort the name ofIslam.

In 1995, Rushdie, much to hisdisappointment, failed to win theBooker prize for The Moor’s LastSigh. In spite of this he receivedgreat support from his close bandof followers, like AuberonWaugh, Editor of The Literary

Review who said that a man whohad been chased ‘from pillar topost by religious maniacs’deserved victory, (The Times,November 1995).

The fact that Waugh admitted thathe had not even read Rushdie’snovel just adds absurdity to theblinkered and fanatical supportRushdie has received, just toreward him in the name offreedom of speech. But theknighthood is for services toliterature, not for being a victimof the actions of some‘fundamentalists’ or indeed forfreedom of speech. At this rate,very soon the next ‘obvious’ stepwould be the pinnacle in anyone’slife: the Nobel Prize, and inRushdie’s case for LiteraryFiction.

Everyone has a right to anopinion, and a right for freedomof expression. But freedomwithout any sort of boundarieswould lead to anarchy. Could youimagine letting everyone drivecars with freedom on any side ofthe road? What would be thereaction if nudists were allowed

3

EDITORIAL

The Review of Religions – August 2007

to express their freedom in publicplaces where there are youngchildren?

No matter who we are, or whatposition we hold in society, noone has complete freedom to dowhat one likes. Writers are not aspecial breed of privileged peoplethat are afforded carte blanche. Infact it is quite the opposite; theyare the ones who have to exercisethe most control because theyreach out to a greater audience.

But where the ‘freedom ofexpression’ card is used towilfully cause hurt and incitehatred causing riots, as didRushdie, then that writer deservesno credit. Having read allRushdie’s books, and moving inthe circle of writers andpublishers, both Western andEastern, I have yet to meet onewho has such high praise for himthat merits any Book award, letalone a Booker Prize, orknighthood.

Most literary people I know haveall said, without exception, thatthey start to read his books,

purely due to the publicitysurrounding him. They end upputting them down after only afew pages: so incongruent anddisjointed do they find hiswriting. So how did he becomesuch a renowned author?

Every sane and rational humanbeing is able to deduce that thereare greater powers behind himand that mischief is the ultimatepurpose. Lauding Rushdie withmore ‘honours’ will add fuel to ahotbed of simmering ashes, andthose that are behind this andsupport him unreservedly areequally guilty.

Some western writers have alsodoubted the suspicious motive ofRushdie’s writings. An eminentEnglish author, Roald Dahl, amember of the Society ofAuthors, and who is perhaps thefirst non-Muslim to bravelyexpose Rushdie for what he trulyrepresents, raised a veryimportant question in a letterpublished in The Times, 28thFebruary 1989. In it he wrote:

‘with all that has been written

4

EDITORIAL


and spoken about the Rushdieaffair, I have not yet heard anynon-Muslim voices raised incriticism of the writer himself.On the contrary, he appears tobe regarded as some sort ofhero... To my mind, he is adangerous opportunist.Clearly he has profoundknowledge of the Muslimreligion, its people, and hemust have been totally awareof the deep and violentfeelings his book would stirup among devout Muslims. Inother words, he knew exactlywhat he was doing and hecannot plead otherwise.’

Roald Dahl ends his letter bymaking a very noteworthyobservation which has beenmissed by most of the westernmedia and Rushdie’s supporters:

‘In a civilised world we allhave a moral obligation toapply a modicum ofcensorship to our own work inorder to reinforce thisprinciple of free speech.’

Another English novelist, Will

Self, brands his literarycolleague, Rushdie, ‘irrespon-sible’ for accepting the awardconsidering the outrage it hascreated among Muslimsworldwide. He says:

‘Given the furore The SatanicVerses occasioned, it doesstrike me that any responsiblewriter might ask himselfwhether the fallout fromaccepting such an honour wasreally worth the bauble. It issurely better that writersdecline any form of honour.’

But Rushdie is one who hankersafter publicity at any cost, and heand his band of cohorts have triedto use the ‘fiction card’ to justifyhis ‘over-imaginative’ andcreative writing of the TheSatanic Verses. The HolyProphet(saw) of Islam, his noblewives and companions arementioned specifically by name,which leaves absolutely no roomfor any doubt in the reader’s mindas to who is being alluded. Let usexamine some sections from TheSatanic Verses.

5

EDITORIAL


Some allegations against theHoly Prophet(saw), his noblewives and companionsIn The Satanic Verses, mattersrelating to polygamy and thealleged licentiousness of the HolyProphet(saw) have been treatedwith the most potent poison:

‘In spite of the ditch ofYathrib, the faithful lost agood many men in the waragainst Jahilia... And after theend of the war, hey presto,there was the ArchangelGibreel instructing thesurviving males to marry thewidowed women..... Salmancried, we were even told itdidn’t matter if we werealready married, we couldhave up to four marriages ifwe could afford it, well, youcan imagine, the lads reallywent for that. What finallyfinished Salman withMahound: the question of thewomen; and of the Satanicverses. Listen, I’m no gossip,Salman drunkenly confided,but after his wife’s deathMahound was no angel, youunderstand my meaning....

Those women up there: theyturned his beard half-white ina year.... he went for mothersand daughters, think of hisfirst wife and then Ayesha: tooold and too young, his twoloves.’ (p.366).

‘How many wives? Twelve,and one old lady, long dead.How many whores behind theCurtain? Twelve again;.......When the news got aroundJahilia that the whores of theCurtain had each assumed theidentity of one of Mahound’swives, the clandestineexcitement of the city’s males was intense;.... So, in theProphet’s absence, the men ofJahilia flocked to the Curtain,which experienced a threehundred per cent increase inbusiness..... The fifteen-year-old whore ‘Ayesha’ was themost popular with the payingpublic, just as her namesakewas with Mahound.’ (pp.380/381).

Rushdie also mocks the idea thatMuhammad(saw) would go intotrances when he wanted

6

EDITORIAL


revelations to be sent to suit hisneeds.

Rushdie picks on another incidentconcerning the Holy Prophet(saw)

and Ayesha to continue hisperverted account in castingdoubt using defamatorylanguage. This incident was theone in which some scandal-mongers tried to taint the noblecharacter of Ayesha, and it took arevelation from God to put thematter straight and exonerateAyesha completely.

Rushdie has, as usual, treated thesubject without any sensitivityand has used it to ridicule and toderide:

‘Lemme tell you instead.Hottest story in town. Whoo-whoo!’ ... The two youngpeople had been alone in thedesert for many hours, and itwas hinted, more and moreloudly, that Safwan was adashingly handsome fellow,and the Prophet was mucholder than the young woman,after all, and might she nottherefore have been attracted

to someone closer to her ownage?... ‘What will Mahounddo?’ Baal wanted to know. ‘O,he’s done it,’ Salman replied.‘Same as ever. He saw his pet,the archangel, and theninformed one and all thatGibreel had exoneratedAyesha.’ Salman spread hisarms in worldly resignation.‘And this time, mister, thelady didn’t complain aboutthe convenience of theverses.’ (pp.386/387).

Is this the work of a writer whohas the interest of the reader inmind, or a deliberate attempt toincite and hurt the sensitivities ofMuslims at large?

Rather than ‘honouring’ Rushdieto the hilt with presumably theNobel Prize, the next in a longline of accolades, he should beexposed for what he really is, byrational and logical means and atthe same time to extol the truebeauties of Islam.

We would simply like themischief the likes of Rushdie and

7

EDITORIAL


Sir Ahmed Salman Rushdie wasborn a Muslim in Bombay, theonly son of Anis Ahmed Rushdieand Negin Butt. After a career inadvertising, he took up writing.He has been married four timeswith all marriages ending or inone case about to end in divorce.In 1999, he had an operation toopen up his eyes. He is a selfavowed atheist.

His first work was ignored by thepublic. His Midnight’s Childrenreceived the Booker Prize, theBooker Prize committee nomi-

nating him in 1993 as the Bookerof Bookers. Magic realismbecame his genre.

In September 1988, Rushdiepublished The Satanic Verses inwhich he seemed to give vent tohis personal perversion byscornfully refering to a falselyreported tradition that the HolyProphet Muhammad(saw) (whomRushdie refers to as Mahound)added verses in an attempt toaccept three goddesses wor-shipped by the Makkans.According to those who believe

their accomplices to be exposedto the world so that in future noone is allowed to inflict suchwilful hurt to the adherents of anyfaith.

Religion should always be judgedfrom the sources upon which it isbased, and not from the actionsand pronouncements of a handfulof fanatics or politicians.

The Islam taught and practised bythe Holy Prophet(saw) is a mostbeautiful and attractive religion.It is this Islam which willcaptivate the hearts of the entireworld if it is given a chance toflourish. We can only hope andpray that the whole worldbecomes more tolerant and that itexercises more control over the‘freedoms’ it professes to giveeveryone.

8

EDITORIAL


SOME OTHER FACTS

in this falsehood, the Prophetrevoked these verses as beingfrom the Satan. Such peopleignore the fact that the wholechapter is a strong rejection ofidol worship and the question ofany satanic prompting does notarise and is totally out of context.Rushdie on the other handreinvents history by attributingthese verses to the ArchangelGabriel.

This book was banned in manyMuslim countries. In Bradfordand other places in the world, thebook was burnt on the streets. Afatwa (an edict) was issued byAyatullah Ruhollah Khomeini,the then spriritual leader of Irancalling the book blasphemousand a bounty of US$1 millionoffered for his death. Rushdiewent into retreat with policeprotection costing severalmillion pounds each year.Diplomatic relations betweenIran and Britain were broken.Rushdie offered a public apologybut to no avail.

Since then Rushdie has spokenout against the bill designed to

prevent religious hatred, hasstated that veils suck andcommented on the Danishcartoons. For his services toBritish literature (although hespends more time in USA than inBritain) or as some would have itportrayed for all these servicesagainst Islam, he was knighted asSir Salman on 16 June 2007.Once again, calls for his deathwere renewed by severalmisguided Muslim groups.Pakistan’s religious affairsminister, Mr Mohammad Ejaz-ul-Haq was reported to have saidthat: ‘if someone commitssuicide bombing to protect thehonour of the ProphetMuhammad, his act is justified.’Islam does not need suicidebombers to tackle such writers:what is needed is a rational retortin writing to those who use thepen to criticise Islam.

9

EDITORIAL



Faculty of Speech is the BasicReality of ManIt is necessary to point out thatobservation of the book of naturecompels us to acknowledge thatthe principal sign of all that hasbeen created by the hand of God,or has issued from Him, is that itserves to bring about therecognition of God according toits respective rank and station,and that it proclaims in its ownpeculiar manner that the truepurpose of its creation is to serveas a means of the recognition ofthe Divine. This is confirmed bythe study of the diverse species ofGod's creation. Thus as theArabic language has issued from

the mouth of God Almighty, itwas necessary that it should alsodisplay this sign so that it may beestablished with certainty that intruth, it is one of those thingswhich have proceeded solelyfrom God Almighty without theintervention of any human effort.All praise, therefore, belongs toAllah that the Arabic languagedisplays this sign most plainlyand clearly. As the verse:

And I have not created theJinn and the men but that theymay worship Me.(Ch.51:V.57)

declares the true purpose of the

This series sets out, in the words of the Promised Messiah(as), Hadhrat Mirza GhulamAhmad, a summary of his exposition of four outstanding topics: ISLAM; ALLAH,THE EXALTED; THE HOLY PROPHET(sa) and THE HOLY QUR’AN. The originalcompilation, in Urdu, from which these extracts have been translated into English, wascollated with great care and diligence by Syed Daud Ahmad Sahib, Allah have mercyon him and reward him graciously for his great labour of love. Amin. The Englishrendering is by the late Sir Muhammad Zafrullah Khan, may Allah be pleased withhim, and is quoted from The Essence of Islam, Volume 1. All references throughout,unless otherwise specifically mentioned, are from the Holy Qur’an.

ESSENCE OF ISLAM: Part 22 – Arabic, the Mother of Tongues

11The Review of Religions – August 2007

creation of man and his faculties.In the same way, the same verityis established about Arabic,which is man's real language andis a part of his creation. There canbe no doubt that the creation ofman can be deemed complete andperfect only when it isaccompanied by the creation ofspeech also. For that whichreveals the true beauty ofhumanness is the faculty ofspeech, and it would be noexaggeration to affirm thathumanness means speechaccompanied by all its essentials.Thus the affirmation of GodAlmighty that He has createdman for His worship andcomprehension means, in otherwords, that He has created thereality of humanness which is thefaculty of speech, together withall the capacities and actions thatare subordinate to it, for His ownservice.

When we reflect on what is man,it becomes obvious that he is ananimate who is completelydistinguishable from otheranimates by virtue of his facultyof speech. This shows that the

faculty of speech is the basicquality of man, and that his otherfaculties are its servants and aresubordinate to it. If it were saidthat human speech is not fromGod Almighty, it would amount

ESSENCE OF ISLAM – ARABIC, THE MOTHER OF TONGUES

The founder of the AhmadiyyaMuslim community was Hadhrat

Mirza Ghulam Ahmad(as).The founder of the AhmadiyyaMuslim community was HadhratMirza Ghulam Ahmad(as). In 1891,he claimed, on the basis of Divinerevelation, that he was the PromisedMessiah and Mahdi whose adventhad been foretold by Muhammad,the Holy Prophet of Islam (peaceand blessings of Allah be upon him)and by the scriptures of other faiths. The founder’s claim constitutes thebasis of the beliefs of the AhmadiyyaMuslim community.


to saying that man’s humannessis not from Him. But it is patentthat God is man's Creator and is,therefore, also the Teacher of hisspeech. Of which language He isthe Teacher can be determined bythe consideration that it must bethe language which can serveman for the purpose of therecognition of God, as the otherfaculties of man serve himaccording to the purpose of theverse:

‘And I have not created theJinn and the men but that theymay worship Me.’(Ch.51:V.57)

We have already explained thatArabic alone possesses thosequalities. Its service is that itpossesses such power forconveying to man thecomprehension of God as itdisplays beautifully in itselementary words the distinctionsbetween Divine attributes, whichis found in the law of nature. Itmakes manifest the delicate andsubtle distinctions betweenDivine attributes which appear inthe book of nature, and the proofs

of the Divine Unity which areindicated in the same book, andthe diverse types of Divinedesigns relating to His creatureswhich are also discoverable fromit, in such manner as to present adelightful picture of them. Itillustrates very clearly the subtledistinction between the attributesand qualities of God Almighty onone side, and His designs andworks on the other, which aretestified to by His law of nature.

It thus becomes obvious that GodAlmighty has created the Arabiclanguage as an adequate servantfor the manifestation of Hisattributes, works and designs, andfor illustrating the accordbetween His words and Hisworks, and has from thebeginning appointed thislanguage as the key for resolvingthe mystery of all that relates tothe Divine. When we appreciatethis wonderful and majesticcharacteristic of Arabic, all otherlanguages appear to suffer fromdarkness and deficiency. Nolanguage possesses the quality,inherent in Arabic that serves as amirror for Divine attributes and



Divine teachings, and presents asimple reflective diagram of thenatural pattern of all aspects ofDivinity. When we observe, withthe aid of sane reason and clearintellect, the division betweenDivine attributes, which isnaturally reflected in the book ofthe universe from the beginning,we find the same division in theelementary words of the Arabiclanguage. For instance, when weconsider many aspects the mercyof God Almighty is elementarilydivided, according to intellectualresearch, the law of natureinstructs us that His mercy hastwo aspects: before any action onour part and after our action. Thesystem of providence clearlytestifies that Divine mercy wasmanifested for mankind in two

aspects according to its primarydivision.

Two Aspects of the Mercy ofGod First is the mercy which wasmanifested for man without anyaction having proceeded fromman. For instance, the creation ofthe earth, heaven, sun, moon,planets, water, air, fire, and allother bounties upon which man'slife and survival are dependent.Without doubt all these bountiesare a mercy for man bestowedupon him without any right,through pure grace andbeneficence. This is a gracewhich came into operation evenbefore the existence of man whodid not even have to ask for it ....


‘IT THUS BECOMES OBVIOUS THAT GOD ALMIGHTY HASCREATED THE ARABIC LANGUAGE AS AN ADEQUATESERVANT FOR THE MANIFESTATION OF HIS ATTRIBUTES,WORKS AND DESIGNS, AND FOR ILLUSTRATING THEACCORD BETWEEN HIS WORDS AND HIS WORKS, ANDHAS FROM THE BEGINNING APPOINTED THIS LANGUAGEAS THE KEY FOR RESOLVING THE MYSTERY OF ALL THATRELATES TO THE DIVINE.’


The second type of mercy is thatwhich follows upon the goodactions of man. For instance,when he supplicates Godearnestly, his prayer is accepted,and when he cultivates the earthlaboriously and sows seed,Divine mercy fosters the seed,with the result that a largequantity of grain is gathered. Inthe same way, carefulobservation would show thatDivine mercy accompanies everyone of our righteous actionswhether they are religious orsecular. When we labouraccording to the laws prescribedby God, Divine mercy comes intooperation and makes our labourfruitful. These two types ofmercy are such that we cannotsurvive without them. No one candoubt their existence. These arethe bright manifestations whichsupport the whole pattern of ourlives.

When it is established thatAlmighty God has caused thesprings of two mercies to flow forour sustenance and perfection,and they are two of His attributeswhich are manifested in two

aspects for the watering of thetree of our being, we must findout how these two springs aredesignated when they arereflected in the Arabic language.By virtue of the first type ofmercy, God AImighty is calledRahman in Arabic, and He iscalled Rahim by virtue of thesecond type of mercy. It is inorder to illustrate this quality ofthe Arabic language that we havementioned the expressionRahman in the very first line ofour Arabic discourse. As theattribute of mercy by virtue of itselementary division comprisestwo types according to the Divinelaw of nature, the Arabiclanguage has two elementarywords for it.

A seeker after truth would find itmost helpful to adopt as acriterion the Divine attributes andworks that are visible in the bookof nature, for the purpose ofdiscerning the subtle distinctionsof the Arabic language, and toseek for these divisions, whichappear according to the law ofnature in the elementary words ofArabic. Whenever it is desired to



highlight the distinction betweensuch Arabic synonyms as arerelated to the attributes or worksof God, attention should bedirected towards the divisionbetween those attributes andworks which are exhibited innature, inasmuch as the truepurpose of Arabic is to serveDivinity, as the true purpose ofman is the enlightened recog-nition of God Almighty.

The qualities of any thing can beappreciated only by keeping inmind the purpose for which it hasbeen created. For instance, an oxis created for the purpose ofploughing or transport. If weoverlook this purpose and seek touse it as a hunting-dog, it wouldfail utterly and would proveuseless and valueless. On theother hand, if we try it in the fieldof its true purpose it soon provesthat it carries a great respon-sibility within the system of themeans of maintenance of humanlivelihood. In short, the worth ofeverything is proved by its beingutilised for its true purpose. Thusthe true purpose of Arabic is toillustrate the bright countenance

of all manifestations of Divinity.

As the proper carrying-out of thisdelicate and subtle operation, andto be safeguarded againstmistakes, was beyond humancapacity, God the Noble andMerciful revealed the HolyQur'an in the Arabic language, amiraculous illustration of thequalities of the Arabic language,and of the delicate distinctionbetween the different elementarywords, and the extraordinarilyrich connotations of itscompounds, in such manner thatall heads bowed to it inacknowledgement. All thesequalities of the Arabic languagewere not only acknowledged bythe highest contemporary lin-guists, but their failure to matchthem established that humanfaculties are not able to set forththose verities and insights, toillustrate the true and real beautyof the language. We have learntthe distinction between Rahmanand Rahim from the same HolyBook which we have cited, as aninstance in our Arabic discourse.Every language contains manysynonyms, but until we become



aware of the distinctions betweenthem, and so long as those wordsdo not relate to subjectspertaining to Divinity andreligious teachings, we need takeno account of them.

It should also be remembered thatman cannot invent theseelementary words, but once theyare created by Divine power, mancan, by study, discover theirsubtle distinctions and theirproper use. For instance, thegrammarians have not discoveredanything new, nor have theyframed any rules to which otherpeople must conform; but, havingstudied this natural language theydiscovered that it was illustrativeof a system of rules, and theyproceeded to formulate thoserules in order to facilitate thestudy of the language. Thus, byusing every word in its properplace, the Holy Qur’an illustratedhow the Arabic elementary wordscan be manipulated, how theyserve the subjects of Divinity, andhow subtle are their mutualdistinctions ....

The Connotation of SomeArabic Words Now we proceed to set forthsome of the connotations ofanother Arabic word which wehave selected from the HolyQur’an and which is Rabb. Thisword occurs in the very firstverse of the first chapter of theHoly Qur’an where Allah, theGlorious, says:

All praise belongs to Allah,Lord of all the worlds.(Ch.1:V.2)

Lisan-ul-’Arab and Taj-ul- ‘Urus,which are the two most reliableArabic lexicons, have set forththat the word Rabb comprisesseven connotations:

• Master or Owner (Malik); • Master or Chief (Sayyed); • Regulator (Mudabbir); • One who nurtures (Murabbi); • One who safeguards (Qayyim); • Bestower (Mun’im) and; • Perfector (Mutammim).

Of these seven, three refer to thepersonal grandeur of theAlmighty. Of these, one is Malik.



In Arabic lexicon, Malikconnotes that He owns theuniverse and can use it as Helikes. His ownership of it is notshared by any other. This word inits true meaning cannot beapplied to anyone except GodAlmighty, inasmuch as fullcontrol and complete power ofdisposal and perfect rights cannotbe attributed to anyone exceptGod Almighty.

Sayyed, according to Arabiclexicon, is one who hassubordinate to him a largenumber who should serve himout of sincere eagerness andnatural obedience. The distinc-tion between a sovereign andSayyed is, that a sovereignsubdues people by his might andthe strictness of his laws, whilethe followers of a Sayyed obeyhim voluntarily out of theirsincere love and eagerness andinclination and call him‘Sayyedana’ (our chief) out ofsincere affection. A sovereigncan be obeyed in that spirit whenhe becomes a Sayyed in theestimation of his people. Thisword can also not be used for

anyone beside God Almighty,inasmuch as true and eagerobedience which has no personalpurpose in view cannot possiblybe accorded to any beside GodAlmighty. He is the only Onebefore Whom the souls prostratethemselves, for He is the truesource of their creation. That iswhy every soul naturally bowsdown to Him. The worshippers ofidols and of men have also thesame eagerness to obey Him ashas a righteous person whobelieves in His Unity, but theyfail, on account of their error andfaulty desire, to recognise thetrue spring of life, and on accountof their blindness they direct theirinner eagerness towards a wrongobject. That is why some of themdeify stones, or Ramchandra, orKrishna, or the Son of Mary,under the mistaken belief that theobject of their worship is the TrueGod. They ruin themselves byinvesting creatures withGodhead. In the same way, thosewho pursue their own desireshave been misled in their spiritualsearch for the true beloved andSayyed. Their hearts also soughta beloved and a true Sayyed, but



having failed to recognise thetrue desire of their hearts, theyimagined that the true belovedand Sayyed, whom the souls seekand whom they are eager to obey,are worldly wealth, propertiesand delights. This was an error ontheir part. The true Cause ofspiritual desires, and the sourceof pious sentiments, is the BeingWho has said:

And I have not created theJinn and the men but that theymay worship Me.(Ch.51:V.57)

Meaning that: I alone am thepurpose of the creation of Jinnand men and all their faculties,which have all been created sothat I should be recognised andworshipped.

This verse indicates that man, byhis very creation, has beeninvested with the search andrecognition and obedience ofGod. Had man not been investedwith these, there would havebeen no pursuit of passion, noidol worship, and no worship ofmen in the world, inasmuch as

every error results from pursuit ofthe discovery of truth. Thus Godalone is the true Sayyed.

Another of these attributes isMudabbir. This means thekeeping in mind, with referenceto every enterprise, the wholesystem of events in the past, andof consequences in the future,and the putting of everything inits proper place having regard tothat system, and not to embarkupon anything outside it. Thisattribute also cannot be applied toanyone beside God Almighty,inasmuch as perfect planningdemands knowledge of thehidden, and that belongs to GodAlmighty alone.

The remaining four names -Murabbi, Qayyim, Mun’im andMutammim - indicate thosebounties of God Almighty whichare bestowed upon men onaccount of His PerfectMastership, Leadership, andPlanning. Murabbi means he whonurtures, and perfect nurturemeans that all aspects of man,like his body, soul, faculties andcapacities, should be nurtured



and the system of nourishmentshould extend to the climax ofman’s physical and spiritualprogress. The manifestation ofthe point at which the name ofhumanness or its elements begin,and its features begin to movefrom nothingness towardsexistence, is also nurture. Thisshows that in Arabic idiomRububiyyat has very wideconnotations, and that it coversthe whole expanse from the pointof nothingness to the climax ofperfection. The name ‘Creator’(Khaliq) and the like arederivatives of Rabb.

Qayyim means one whosafeguards the system. Mun’immeans one who bestows allbounties, which man or any othercreature can receive, according toits capacity, and is desirous ofobtaining, so that it might arriveat its climax, as Allah, theGlorious says:

…Our Lord is He Who gaveunto everything its properform and then guided it to itsproper function.(Ch.20:51)

Our Lord, Who invested allthings with appropriate form andthen guided them to therealisation of their requisitegoals.

Mutammim means that thesystem of beneficence should notbe left deficient in any respect,and should be carried to itsclimax in all its aspects.

Thus the term Rabb, which hasbeen used in the Holy Qur’ancomprises all the diverseconnotations that we have set outbriefly above.

We have to record with greatsorrow that an ignorant EuropeanChristian writer has set out in oneof his books that Christianitypossesses this superiority overIslam, that it has named GodAlmighty 'Father', which is a verydear and lovely name, and thatthis name has not been applied toGod in the Qur’an. We aresurprised that this critic has notconsidered what honour andgreatness the lexicons haveattributed to the expression‘Father’, for every word acquires



true honour and greatness fromthe position assigned to it by alexicon, and no one is entitled tobestow such honour upon a wordas the lexicon does not bestow.That is why even the Word ofGod does not disregard thelexicon, and according to allsensible people, in order todetermine the honour andgreatness of a word, recoursemust first be had to the lexicon, inorder to ascertain what robe ofhonour it has bestowed upon thatword. Keeping this criterion inmind, we find that all that thelexicon discloses is that when aperson is in fact born of the seedof another, and he who drops theseed has no further connectionwith his birth, it is said that thatother is his Abb (father). If itshould be desired to indicate thatAlmighty God is Himself theConscious Creator of a person,and Himself leads him towardsperfection, and out of His greatmercy bestows appropriatebounties on him, and is Himselfhis Guardian and Supporter, thelexicon does not permit that theseconnotations may be expressedby the employment of the word

‘Father’; the lexicon providesanother term for the expression ofthis concept, and that word isRabb, the true meaning of whichwe have just set out on theauthority of the lexicon. We arenot at all entitled to invent ourown lexicon, and must follow thedivision of words established byGod from the beginning.

The Word ‘Father’ is Derog-atory to God This would show that theapplication of the word Father toGod is disrespectful andderogatory to Him. Those whohave invented against Jesus thecharge that he was in the habit ofcalling God Almighty ‘Father’,and in fact believed that God washis father, have been guilty ofaccusing him of a false andhateful offence. Can any sensibleperson imagine that Jesus wasguilty of such stupidity as to haveapplied to God, the Glorious, aname, the etymological meaningof which should be so low andhumiliating and indicative ofweakness, powerlessness andhelplessness from every point ofview?



The word Abb (father) is so lowand humiliating that it does notnecessarily import any kind ofdesign or nurture or love. Forinstance, a goat that covers a she-goat and drops its seed or a bullthat satisfies its lust with a cowand then turns away from itwithout any thought of a calfbeing born of its action, or a pigwhich under the surge of its lustis constantly occupied insatisfying it and has no notionthat through its repeated actionwhole litters of piglets might beborn and spread in the earth,would no doubt, if its lustfulactivities produce its young, becalled their father. According toall the lexicons the word Abbdoes not in the least imply that afather after dropping the seedshould take any further action sothat a child may be born, or thatthis should be his design at thetime of cohabitation; indeed theword Abb does not necessarilyimply desire for progeny, and allthat it imports is that he shoulddrop the seed, and it is only onthat account that lexico-graphically he is called Abb.Then how can it be permissible

that such a worthless word,which is so appraised in alllanguages, should be applied tothe All-Powerful One, all ofWhose works are manifested byvirtue of His perfect designs,perfect knowledge and perfectpower? How can it be right thatthe same word, which is used fora bull and for a pig, should beused for God Almighty also?What impertinence is this, whichthe ignorant Christians persist incommitting? They have been leftwith neither shame nor modestynor any understanding of humanvalues. The doctrine of theatonement has affected theirhuman faculties like paralysis, sothat they have been renderedutterly worthless and withoutfeeling.

Here we consider it proper todispel some of the doubts andmisconceptions of Max Müllerwhich he discusses in the firstvolume of his book on thescience of languages. Hisstatement: One factor that hasblocked the progress ofknowledge is that in order toexpose other people to ridicule



and contempt, some peopleemployed contemptuous epithetsto them, and thus failed to learntheir languages. So long as thewords wild and dumb (‘Ajami) asapplied to those people were notexcluded from human dictio-naries, and did not give place tothe expression ‘brother’, and solong as it was not acknowledgedthat all mankind are of onespecies, a beginning could not bemade with the science oflanguages.

My statement: The abovestatement shows that the writer iscritical of the Arabs and imaginesthat the expression ‘Ajam’,applied by them to those whoselanguage is other than Arabic, isused out of bigotry and contemptfor those people. He fell into thiserror because his Christianbigotry stood in the way of hisfinding out whether theexpressions ‘Ajam’ and ‘Arab’were devised by man or by GodAlmighty. He has himselfacknowledged in his book thatman has not the capacity toformulate the elementary wordsof a language on his own. Arabic

has two words in juxtaposition toeach other. One is ‘Arab’, whichconnotes those who are eloquentand possess mastery ofexpression; and the other is‘Ajam’, which means non-eloquent and tongue-tied. If Mr.Max Müller thinks that these twowords are not ancient and Islamhas invented them out of bigotry,he should specify the originalterms which were used in theseconnotations, for it is not possiblethat a people should not have hadany appellation in ancient times.If it is found that these twoexpressions are ancient, thiswould mean that they were notcoined by man, but that theAlmighty, Knower of the unseen,Who has created man withdiverse capacities, has Himselfapplied these two names todifferent peoples correspondingto their respective abilities.

Another consideration is that ifthese two expressions, ‘Arab’and ‘Ajam’, have been coined bysome human being out of bigotryand contempt, then doubtlessthey would be contrary to factand would be altogether false.



But we have established in thisbook that the word ‘Arab’expresses a reality, and that it istrue in fact that the Arabiclanguage, on account of itssystem of elementary words andits delicate structure and otherwonders, occupies so high aposition that one is compelled toaffirm that in comparison with itother languages are like thedumb. Moreover, we observe thatother languages are motionlesslike solids and are so bereft ofany movement towardsdevelopment as if they arelifeless, and we are compelled toacknowledge that they occupy avery low position. The Arabiclanguage describes non-Arabspolitely as ‘Ajam but in truth theydid not deserve even thisappellation. Had the lowcondition of their languages beencorrectly described the mostappropriate expression to beapplied to them would have beenthat they were dead languages. (Minan-ur-Rahman, RuhaniKhaza’in, vol.9, pp.145-161)

Glory be to Arabic, how beautifulis its countenance, looking out of

perfectly illumined mantles! Theearth has been brightened with itsexalted lights, and it has beenproved to possess the climax ofthe yearnings of man. In it arefound wonders of the All-Wiseand Powerful Maker, as they arefound in everything whichproceeds from the Great Creator.Allah has perfected all its limbsand has not left out anything fromits beauty and splendour, and nodoubt you will find it perfect inexpression, comprising all theobjectives of man. There is noaction that begins at any period oftime, nor is there any attribute outof the attributes of Allah, theBestower, nor is there anydoctrine out of the doctrines ofmankind, but there is in Arabican elementary word apposite toit. Should you have a doubt aboutit, let us know the contrary. (Minan-ur-Rahman, RuhaniKhaza’in, vol.9, pp.193-194)



It is pertinent to discuss thesubject of the teachings of Islamon the offence of blasphemy as itis being used daily to persecutemembers of the AhmadiyyaMuslim Community.

Whatever the quality of aMuslim’s faith, even if he were anamesake Muslim, he holds animmense measure of respect forthe Holy Prophet(saw). This feelingis being exploited by theunprincipled and politicallymotivated Mullahs against otherreligious minorities. They partic-ularly accuse Ahmadis ofdisparaging the honour of theHoly Prophet(saw) and thus ofbeing guilty of blasphemy forwhich the maximum sentence inPakistan and some othercountries is death.

I intend to examine the validityof the charge made againstAhmadis. Do they disparage the

honour of the Holy Prophet(saw),or do they, in fact, honour himand exalt him as KhatamanNabiyyin (Seal of Prophethood)?I will also explore how valid thedeath sentence is in accordancewith Sharia Law.

There is no doubt that blasphemyis the most repugnant, detestableand loathsome act, whichtouches on the sensitivities of alldecent-minded and believingpeople. No matter which faithone belongs to, any violation bywords or deeds of the sanctity ofGod or His chosen Messengers,is considered deeply offensive.And yet, denigrating God andslandering the Prophets of Godgoes back into the mists of time.

All prophets suffered slander,mockery or derision during theirlifetimes from their opponentsand the practice continued aftertheir deaths. What is the

Blasphemy in IslamAn address by Dr Iftikhar Ayaz OBE (UK) at the AhmadiyyaMuslim Annual Convention in Dacca, Bangladesh.


punishment for such an offence?

The history of mankind revealsmany sad periods of religiousstrife, bigotry, persecution andconflict. Muslims have notalways acquitted themselves intheir dealings with other peoplein accordance with the teachingsof Islam. Their conduct has beenregrettable, sometimes evenreprehensible.

There can be no doubt that theteachings of Islam proclaim andinsist upon complete freedom inmatters of conscience andtolerance and respect for thebeliefs of others. The pursuanceof this Islamic requirementwould eliminate one of theprinciple causes of internationalmisunderstanding and conflict.

But Islam does not stop here. Itexhorts Muslims to striveactively for peace.

O ye who believe! come intosubmission wholly and follownot the footsteps of Satan;surely, he is your open enemy.(Ch.2: V.209)

There is severe condemnation ofthe conduct of one who, when hewields authority, strives to createdisorder in the land and todestroy tithe and offspring:

…Allah loves not disorder.(Ch.2: V.206)

Everything that tends to destroylocal peace, create internationaltension or to disturb internationalrelations is sought to be avoidedand its mischief has beenresented.

Our beloved, the Holy ProphetMuhammad(saw) came as ablessing for mankind. Allah inHis mercy revealed to him thecomplete Book, the Holy Qur’an– a guidance for all mankind forall times to come, which remainsuntarnished, unchanged andguarded by Divine decree. Allahrevealed a complete code of lifeguarded by Divine decree – a lawto govern all dimensions ofhuman life. That Islamic law isknown as Sharia.

Before we look at what Shariahas to say about blasphemy, we

BLASPHEMY IN ISLAM


must understand the characterand structure of Islamic law.Sharia is based on a simpleprinciple. What is right must bedone and what is normally wrongmust not be done. It is thereforeimportant to correctly definewhat is right and wrong. Theseare important legal questions, sowho can answer them? Certainlynot man according to Muslimlegislators. We have the HolyQur’an, which is the very wordof God. Supplementary to it, wehave the Hadith – records of theHoly Prophet’s(saw) actions andsayings from which we mustderive help in arriving at legaldecisions.

If, in the unlikely event, there isnothing either in the Qur’an orHadith to answer a particularquestion, we have to follow thedictates of reason in accordancewith certain definitive principles.

Islamic law is derived from foursources: the Qur’an, the Sunnahof the Holy Prophet(saw), Ijma’,that is consensus of opinionamong the learned Muslim

jurists, and Qiyas, that is analogyand reasoning. To elaboratefurther and show the position ofthese sources, it is appropriate tomention a famous and importantHadith.

It is said that the Holy Prophet(saw)

sent Mu’adh, one of hisCompanions, as Governor ofYemen and also appointed him todispense justice (no trainedlawyers existed at that time). TheHoly Prophet(saw) asked Mu’adh‘According to what will youjudge?’ He replied, ‘Accordingto the Word of God (HolyQur’an)’. The Holy Prophet(saw)

then asked ‘And if you findnothing therein?’ ‘According tothe traditions of the Messenger ofGod’ said Mu’adh. ‘And if youfind nothing therein?’ ‘Thenshall I interpret with my reason’said Mu’adh. And thereupon, theHoly Prophet(saw) said, ‘Praise beto God who has favouredMu’adh with what the Prophet iswilling to approve’.

Having understood the natureand source of Islamic law, we

BLASPHEMY IN ISLAM


should know the definition ofcrimes and their categories inIslamic law.

Muslim legislators and juristshave defined crime as goingagainst or beyond the commandsand prohibitions laid down in theHoly Qur’an. In other words,crossing the bounds fixed byGod. Since such crimes areviolations of the rules made byGod, they are considered crimesagainst religion.

In Islamic law, crimes aredivided into two major groups:

• crime for which Hadd(punishment ordained byGod) is given, such asadultery (Zina), false accu-sation of adultery (Kadhf), androbbery.

• crimes such as homicide,bodily harm and damage toproperty are consideredoffences. The punishment forsuch crimes are such as Qisas(retaliation), Kaffara (expia-tion) and Ta’zeer (disciplinaryaction).

The major difference betweenthese two groups of crimes is thatthe punishments (Haddpunishments) ordained againstthe first group are considered the‘rights of God’ for which there isno pardon or concession, whilethe punishments prescribedagainst the second group are the‘rights of man’ and thereforethey can be reduced or totallyruled out and pardoned. Forinstance, in the case of murder,the offender can be pardoned ifthe victim’s next of kin agrees todo so.

The act of blasphemy is an actagainst the sanctity of God oragainst the honour of theMessengers of God. As such, thisoffence, committed against God,comes under Hadd punishmentsordained against God. No earthypunishment has been prescribedand no human interference ispermitted to increase or reducethe punishment. This admon-ishment appears at the end ofmany verses in the Holy Qur’an,as for example at the end of along exposition of the rules offasting, God says:

BLASPHEMY IN ISLAM


…These are the limits byAllah, so approach themnot.…(Ch.2: V.188)

Let us examine what the HolyQur’an and the traditions of theHoly Prophet(saw) have to sayabout punishments ordained byGod. Allah the Almighty saysabout the arrogant:

…‘What think ye of thatwhich your Lord has sentdown?’, they say ‘Stories ofthe ancients.’ that they maybear their burdens in full onthe Day of Resurrection, andalso a portion of the burdensof those whom they leadastray without knowledge.Behold! evil is that whichthey bear ... Then on the Dayof Resurrection He willdisgrace them.’…(Ch.16: Vs.25, 26 & 28)

Pride and arrogance are theprimary ingredients of mis-conduct and misbehaviour, and itis only such people who wouldhurt and offend others. Thepunishment for the arrogant is

described in the same Chapter:

So enter the gates of Hell, toabide therein. Evil indeed isthe abode of the proud.(Ch.16: V.30)

Again in Chapter 33, Allah theAlmighty declares:

Verily, those who annoy Allahand His Messenger – Allahhas cursed them in this worldand in the Hereafter, and hasprepared for them an abasingpunishment.(Ch.33: V.58)

Let us look at the honour of theHoly Prophet(saw) and how he waspersecuted. He was mockedduring his Makkan period and inMadinah, he was continuouslyridiculed by the Jews who usedevery opportunity to makesickening jokes against him.

The Holy Qur’an refers to thearch persecutor of the HolyProphet(saw), Abu Jahl, and says:

Hast thou seen him whoforbids a servant of Ours

BLASPHEMY IN ISLAM


when he prays? Tell me if he(Our servant) follows theguidance or enjoinsrighteousness, what will bethe end of the forbidder? Tellme if he (the forbidder)rejects and turns back, doeshe not know that Allah seeshim? Nay, if he desists not,We will assuredly drag him bythe forelock, a forelock lying,sinful.(Ch.96: Vs.10-17)

To look at the true status of theHoly Prophet(saw), we should referto the Holy Qur’an which says:

Allah and His angels sendblessings on the Prophet. Oye who believe! you alsoshould invoke blessings onhim and salute him with thesalutation of peace.(Ch.33: V.57)

Now we will look at the time ofthe Holy Prophet(saw) and theextent to which he was reviled,jeered at, conspired against andpersecuted. His opponents triedby all means at their disposal todivert the Holy Prophet(saw) from

his mission. The Qur’anremarks:

Many of the People of theBook wish out of sheer envyfrom their own selves that,after you have believed, theycould turn you again intodisbelievers after the truthhas become manifest to them.But forgive and turn awayfrom them, till Allah bringsabout His decree. Surely,Allah has the power to do allthat He wills.(Ch.2: V.110)

We see how serious Allah theAlmighty considers the offencesof those opposing, maligning andobstructing Allah and HisMessenger in his prayer and inhis mission.

Because of the gravity andperfidy of these offences, Allahconsiders them to be ‘His right’topunish the offenders as He sowishes. He does not transfer thisright of dispensing justice toanyone – not even to His mostbeloved of Prophets. Instead, Hetells the Holy Prophet(saw)

BLASPHEMY IN ISLAM


‘Forgive them and turn awayfrom them’. It is because Allahthe Almighty considers theoffence so grave that nopunishment in this world can dojustice to the gravity of theoffence. Allah the Almighty hasprepared an abasing punishmentfor such people in the Hereafter.

Narrowing the subject ofblasphemy to the Muslims, onenotices that the passions ofMuslims are aroused veryquickly when the honour of theHoly Prophet(saw) is impugned. Atleast, the politically orientedleadership of Muslim clergy,notoriously known as Mullahs,exploit this emotional reaction ofthe innocent less educatedmasses, as we see happening insome countries today.

How did the Holy Prophet(saw),that excellent exemplar, the bestand most Beloved of allProphets, that interpreter parexcellence of the Holy Qur’an,react to those who reviled him?

During the lifetime of the HolyProphet(saw), there were many

vulgar and abusive campaigns byhis opponents whose desire wasto create dissension among themigrants (Muhajirs) and thelocals (Ansar) and to create inter-tribal rivalry. They were singing:

‘Drive out that fool of yoursthat you may be safe. Here isa rider come among themwho has divided them (hesays) “This is permitted andthis is forbidden”’.

At one occasion in Madinah, theopponents nearly succeeded increating dissension among theMuslims. They would havefought each other but when theHoly Prophet(saw) heard the news,he addressed them:

‘O Muslims! Remember God,remember God. Will you actlike pagans while I am withyou? After God has guidedyou to Islam and honouredyou and saved you frompaganism? After he hasdelivered you from unbeliefand made you friends bydoing so?’

BLASPHEMY IN ISLAM


Let us remember the incidentafter the battle of al-Mustaliq,while the Holy Prophet(saw) wasstaying by a watering place, anunpleasant dispute took placeamongst the migrants and locals.Taking advantage of thatincident, the leader of theMunafiqun, Abdullah bin Ubay,used extremely vile languageagainst the Holy Prophet(saw).When the Prophet(saw) was told ofthis, Umar(ra) who was with him,said, ‘Go and kill Abdullah binUbay.’ The Holy Prophet(saw)

answered: ‘What if men shouldsay Muhammad kills his owncompanions? No, go and giveorders for him to set off.’

The Holy Prophet(saw) wasundoubtedly very hurt, but tookno action against Abdullah binUbay, instead giving orders forhim to move away. The Qur’anrefers to this incident:

They say, ‘If we return toMadinah, the one mosthonourable will surely driveout therefrom the one mostmean;’ while true honourbelongs to Allah and to His

Messenger and the believers;but the hypocrites know not.(Ch.63: V.9)

When the son of Abdullah heardof this incident, he went to theHoly Prophet(saw) and offered tokill his own father for the insultthat he had caused to the HolyProphet(saw). The Holy Prophet(saw)

refused this and said, ‘No, let usdeal kindly with him and makemuch of his companionshipwhile he is with us.’

That demonstrates the HolyProphet’s(saw) reluctance to punishthose who blaspheme, preferringto leave any such punishment inthe hands of Allah.

When the Muslim Empirestretched from the Indus toAndalusia, Muslim jurists andjudges who understood theinjunctions of the Holy Qur’anand the Sunnah refused to punishthe blasphemers to create falsemartyrs. There are many suchincidents in Andalusia and in theOttoman Empire. I will quote oneexample from the book SpanishIslam by Dozy:

BLASPHEMY IN ISLAM


A group of Christian Zealots,led by a priest namedEulogius, were determinedto denounce Muhammadpublicly. Issac, a Cordovanmonk, went to the Qadi(judge) and professed adesire for conversion; butwhen the judge, wellpleased, began to expoundIslam, the monk interruptedhim; ‘Your Prophet,’ he said,‘has lied and deceived you.May he be cursed.’ The Qadireproved him and asked himif he was drunk. The monkreplied, ‘I am in my rightmind. Condemn me todeath.’ The Qadi had himimprisoned and asked AbdurRahman II to dismiss him asinsane.’(Spanish Islam: A History ofthe Moslems in Spain, DozyReinhart, Darf Publishers,London 1988 – reprint from1913)

The only time when blasphemerswere sentenced was when otheroffences were also involved. Ofcourse, there have been incidentsin Islamic history whereblasphemy has been punished

with the death of the offender.Those incidents involved eitherpolitical pressure from the rulersor by the unprincipled, power-seeking Mullahs, who disre-garded Islamic Sharia for theirown ends. The fact remains thatin Islam, there is no punishmentfor blasphemy or heresy or forapostasy. These are the preservesof Allah the Almighty and nohuman being is permitted tointerfere – the Holy Prophet(saw)

understood this point and actedaccordingly. Only Allah canjudge and dispense justice onthese offences.

Hadhrat Mirza Tahir Ahmad(ru) inhis book Murder in the Name ofAllah states:

‘There is no such punishment(death sentence) for blas-phemy in the Holy Qur’an orin the traditions of the HolyProphet of Islam. Blasphemyagainst God is mentioned inthe Holy Qur’an in thefollowing words: “And revilenot those whom they callupon beside Allah, lest they,out of spite, revile Allah in

BLASPHEMY IN ISLAM


their ignorance…”(Ch.6:V.109).’

He further states:

‘No authority has beengranted to any man to inflictany punishment for blas-phemy against God.Blasphemy was committedby Jews against Mary, themother of Christ. It has beenmentioned in the HolyQur’an where it says:

“And because of theirdisbelief and their utteringagainst Mary a grievouscalumny”(Ch.4:V.157).

Again no punishment otherthan by God Himself isprescribed.’

Members of the AhmadiyyaMuslim Community in Pakistanand unfortunately in a few otherMuslim states as well, are beingpersecuted. Here, in this peace-loving country (Bangladesh),Ahmadis were recently hit by acolossal wave of persecution. In

Pakistan, Ahmadis have beensentenced to death and murderedon wrongful charges ofblasphemy ever so often. Whattravesty of Islamic justice is this!Ahmadis are being accused ofmaligning the honour of the HolyProphet(saw) of Islam. Thefabrication and falsehood of thischarge can be seen from thewritings of the founder of theAhmadiyya Muslim Community,Hadhrat Mirza GhulamAhmad(as), the immaculate andobedient servant of the HolyProphet(saw). He said:

‘The basis of our religion andthe foundation of our belief isthat there is no God but Allahand Muhammad(saw) is HisProphet. The faith that wefollow in this earthly life andthe faith in which, by theGrace of God, we will departfrom this temporary life, isthat of our Lord and greatMaster, Muhammad(saw).’

And again:

‘A superior status, com-prising all that is good

BLASPHEMY IN ISLAM


belongs to our Lord andMaster, Seal of the Prophets,Muhammad Mustafa(saw). It isunique to him and it isunapproachable.’

The quality of Muslim faith andthe measure of respect that heholds for the Holy Prophet(saw)

cannot be quantified by anyyardstick, nor can another personsit on judgement on the sincerityof the belief of others.

In Pakistan, unfortunately,blasphemy carries a morerestricted definition. It is beingdefined as an insult to the honourof the Holy Prophet(saw) and it isunder this charge that themembers of the AhmadiyyaMuslim Community are beingpersecuted and prosecuted. Theyare being persecuted for thepassion, love and devotion thatAhmadis have for the greatest ofall Prophets, Muhammad(saw)

about whom the founder of theAhmadiyya Muslim Communitywrote:

‘After the love of Allah, it isthe love of Muhammad which

has captivated my heart. Ifthis love is blasphemy, byGod! I am a great blasphe-mer.’

The matchless intense love forthe Holy Prophet(saw) continues toflow in his followers to this dayand each and every Ahmadi,wherever he is on this planet, iscommitted to sacrifice every-thing for the sake of the honourof his beloved Prophet(saw).

Those who are thirsty for theblood of Ahmadis, let themlisten! Let them heed what thePromised Messiah(as) had to saywhen one of his lovingCompanions, Hadhrat SahibzadaAbdul Latif(ra) was stoned todeath in Kabul, Afghanistan. Hesaid:

‘This blood will not go towaste. God will not remainsilent on this killing. Itsconsequences will behorrible. This is a ruthlessmurder. Under the blue sky,the example of this brutalmurder will not be found. OLand of Kabul! Be a witness

BLASPHEMY IN ISLAM


of this heinous crime on yoursoil. O Land of Misfortune!You have fallen from thesight of God because you arethe place of horrible cruelty.’

Any land where the blood of theflag bearers of Islam, the HolyProphet(saw) and the Kalima willbe shed, will suffer the same fate.And no doubt the terrible things

happening in countries whereAhmadis are persecuted todayare not only a warning to them,but a brilliant sign of the truth ofthe Promised Messiah(as). ThePromised Messiah(as) has come torevive the teachings and pristinepure traditions and practices ofIslam, and it is Allah’s decreethat he will succeed.

BLASPHEMY IN ISLAM

Verse references to the Holy Qur’an item count ‘Bismillah...’ (In theName of Allah...) as the first verse of each Chapter. In some non-standard texts, this is not counted and should the reader refer to suchtexts, the verse quoted in The Review of Religions will be found at oneverse less than the number quoted.

In this journal, for the ease of non-Muslim readers, ‘(saw)’ or ‘saw’after the words, ‘Holy Prophet’, or the name ‘Muhammad’, are used.They stand for ‘Sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam’ meaning ‘Peace andblessings of Allah be upon him’. Likewise, the letters ‘(as)’ or ‘as’after the name of all other prophets is an abbreviation meaning ‘Peacebe upon him’ derived from ‘Alaihis salatu wassalam’ which are wordsthat a Muslim utters out of respect whenever he or she comes acrossthat name. The abbreviation ‘ra’ or (ra) stands for ‘Radhiallahu Ta’alaanhu and is used for Companions of a Prophet, meaning Allah bepleased with him or her (when followed by the relevant Arabicpronoun). Finally, ‘ru’ or (ru) for Rahemahullahu Ta’ala means theMercy of Allah the Exalted be upon him.

In keeping with current universal practice, local transliterations ofnames of places are preferred to their anglicised versions, e.g. Makkahinstead of Mecca, etc.


Muhiyyud Din Ibn Arabi was arenowned mystic, poet, sage, andphilosopher of Islamic Spain.During his lifetime he wasacknowledged as one of the mostimportant spiritual teacherswithin Sufism, renowned for hisgreat visionary capacity as wellas being an excellent teacher. Hesigned his name: MuhammadBin Ali bin Muhammad Ibn al-Arabi al-Tai al-Hatimi. He wasborn in the Muslim Spanish cityof Madinatula Mursiya (Murcia)in August 1165. His Arab familytraced its roots to Hatim al-Tayywho was legendary for hisgenerosity.

His father Ali Ibn al-Arabi was aman of influence as heconsidered Cordoba's chief judgeIbn Rushd among his intimatefriends and was attached to theroyal court of Muhammad BinSaeed Mardanish. When Ibn’Arabi was 8 years old, the

occupation of Murcia led hisfamily to Seville via Lisbon. TheEmir of Seville, Abu YaqoobYousuf had offered his father animportant position in his royalcourt, so this is where Ibn ’Arabispent the next 30 years of his life.Seville was also an importantcentre of Sufism, with a recordnumber of Sufis living in the city.He met two women saints herewho had a strong influence onhim, Yasamin of Marchena, andFatimah of Cordova. AboutYasamin, he observed:

‘In her spiritual activities andcommunications she wasamong the greatest. She had astrong and pure heart, a noblespiritual power and a finediscrimination… she wouldoften reveal something of it tome, as she knew of my ownattainment, which pleasedme.’1

IBN ‘ARABI –Sufi and Savant (1165-1240)By Zakaria Virk – Canada


IBN’ ARABIC – SUFI AND SAVANT (1165-1240)

Ibn ‘Arabi completed his basiceducation in Murcia, and Lisbon.In Seville he studied the Qur’an,Hadith, Shariah (Law), Arabicgrammar and composition. Hedid so well in his studies that hewas employed as a secretary bythe governor of Seville. IbnArabi’s spiritual attainmentswere evident from an early age.He spent most of his time in thecompany of Sufis, becauseTasawwuf was already practisedin his family. By the age of 20, heentered upon the Sufi path.

Sufism in the family His family, in addition to itscultural connections was inclinedto religious tendencies. Two ofhis mother’s brothers were Sufis,Abu Muslim al-Khawlani andYahya ibn Yoghman. al-Khawlani used to spend hisentire night standing in prayerand would beat his legs withsticks when he became tired fromstanding.

The second brother Yahya BinYoghman was at one time rulerof the city of Tlemcen until hemet a holy man Abu Abdullah al-

Tunisi, a Gnostic, and he gave uphis kingship, and became hisdisciple. When people requestedIbn ’Arabi for his prayers, hewould tell them: ‘go to Yahya ibnYoghman, because he was a Kingand became a gnostic. If I wasput into such a tribulation as hewas, perhaps I would not havesucceeded.’

Initiation into SufismIbn ’Arabi states that he becamea Sufi in 1184 when he wastwenty. It is stated that Ibn Arabiwas invited to a party at thehouse of a prominent leader ofSeville, along with other civicleaders. They started having adrink, when it reached Ibn Arabi,he heard a voice saying: ‘OMuhammad, did we create youfor this?’ He put down the drinkand left the party immediately.Outside the house he met ashepherd and went with him tothe outskirts of the city andexchanged clothes with him.After wandering around hearrived at a graveyard where hedevoted himself to Dhikr Ilahi(Remembrance of Allah) for fourdays. Finally when he came out,



he was blessed with immenseknowledge of numerous disci-plines.

After this life-changingexperience, he spent 9 months intotal solitude under the guidanceof his master Shaikh Yousuf binYukhlaf al-Kumi. Ibn Arabi says:

‘my solitary stay started at thetime of Fajr, by the time thesun started to rise; the secretsof the unseen world “ghaib”were unravelling on me. Istayed in this retreat for 14months and all those secretsthat were told to me I havepenned them down.’

His first employment in the civilservice was as a scribe whichwas an important position in thecabinet. His father was a ministerof state and his family was wellknown throughout the country.After his spiritual experience, hegave up his employment. Hepreferred to live as a dervish(faqr).

Meeting with Ibn Rushd Due to Ibn ‘Arabi’s extraordinary

scholarship and spiritual insights,his fame spread throughoutSpain. The master interpreter ofAristotle, Cordoba’s Qadi IbnRushd (1126-1198) requested hisfather for a meeting with Ibn‘Arabi.

This meeting is important in thatof the two illustrious men, onewas a follower of the edicts ofreason, who became the mostinfluential thinker in the West.The other was a Gnostic forwhom knowledge meant‘vision’, who became a toweringpersonality in Sufism. Ibn ’Arabirelated this visit in his ownwords:

‘One day I went to see Qadiabu Walid Ibn Rushd inCordova as he wanted to meetme on account of what he hadheard of the revelationswhich God accorded meduring my retreat. Anyonewho heard about these secretsused to wonder. I was still abeardless young man. IbnRushd was my father’s closefriend. As I entered the room,he stood up out of respect for



me. He embraced me. Thenhe said to me “Yes”. I in turnreplied Yes. He was pleasedwith this response thinkingthat I understood him. I on theother hand being aware of themotive for his pleasure,replied, “No”. Upon this, IbnRushd drew back from me,his colour changed and heseemed to doubt what he hadthought of me. He then askedme, “What solution have youfound as a result of mysticalillumination (Kashf) anddivine inspiration. Does itcoincide with what is arrivedat by speculative thought?”. Ireplied, “Yes and No.Between the Yea and Nay thesouls take their flight beyondmatter, and the necks detachthemselves from theirbodies.” At this Ibn Rushdbecame pale and I saw himshaking as he muttered, “LaHaula wa la Quwwat”, (thereis no power Allah”). This wasbecause he had understoodmy insinuation. In crypticlanguage, the young boy hadinformed Ibn Rushd thatrational investigation was not

sufficient to attain completeknowledge of God and theworld.

On another occasion, heasked my father to interviewme so that he could tell meabout things (knowledge)which he was in possessionof. As he was one of theforemost intellectuals hethanked Allah for having meta person who went intosolitude while he wasignorant but came out of itfull of knowledge withouthaving any discussions,

Statue of Ibn Rushd, Cordoba



lectures, research or studyingunder a teacher. He said,“Glory be to God that I havebeen able to live at a timewhen there exists a master ofthis experience, one of thosewho opens the locks of Hisdoors. Glory be to God tohave made me the personalfavour of seeing one of themwith my own eyes.”2

In this encounter, the youngmystic gained the upper hand,leaving the aged Peripateticphilosopher dumbfounded. Itshows his philosophical thinkingand mystical experience, howmysticism and philosophy wereintertwined. Mysticism, in thiscase overcame philosophybecause Ibn ’Arabi was also amaster of philosophy.

His travels In 1193, Ibn’Arabi made his firstforeign trip aged 30. He travelledto Tunis where he met Abdulazizbin Abu Bakr al-Quraishi al-Mahdawi on whose request hewrote a biography of 55 Sufisaints of Andalus with whom hehad been in contact. It was called

Ruhul Qudus. Perhaps because of civil war inNorth Africa, Ibn ’Arabi returnedto Andalus. In 1194, he travelledto Fez where he foretold thevictory of the Almohad rulerYaqub al-Mansur (1160-1199)over Christian armies at Alarcos.By 1195, he was back in Sevillewhere he spent most of his timein study and discussion. Itappears that by this time hisreputation for spiritual authorityhad made others deferentialtowards him.

In 1196 he returned to Fez toattend the lectures of AbdulKarim, Imam of the AzharMosque. He frequented thegarden of Ibn Hayyun to meetmen of the spirit. During his stayhere, his reputation drew manydisciples. His own spiritual statewas of the highest order as hetells us that he attainedknowledge of the Seal ofMuhammad’s Sainthood (Khatimal-Auliya). In 1198 he made hisway back to Murcia via Granada.He attended the last rites of IbnRushd in Cordoba who hadpassed away in Marrakesh but



his remains were brought to hisbirthplace for burial. On thisoccasion he composed thefollowing lines:

This is the Imam and theseare his works,Would that I knew whether hishopes were realised.

In 1200 he went to Marrakesh,where he spent some time withAbu al-Abbas of Ceuta, Keeperof the Alms. Here he had twoexperiences which brought himto an even higher spiritual level.Then he journeyed to Bugia and

Tunis on his way to the East.

Life in the East He pursued his journey to theEast with his companion al-Hasar. After spending a shorttime in Cairo and Alexandria, hearrived in Makkah in 1201. Oncein Makkah he enjoyed thehospitality of Zahir bin Rustumof Isphahan who was himself aSufi and occupied a high positionin society.

Zahir had a daughter Nizam Ainal-Shams whose striking looksinspired Ibn ’Arabi to write

Map of travels of Ibn ’Arabi


Tarjuman al-Ashwaq, a finecollection of love poems. Nizamwas blessed with stunningbeauty, intellectual calibre andprofound spiritual experiences.‘Her dazzling beauty, gracefulmodesty of her bearing, and thesoft melody of her speech, weresuch that her presence enchantedall those around her’, wrote IbnArabi in Tarjuman al-Ashwaq.

While in Makkah, he performedthe Hajj. During the circum-ambulation (tawaf) of the Ka’abahe saw a vision on passing theBlack Stone. This vision markeda critical stage in his spiritualmaturity.4

In Makkah, he started the writingof his magnum opus Futuhat al-Makkiyya. In 1204 he leftMakkah and travelled toBaghdad and then Mosul. Herehe composed a book al-Tanazzulat al-Mawsiliyya(Revelations at Mosul) whichdescribed the significance ofablution and prayer (salat). Hearrived in Hebron in 1206 on hisway back to Cairo where he wasaccused of heresy by the

authorities, but the ruler Nasir al-Din al-Malik al-Adil intervenedhaving received a letter ofcommendation from Abu al-Hassan of Bugia.

Life in KonyaIbn’Arabi was discouraged byhis reception in Cairo and in1207, returned to Makkah. Aftera year long stay he made his waytowards Asia Minor (Turkey).On his arrival in 1210, he waswell received by the SaljuqSultan of Rum, Kay Kaus (1210-1220) and the people of Konya.Here, Sadr al-Din was hisfaithful disciple who laterbecame a major exponent of histeachings, and left many largecommentaries on his works. Sadral-Din was a close associate ofMaulana Jalal al-Din Rumi andwas also the teacher of Qutb al-Din Shirazi (1236-1311), anotable Sufi of 13th century.

In 1211, he left Konya with a fewof his disciples and travelled toBaghdad. Here he had a meetingwith Shihab al-Din Suharwardi, agreat Sufi master. In 1212 Ibn’Arabi wrote a letter to Sultan



Kay Kaus who had asked himregarding the treatment ofChristians as his subjects.Ibn’Arabi advised him to adoptstrict measures in his dealingsand prevent them from harmingthe cause of Islam in hisKingdom. This was perhaps dueto the Crusades that were goingon at the time.

In 1213, he travelled to Makkahand two years later he journeyedonce more to Turkey where hemet Kay Kaus and foretold hisvictory at the battle of Antioch.He went to Aleppo where hestayed to 1221. In 1223, hedecided to settle in Damascus, ashe wanted to spend the rest of hiseventful life in relative peace,and was treated very respectfullyby the ruler al-Malik al-Adil. In1240 he breathed his last and waslaid to rest at Salihiyah, near Mt.Qasiyun, north of Damascus. AMausoleum was built for him inthe 16th Century and is still aplace of pilgrimage for Sufis.

His Children Ibn’Arabi got married threetimes, in three countries. During

his stay in Seville, he marriedMaryam, the daughter ofMuhammad ibn ‘Abdun, whoshared his aspiration to become aSufi. The second wife, Fatimah,was daughter of Sheriff ofMakkah who was mother ofImad al-Din. He finally alsomarried the daughter of Qadi al-Qaza in Damascus.5

He had two sons, Sa’d al-DinMuhammad (1221-1258) anaccomplished poet, and Ima'd al-Din Muhammad (d.1268).

His Works Among the Sufis, Ibn Arabi isreferred to as Al-Shaikh Al-Akbar, the greatest Teacher. Thereason for this is that he was thefirst person to express in writingdoctrines which had beenconfined to oral transmission andallusions. By doing so hecompiled an enormous corpus onvarious subjects such asmetaphysical doctrines, ritualablution, cosmology, numer-ology, oneirology, mystical statesand Sufi doctrines.

Ibn’Arabi himself listed 251



works in his list of books.Although few of these have beenprinted or translated, around 110works are known to havesurvived in manuscripts, ofwhich 18 are in Ibn ‘Arabi’s ownhand. Some 71 have been printedand 33 have been commented onby Muslim scholars.

He was as much at home with theHoly Qur’an and Hadithscholarship as with philology,letter symbolism, philosophy,alchemy and cosmology.

He could write with equal facilityin prose or poetry. The rhymedprose (saj), which is found in theHoly Qur’an abounds in hisworks.

Futuhat al-Makkiyya, is averitable encyclopaedia ofSufism (spiritual knowledge)which unites and distinguishesthe three strands of tradition,reason and mystical insight. Itwas conceived and undertakenon his first visit to Makkah in1201, and completed inDamascus in 1237. It coversmystical experiences, meta-

physical theories, visions,cosmological doctrines, Sufidoctrines and speculation. In 560chapters, it is a work oftremendous size, a personalencyclopaedia extending over allthe subjects in Islam as Ibn’Arabiunderstood and had experiencedthem, together with valuableinformation about his inner life.He asserts in the book that it wasnot the result of free choice, orreflection but:

‘God dictated to meeverything that I have writtenthrough the angel ofinspiration.’

More than 100 commentarieshave been written on this greatwork.

Fusus al-Hikam (The Bezels ofWisdom) was composed by himin 1229, as an exposition of theinner meaning of the wisdom ofthe prophets in the Judaic/Christian/ Islamic line. Each ofthe 27 chapters is devoted to thebasic doctrines of Islamic eso-tericism. It was inspired by avision about the Prophet



Muhammad(saw) holding a book inhis hand which he orderedIbn’Arabi to take and transmit tothe world.

This book came under heavycriticism and he was declared aheretic (Kafir) by many religiousscholars (Ibn Taimiyah). Manycommentaries have been writtenon Fusus, notably that of Sadr al-Din al-Konawi, and Abdul Ghanial-Nablusi. It is studied in thoseIslamic countries where Sufismflourishes as the most masterlytext on gnosis (Irfan).

Ruh al-Quds and al-Durrat al-Fakhirah were translated by DrR.W. Austin, and published in1971 in a single volume. Lifesketches of 71 Sufis of Andalusiahave been given in Sufis ofAndalusia. Some smaller workswere translated into Spanish byAsin Palacios in 1931.6

Only 18 of his works survive inhis own hand, many exist incopies made with his authority.Many autographed manuscriptsare stored in libraries inBaghdad, Istanbul and Konya.

His sayings There are many quotes ofIbn’Arabi preserved which giveus a sense of his views:

‘The knower of Allah knowsthrough eyesight (basar)what others know throughinsight (basira), and heknows through insight whatvirtually no-one knows.Despite this, he does not feelsecure from the harm of hisego towards himself; howthen could he ever feel securefrom what His Lord hasforeordained for him?’

‘The discourse of the knoweris in the image of the listeneraccording to the latter’spowers, readiness, weakness,and inner reservations.’ – ‘Ifyou find it complicated toanswer someone's question,do not answer it, for hiscontainer is already full anddoes not have room for theanswer.’

‘The ignorant one does notsee his ignorance as he basksin its darkness; nor does the



knowledgeable one see hisown knowledge, for he basksin its light.’

‘The movement which is theexistence of the universe isthe movement of love.’

Addressing his close associateshe once said:

‘For every type of know-ledge, there are certainpeople. Everyone cannotmaster themselves for everytype of knowledge, nor isthere enough time to do it.Therefore, it is incumbent,that there should be everytype of people in anycommunity. There should bepeople with different bent ofmind, although theirobjective should be thesame’.8

Unity of Being He is generally known as themajor exponent of the concept ofWahdat al-Wujud, though henever used this term in any of hisbooks. Like every mystic, hisemphasis lay rather on the true

potential of the human being andthe path to realising thatpotential, which reaches itscompletion in the Perfect Man(al-insan al-kamil). Wahdat al-Wujud is a peculiar type ofphilosophy meaning ‘that whileGod is absolutely transcendentwith respect to the universe, theUniverse is not completelyseparated from Him; that theUniverse is mysteriouslyplunged in God.’9

Ibn’Arabi shows how ‘A PerfectMan’ is the complete image ofthis reality and how those whotruly know their self know God.His writings provide ampleexposition of the Unity of Being,the single and indivisible realitywhich transcends and ismanifested in all the images ofthe world. For this theory he wasaccused of being a pantheist,which implies a substantialcontinuity between God and theUniverse, whereas Ibn ’Arabibelieved in God’s absolutetranscendence over everycategory.10



His ideology Ibn ‘Arabi exerted a stronginfluence upon his friends anddisciples, many of whom werespiritual masters in their ownright. He considerably affectedthe whole course of spiritualthought and practice in theIslamic world. His books werestudied by followers of Sufism.His poems were chanted incenters of various Sufi orders(Tariqah). In recent years hiswritings have also becomeincreasingly the subject ofinterest and study in the West,leading to the establishment of anacademic Society in his name.

Ibn ‘Arabi believed in thecontinuous existence of non-legislative (anbiya la tashri’alahum) prophecy. He alsobelieved that the Sufis are able toreceive instructions from theHoly Prophet(saw) through themediation of the angel Gabriel.He is reported to have thoughtthat cessation of prophecy wouldamount to the death of Islam.11

He explained the relationshipbetween a muhaddath (person

who is spoken to) and the non-legislative prophet. A muhaddathis different from a legislativeprophet (anbiya tashri’ee) in sofar as the imposition of newSharia law is concerned. He isconsidered Rai’sal auliya wajami al-muqamat (head of thesaints and all the stages on thespiritual path are gathered in hispersonality). He has a share inthe non-legislative prophecy andthere seems to be little differencebetween him and the non-legislative prophet.12

The cardinal idea in his thoughtis that persons who attained thespiritual rank of prophecy willnever cease to exist in the Islamicumma (community). It is based


Ahl al-tariqah follower of a Sufi orderFana self-annihilationFaqir follower of a Sufi path

Mutasawwif one who particip-ates inSufism, dervish in Persian

Shaykh Master

Silsilah spiritual chain

Sufiperson who has realised thegoal and achieved the stateof supreme identitiy

Tariqah Sufi Order

Dhikr repetition of Divine Name


on the hadith of ProphetMuhammad(saw), in which heasked Allah to ‘pray forMuhammad and for the family ofMuhammad as You prayed forIbrahim and the family ofIbrahim’. There were prophetsamong the descendants ofIbrahim(as) (Abraham), hence it isimplicit in the supplication thatAllah will bestow the rank ofprophecy on Muslims as well.

Ibn ‘Arabi says that no law willever abrogate or add to theProphet’s Law. This is themeaning of the Prophet’sstatement that ‘mission andprophecy ceased and there willbe no messenger after me and noprophet.’ There would be nomore law-bearing prophets afterthe Holy Prophet(saw), and anyfuture prophets would be subjectto his law. It is future laws thathad ended, not the rank ofprophethood.13

The greatest numbers ofIbn’Arabi’s adherents are to befound in modern Iran. Eventoday his metaphysics togetherwith Suharwardi’s (1155-1191),

forms the basis of the world-viewof Iranian intellectuals.

References1. Sufis of Andalusia, translated by

R.W.J. Austin, London, 1971, page142

2. Sufis of Andalusia, Ruh al-Quds, page100, London, 1971,

3. Futuhat Makkiya, Vol.I, pages153/154

4. ibid, pp.47-85. Futuhat Vol.IV, page 5596. Sufis of Andalusia, R.W. Austin,

George Allen & Unwin, London, 1971, page 123

7. Mawaqi al-Nujum, – an oceanwithout shore, by MichelChodkiewicz, 1993, NY, page 102

8. Futuhat Makkiya, Vol.I, page 1539. Three Muslim Sages, S.H. Nasr,

Caravan Books, NY, 1969, pp 106 10. ibid, pp 104/105 11. Malfoozat, Roohani Khazain, Vol. 10,

page 28112. Futuhat al-Makkiyya, Cairo, Vol.2,

page 103 13. Futuhat al-Makkiyya, Cairo, Vol.2,

p.3 - vide Prophecy Continuous, Y. Friedmann, University of CaliforniaPress, 1989, page 74.



Arrangement of the Verses andChapters of the Holy Qur’anIt may perhaps be objected thatsuch an arrangement was notpossible as the Qur’an was notcomplete till the death of theHoly Prophet(saw) and verses andchapters were constantly beingrevealed. It is quite true that theQur’an could not be said to becomplete so long as the recipientof the Divine revelation lived,but this could not interfere withthe arrangement of verses andchapters. The word Qur’ansignified the part of the Qur’anthat had been revealed.

Now the tradition quoted above(see previous issue) speaks of theconversion to Islam of the BeniSaqif, which did not take placetill the ninth year of Hijra, inwhich year the chapter entitled‘Immunity’ which is looked upon

as the latest in chronologicalorder, was revealed. Hence at thetime of which the traditionspeaks almost the whole of theQur’an had been revealed, andthe division into seven portionswhich speaks of the number ofchapters in each portion has in itsfavour the authority of the HolyProphet(saw) himself, and noobjection to it is based onreasonable ground.

The verses that were revealedafterwards were put in theirproper place in the chapters towhich they belonged, and if anyshort Sura was also revealedafterwards, as the ‘Help’ it alsofound its proper place in thearrangement of chapters, and didnot interfere with theenumeration of the chapterscontained in the first six portions.

The Purity of the Text of theHOLY QUR’AN PART 6 (continued from previous month)

From the Review of Religions, 1907


There is no evidence that thearrangement of chapters existingin the time of the HolyProphet(saw) was altered in anyway by Abu Bakr(ra) orUthman(ra). Against Abu Bakr(ra)

no one has ever advanced such acharge, and Uthman(ra) onlyfollowed the collection of AbuBakr(ra). The copies made in thetime of Uthman(ra) were madeunder the directions of thecompanions who possessed thebest knowledge of the Qur’an,and many of them as Obayy binK’ab knew the whole of it byheart.

The arguments which we haveadvanced above as to thearrangement of verses applymutatis mutandis to thearrangement of chapters. But assome traditions speak of differentarrangements, we shall considerthem before leaving this subject.

Let us take first the chapterheaded Talif-ul-Qur’an in theBukhari. According to the firsttradition mentioned in thischapter, a man from Iraq came toAyesha(ra) and asked her to showhim her copy of the Qur’an. Onbeing questioned as to what hemeant to do with it he said thatno arrangement was followed inthe recital of the Qur’an and thathe wanted her copy for a rightarrangement of the Holy Book.Upon this, the tradition tells us,Ayesha(ra) rebuked him andaccosted him in the followingwords:

‘What harm is there which isread first. Verily what wasrevealed of it first was achapter from among themufassal speaking of paradiseand hell. But when peoplebegan to accept Islam,

THE PURITY OF THE TEXT OF THE HOLY QUR’AN – PART 6

‘THERE IS NO EVIDENCE THAT THE ARRANGEMENT OFCHAPTERS EXISTING IN THE TIME OF THE HOLY PROPHET(SAW)

WAS ALTERED IN ANY WAY BY ABU BAKR(RA) OR OTHMAN(RA).AGAINST ABU BAKR(RA) NO ONE HAS EVER ADVANCED SUCH ACHARGE, AND OTHMAN(RA) ONLY FOLLOWED THECOLLECTION OF ABU BAKR(RA).’


injunctions were revealedabout the things legal and thethings prohibited. Had thefirst injunction revealed beenthe prohibition of drinking,they would have said thatthey could not give updrinking. ....... Then shebrought out her copy of theQur’an and recited verses ofsome chapters.’

In this tradition we have theobjection of a man from Iraq, notone of the companions but a newconvert to Islam, and the reply ofAyesha(ra). In the reply theobjector is rebuked for sayingthat no arrangement wasfollowed in the recital of theQur’an and it is explained to himwhat necessitated anarrangement different from thechronological order. It appearsfrom the reply that his questionrelated to the order of revelation,for he was told that there was noharm in placing a verse revealedbefore another after it in thearrangement. The copy of theQur’an which Ayesha(ra) showedthe questioner had also itsarrangement different from the

order of revelation, for she isstated to have recited verses ofdifferent chapters in support ofher argument. And the man wassatisfied with Ayesha’s argumentand did not take her copy whichhe would have certainly done ifthe arrangement of Ayesha’scopy had been different from thecurrent copies of the Qur’an.

It should also be borne in mindthat the arrangement of chaptersto which we have referred abovewas observed only in the recitalof the whole Qur’an, and no sucharrangement was observed in itsrecital in prayers or outsideprayers when only certainportions were recited.

In prayers, for instance, if anychapter or any portion of achapter was recited in one rak’a,any other chapter or portion of achapter whatever could berecited in the second rak’a.There is ample evidence as tothis in traditions. Similarly twoor more chapters could be read ina single rak’a, and in some casesthere were combinations of suchchapters for recital in prayers.



In his tahajjud prayers, forinstance, the Holy Prophet(saw)

used sometimes to recite twentychapters, eighteen of which weretermed the mufassal, or theshorter chapters towards theclose of the Qur’an beginningwith Qaf, and two Ha Mims, orchapters commencing with HaMim. Thus in each rak’a two ofthese chapters were recited, thetotal number of rak’as being ten.The Holy Prophet(saw) made apeculiar combination which hasbeen preserved to us through Ibn-i-Masud, and accordingly it isknown as the talif-i-Ibn-i-Masudor the combination of Ibn-i-Masud. Now this combinationhas nothing to do with thearrangement of chapters in theQur’an, nor was it followed onall occasions. It was acombination, which, according toIbn-i-Masud, the Holy Prophet(saw)

followed upon one occasion ormore occasions than one in hislater midnight prayers. Asauthentic traditions show that theordinary arrangement of chapterswas not followed by the HolyProphet(saw) or his companions in

prayers, this peculiar com-bination does not detract aughtfrom the value of the originalarrangement.

On the other hand, this peculiarcombination was preserved andmentioned only on account of itspeculiarity and departure fromthe original arrangement ofchapters. Nor was this peculiarcombination followed alwayseven in tahajjud prayers for thereare other authentic traditionsshowing other combinations andthe recital of other chapters.

Even in the public prayers thearrangement of chapters was notfollowed. On one occasion theHoly Prophet(saw) recited thefourth chapter, Al-Nisa in thefirst rak’a and the third chapter,Al-Imran, in the second, and theincident has been preserved in atradition only because adeparture was made in the casefrom the recognised arrange-ment.

Many other instances of the samekind are on record, and as it was



not obligatory to follow thearrangement of chapters inreciting them in prayers, suchcases furnish only additionaltestimony to the truth of the factthat the arrangement of chaptersfollowed at present is the same aswas followed in the recital of thewhole Qur’an in the life-time ofthe Holy Prophet(saw) according tohis directions.

The circumstances narratedabove as to the peculiarcombination of the twentychapters termed the mufassal, acombination resorted to by theHoly Prophet(saw) sometimes inhis tahajjud prayers, has ledsome men to think that Ibn-i-Masud’s copy of the Qur’anfollowed a different arrangementof chapters. But the onlytrustworthy evidence to supportthis is the tradition quoted above,which speaks of a certaincombination of twenty shortchapters in the tahajjud prayers,and when it is shown that theobservance of the arrangement ofchapters was not necessary inprayers, the force of that

evidence vanishes altogether.

Even supposing for the sake ofargument that Ibn-i-Masudfollowed a different arrangementof chapters, and it was accordingto that arrangement that thechapters were written in his copyof the Holy Qur’an, it does notfollow that his was the rightarrangement or that thearrangement in Abu Bakr’s orUthmans’s copy was the wrongone. None of the companionsfavoured the arrangement of Ibn-i-Masud.

On the other hand, all of themrecognised the arrangement inUthman’s copy as thearrangement followed by theHoly Prophet(saw). Among thecompanions who superintendedthe copying of the Qur’an in thereign of Uthman(ra), there weresuch eminent men as Ali(ra),Obayy bin Ka’b, Zaid bin Sabitand others. Uthman(ra) hadchosen, as I will show later on,twelve of the most eminentcompanions, who were distin-guished for their sound



knowledge of the Qur’an, andthey decided all points on whichany dispute arose. They couldnot be unaware of the particularcombination of chapters whichthe Holy Prophet(saw) followed inhis later midnight prayers, butthey knew that no particulararrangement was adhered to bythe Holy Prophet(saw) in the recitalof chapters in prayers and noarrangement could in fact beobserved. It is absurd to supposethat they were all ignorant of acertain combination and that Ibn-i-Masud alone knew it. Had thearrangement of chapters been leftto private judgment, we couldhave supposed Ibn-i-Masud’sarrangement to be the right oneand attributed the error to the restof the companions. But thematter was to be decided by whatthe Holy Prophet(saw) had ordered.

Ibn-i-Masud thought that acertain arrangement which hehad seen the Holy Prophet(saw)

following in his tahajjud prayerswas the right arrangement. Buthe made a mistake. Thecompanions knew that thearrangement followed in prayerswas not and could not be theright arrangement. Authentictraditions related by them showthat the Holy Prophet(saw) used torecite a portion of one chapter inone rak’a and a portion ofanother chapter whether beforeor after the first in actualarrangement in the second rak’a.They also knew the case in whicha companion who led the prayersin a certain mosque commencedevery rak’a with the shortchapter entitled ‘Unity’ and thenfollowed it with any otherchapter, and when the HolyProphet(saw) was appraised of this


‘...SUCH CASES FURNISH ONLY ADDITIONAL TESTIMONY TOTHE TRUTH OF THE FACT THAT THE ARRANGEMENT OFCHAPTERS FOLLOWED AT PRESENT IS THE SAME AS WASFOLLOWED IN THE RECITAL OF THE WHOLE QUR’AN IN THELIFETIME OF THE HOLY PROPHET(SAW) ACCORDING TO HISDIRECTIONS.’


circumstance he did not object toit. They knew further that in themorning prayers on Fridays, theHoly Prophet(saw) generallyrecited the chapter Al-Sajdah, the32nd chapter, in the first rak’a,and the chapter Ad-Dahr, theseventy-sixth chapter, in thesecond rak’a, yet this did notmean that the latter chaptershould follow the former in actualarrangement. They knew theactual arrangement and theyfollowed it.

Ibn-i-Masud based hisarrangement on a certain com-bination followed in certainprayers and thus made an error injudgment. Yet in the main evenhis arrangement was not differentfrom the arrangement followed inUthman’s copy. The same longerchapters, the Tiwal, were first inhis copy as in Uthman’s, with thisdifference only that Al-Nisapreceded Al-Imran, the order ofthe third and fourth chapters beingthus reversed. The reversal of thisorder is also due to the HolyProphet(saw) having once done it inreciting them in prayers. Theseare the only two differences as

regards the arrangement ofchapters that are mentioned tohave existed in Ibn-i-Masud’scopy. So the error is either to beattributed to Ibn-i-Masud or tothose who have supposed that hisarrangement of the chapters of theQur’an differed in these twopoints from the recognisedarrangement followed in theofficial copies issued byUthman(ra).

Even the existence of thedifference confirms theconclusion that the arrangementof chapters followed by Othman(ra)

was exactly the same as thatfollowed by the Holy Prophet(saw).There is agreement in the mainbetween other companions andIbn-i-Masud, and the differencearises only out of an error ofjudgment. The only differences inIbn-i-Masud’s arrangement, ifthese differences did actuallyexist in his copy, were thosewhich arose out of the HolyProphet(saw) reciting certainchapters in a different order in theprayers. Perhaps Ibn-i-Masudthought that the order of those fewchapters had been changed by the



Holy Prophet(saw) when he heardhim reciting them in prayers, butthe other companions knew that itwas not obligatory to follow thearrangement in prayers. Now weask, if the order of chapters wasnot fixed by the Holy Prophet(saw)

himself, what led Ibn-i-Masud tofollow the same arrangement aswas followed by Uthman(ra) andthe other companions?

Such an agreement in thearrangement of 114 chapters wasnot possible unless both werefollowing one and the the sameauthority who had fixed thatorder. Such authority could benone but the Holy Prophet(saw). Asfurther testimony that Ibn-i-Masud’s arrangement of chapterswas materially the same as wasfollowed in Uthman’s copies andas is followed by us to this day,we have a tradition in Bukhari inwhich Ibn-i-Masud names thefive chapters in the middle of theQur’an, Beni Israel, Al-Kahf, TaHa, Maryam and Anbiya, in thesame order in which they arefound in our copies of the HolyQur’an. All this evidence leadsus to the certain conclusion that

Ibn-i-Masud’s arrangement ofchapters was the same as in thecopies made by the order ofUthman(ra), that if there was anydifference it was very slight andimmaterial, and that thisdifference arose out of a mis-understanding on the part of Ibn-i-Masud.

Two other persons are named ashaving followed a differentarrangement of chapters in thecollection of the Qur’an. Theseare Ubayy bin Kab and Ali(ra). Thecase of the former may bedisposed of at once, as there is notestimony worth the name whichshould show that Ubayy followeda different arrangement ofchapters. The only thing statedabout him is that he placed thefourth chapter before the third. Ifthat was the only difference ofarrangement, it is quiteimmaterial and the error mayhave arisen from the same sourceas in the case of Ibn-i-Masud. Butas I will show just now, if Ubayyever entertained such opinion, heafterwards gave it up when hecame to know the facts.



Ali(ra) is said to have collected thechapters in the order ofrevelation, and there is a traditionstating that he did not rest afterthe Holy Prophet’s(saw) death untilhe had collected the Qur’an,arranging its chapters in achronological order. The authen-ticity of this tradition has beenquestioned, for that Qur’an wasnever handed down to posteritythough Ali(ra) reigned as Caliphimmediately after Uthman(ra).Moreover there are traditions of ahigher authority which do notgive to Ali(ra) such credit.According to one tradition (seeFath-ul-Bari, p.10) Ali(ra) himselfsaid that:

‘the greatest of men as regardsthe collection of the Qur’an isAbu Bakr: he is the first manwho collected the Qur’an.’

Therefore the tradition whichmakes Ali(ra) say that he did notrest after the death of theProphet(saw) till he had collectedthe whole of the Qur’an iscontradicted by the secondtradition whose evidence iscorroborated by other historicalfacts, one of which is that even

during his Caliphate, Ali(ra) neverreferred to or accepted a differentcopy of the Qur’an or a differentarrangement of its chapters. Butbesides this, there is anotherconsideration which shows thatneither Ali(ra) nor Ubayy followedany arrangement of chaptersother than the one which wasfollowed by Uthman(ra). Ubayyand Ali(ra) were among the menunder whose directions thecopies of the Qur’an werewritten, and therefore they had asmuch hand in giving us thepresent arrangement of chaptersas Uthman(ra) or any othercompanion.

There is one tradition morewhich may be mentioned inconnection with the arrangementof chapters, as from it a contraryconclusion is sometimes drawnby mistake. Ibn-i-Abbas thusnarrates this tradition: ‘I said toUthman what led you to put Al-Anfal (the eighth chapter) injuxtaposition with Baraat andyou did not write between themthe line ‘In the name of Allah, theGracious, the Merciful’ (theverse with which every chapter



of the Qur’an commences), thusclassing these two chapters withthe seven long ones. Upon thisquestion Uthman gave me thefollowing reply: ‘It wascustomary with the HolyProphet(saw) when many chapterswere being revealed to him, thatwhen any portion of any chapterwas revealed, he sent for one ofhis amanuenses and told him towrite down these verses in thechapter where such and suchthings were spoken of. Now Al-Anfal was one of the chaptersrevealed early at Madinah, andBaraat was one of the latestrevealed chapters, and thesubject matter of these twochapters was identical. ThereforeI believed that the latter chapterwas a part of the former chapter,and the Holy Prophet(saw) died,and he did not distinctly say to usthat it was a part.”

This tradition, far from ascribingthe arrangement of chapters tothe judgment of Othman(ra),makes it clear that thearrangement of chapters waseffected by none other than theHoly Prophet(saw). It shows that

except in the case mentioned inthe tradition, the Holy Prophet(saw)

had ‘distinctly’ told hiscompanions where a verse orchapter was to be placed. It alsoshows that the arrangement waseffected according to subject-matter by the Holy Prophet(saw)

himself, for it was the identity ofthe subject-matter which decidedthat the eighth and the ninthchapters should be placed injuxtaposition. In fact, leaving thecase of this one chapter, viz., theninth, out of question, thetradition relates in express andclear words, not only that theHoly Prophet(saw) pointed out theposition of every verse, but alsothat he pointed out the position ofevery chapter and distinctly toldhis companions which chaptershould follow which in thecollection, and that it was he whoarranged the chapters accordingto their subject matter.

Now taking the case of the twochapters mentioned in thetradition, does it follow fromwhat is said in it that the HolyProphet(saw) gave no directions atall as to their arrangement?s The



chapter entitled Baraat(Immunity) was, we know,revealed to the Holy Prophet(saw)

more than a year before his deathand accordingly it is not right tosay that he had no time to givedistinct directions as to its place.The fact is that the HolyProphet(saw) himself desired thetwo chapters to be thus placedside by side and the Baraat to bewritten without bismillah, theformula with which everychapter began. The two chapters,although known under twodifferent names, were really partsof a single chapter. The firsteighty verses of the Baraat wereproclaimed to the assembledhosts in the days of pilgrimage,and this was the reason that theBaraat was regarded as adifferent chapter. Hence the HolyProphet(saw) never told hiscompanions distinctly that theBaraat was only a part of Al-Anfal, and it was for this reasonthat it was looked upon as adistinct chapter. But neither didthe Holy Prophet(saw) commenceit with the opening formula,because in a certain sense, that is,the identity of the subject matter,

it was regarded as a part of theeighth chapter. This is whatUthman(ra) explained to Ibn-iAbbas.

All these circumstances lead usto the certain and undeniableconclusion that the arrangementof the chapters of the HolyQur’an and the arrangement ofthe verses in each chapter wereboth effected by the HolyProphet(saw). There is stronginternal evidence to the sameeffect. The chapters like theverses have a connection witheach other, but as this subjectrequires a separate treatment, weneed not refer to it here. The nextpoint to be considered is that ifthe whole of the Qur’an was safein writing as well as in memory,and if even its verses andchapters were arranged beforethe death of the Holy Prophet(saw),what was meant by the collectionof the Qur’an in the time of AbuBakr(ra) or in that of Uthman(ra).

To be continued.



... and Satan made all that theydid seem fair to them.(Ch.6:V.44)

One of man’s most vain fantasiesis to escape the consequences ofhis actions, to do everything hepleases and be accountable fornothing, not to others, not tohimself, nor to God.

One means to this end isignorance. If one is unaware thatan action is wrong, one is not asaccountable as one who doeswrong intentionally. Thus, if oneconvinces himself that one isignorant of the wrong in one’sactions, theoretically, one is notresponsible.

Accountability seems to dissi-pate in a myriad of deliberateconfusions and calculated mis-understandings. In the desperatepursuit of this vain freedom, oneis capable of going to greatlengths to pretend to oneself that

there is nothing wrong with whatone wants. The last resort of theirrational is to rationalise one’sactions.

Some may be inclined to believethat this is far-fetched and rare,but on the contrary it is quitecommon. Such people under-estimate what foolishness man iscapable. However great ourintellectual capacity may be,proportional is our ability to usethat capacity towards the mostsenseless purposes.

And Satan made their deedsappear good to them, and thusturned them away from thepath, sagacious though theywere.(Ch.29: V.39)

Rationalisation constantly mani-fests itself before us in variousforms. For example, people arealways convincing themselvesthat a lie, carefully worded, is not

Rationalisation By Rizwan Khan – USA


actually a lie, or that cheating on atest, done with certain intentions,is not actually cheating.

These are common occurrenceswhich we witness regularly ormay even be guilty of ourselves.We turn a blind eye to the obviousevil in our actions in the hope that,as a result, we will not beanswerable.

Is he, then, to whom the evil ofhis deeds are made to appearpleasing, so that he looks uponit as good, like him whobelieves and does gooddeeds?…(Ch.35: V.9)

If we were straight-forward withourselves, we would realise thatwe cannot divert blame for suchfaults away from ourselves byclaiming ignorance. The fact isthat we ourselves are responsiblefor that ignorance, for deliberatelyimposing it upon ourselves. If wetry to fool ourselves intounconsciously doing a wrong, wecannot escape responsibility forconsciously fooling ourselves andeverything which results there-

from. The responsibility of ouractions which we seek to escapeultimately finds its way directlyback to us.

This deliberate ignorance, whichwe imagine is our freedom fromresponsibility for our wrongs, is,in itself, the worst wrong. Underits cover, we permit ourselves ahost of new evils from which wewould have otherwise abstained.In its delusional bliss, we sinkdeeper into self-righteoushypocrisy. Through it, we open aPandora’s Box of wrongs fromwhich we had previously beensecure.

When we rationalise an evil, weknow it. Though we mayconvince ourselves on the surface,deep down we are always awareof the truth which we concealfrom ourselves. It is for thisreason that people always becomeso defensive when it is brought totheir attention. Every defencemechanism in our personalityreveals an insecurity which weseek to protect.

The sad result of this state of

RATIONALISATION


affairs is that, though we mayknow the difference between rightand wrong, that knowledge failsto benefit us at all. When wemake up our minds to believewhat we need to in order to dowhat we want to, we abandon anyadvantage our knowledge couldhave afforded us. We may knowwhat is right, but fail to profitfrom it; we may believe in thereligion, but fail to gain from it.Under such circumstances, wefind ourselves with scholars whoknow everything and comprehendnothing, with saints who believein everything but have faith innothing.

The corruption of this hypocrisyis centred on one phenomenon,rationalisation. Rather thanadministering the anaesthetics ofignorance to subdue thesymptoms of our moral diseases,perhaps it would be far better thatwe simply confront ourselves forwhat we are and be straightforward in our actions.

RATIONALISATION

ADVERTISE YOURBUSINESS IN The Review of

Religionsand see sales scale to

new heights.

Existing adverts can beplaced and sponsorshipon regular features is

available in this longestrunning worldwideMuslim monthlymagazine in the

English language.

Rates available onrequest from the

Manager at:

The Review of Religions16 Gressenhall Road, London SW18 5QL


COMPETITIONKhilafat Centenary Article

The Review of Religions is running a competition for articleson Khilafat to be published during 2008.

The winning entry will receive a copy of The Review ofReligions in which the best article is published and it will bepersonally signed by Hadhrat Khalifatul Masih V!

Articles must be unpublished and original and between 4,000words and 7,000 words on one of the following topics:

1. The blessings of Khilafat in Islam2. The institution of Khilafat3. The impact of Khilafat-e-Rashida or

Khilafat-i-Ahmadiyya 4. The concept of Khilafat in religious thought

All entries will be judged by the Editorial Board and theBoard’s decision will be final.

To qualify for this unique opportunity entries must be fullyannotated with cross-references relevant extracts of whichshould be supplied with the article for verification andsubmitted in English in MS Word to reach The Review ofReligions office in London by 30 November 2007. You mustinclude your full contact details including name, address,telephone number and email address. Late entries will not beentertained. Unless prepaid postage is enclosed, unpublishedarticles will not be returned.

We hope you have enjoyed reading this edition of themagazine. The Review of Religions will continue toprovide discussion on a wide range of subjects andwelcomes any comments or suggestions from itsreaders.

To ensure that you regularly receive this monthlypublication, please fill in your details below and wewill put you on our mailing list.

The cost of one year’s subscription is £15 Sterling orUS $30 for overseas readers (Please do not sendcash). Payments by US residents should be bycheck payable to “AMI” (US dollars 30) and sentdirect to ‘The Review of Religions’, Baitul Zafar,86-71 PALO ALTO ST, HOLLISWOOD. NY11423-1203 (USA). All other subscription paymentsshould be made payable to the London Mosque andsent to the address below:

The Review of ReligionsThe London Mosque16 Gressenhall RoadLondon SW18 5QLUnited Kingdom

Please put me on the mailing list for The Review of Religions for 1 year. I enclosesubscription payment of £15.00 or US $30.00 (please see instructions above for USresidents).

Name: ___________________________________________

Address: __________________________________________

__________________________________________________

__________________________________________________

SubscriptionThe Review of Religions

If you would like to order a copy of anyissue published in 2006, please send£1.50 (or equivalent) providing us withyour full name and address. Deliverywill be on a first come, first served basis,and in the absence of a copy beingavailable your money will be returned

• Are you a subscriber to TheReview of Religions?

• Have you renewed your sub-scription for the next year?

Why not sponsor a reader to TheReview of Religions by subscribingfor him/her and we will send thefirst edition on your behalf withyour compliments

MANAGEMENT BOARD CONTENTS CHIEF EDITOR … · Exploration of the reason why Rushdie’s work has...

Documents

Transcript of MANAGEMENT BOARD CONTENTS CHIEF EDITOR … · Exploration of the reason why Rushdie’s work has...