EARLY MUSLIM HISTORY NEEDS

FRESH APPRAISAL
M Aamer Sarfraz

Islam was supposed to be a simple and practical religion. Unfortunately, it has

fallen prey to similar challenges, which have marred other religions over time.
The main source of angst has been how and what we have received as early
Muslim history. This has confused some and detracted others; but definitely put
off many from the religion itself. It presents an illustration of events and
personnel, which is in sharp contrast to what is expected or is notified in the
Quran. As a result, one is left wondering what to trust and what not to believe. It
is a fact that very few original sources that could shed light on early Islam are
available now-a-days. Some of it is due to natural calamities, but most of it is due
to multi-pronged conspiracies unleashed against Islam from the day it was
promulgated. Except Quran, as verified once again by an original copy found in
Birmingham Museum, not a lot of significant material seems to be available in
its original form or as artefacts. The situation is so serious that some scholars in
the West are now questioning the reality of Islam by insinuating that it was
created retrospectively by caliph Abd al-Malik and others. Let us consider some
of our second hand or indirect resources from where we have drawn our
current understanding of Islam.
Muhammad bin Ishaq bin Yasar (704-767 CE) was the first to collect oral
traditions that formed the basis of a biography of Prophet Muhammad (SAW).
His grandfather had converted from Christianity in Kufa after being captured by
Hazrat Khalid bin Walid. He was eventually driven out of Medina after reporting
Hadees from a woman he had never spoken with. He was accused of being Jewish
and a closet Magian at different points in his life. He went travelling to Egypt,
Iran and elsewhere before finding patronage in the court of caliph al-Mansur who
commissioned him to write a comprehensive book of history – the biography of
Prophet Muhammad (SAW) formed a part of that. That book was kept in the
Baghdad court library but somehow disappeared. It miraculously appeared in
slightly different versions in Ibne Hisham (50 years later) and in al-Tabari’s (150
years later) works among some others. Most of his sources were reportedly fickle,
Magian and Jewish. His contemporary, Imam Malik, considered Ibne Ishaq to be
a liar. Imam Hanbal rejected his opinions on Jurisprudence and Imam Bukhari
rarely included his Ahadees in his collection.
Ibn Shihab al-Zuhri (50-124 AH) is a central figure among the early Muslim
historians and narrators of Ahadees. He is a mysterious character who was
supposed to have left Medina and found employment in Damascus with the caliph
Abd al-Malik and continued to serve the Umayyad rulers until his death. No
linked account of al-Zuhri’s life is available as there is no proof that he ever again
lived in Medina. He was considered unreliable because, among other reasons, if
asked anything, especially in writing, he would deliberately give three
contradictory answers to the same question. He reportedly descended from the
Zoroastrians who had settled in the Iraqi cities of Kufa, Basra and Baghdad after
the conquest of Persia. He was the one who broached the idea of different
renderings of the Quran and that some Ayats abrogate others, decorated disputes
between companions of the Prophet (SAW), and narrated dubious accounts of
their communal battles.
Abu Ja’far Muhammad ibn Jarir al-Tabari (839-923 CE) is the foremost
historian in Islamic history. Tabari was fifty years old when al-Mu’tadid took him
under his patronage. He was over seventy years old when his History of the
Prophets and Kings was published in thirteen volumes. Subsequently, he was
famous but a controversial character whose house was regularly pelted with
stones. When he died, Abbasid authorities buried Tabari in secret as they feared
violence. Tabari has relied on other historians e.g., Abu Mihnaf, Sayf bin Umar,
Ibn al-Kalbi and on oral accounts circulating at the time. He wrote early history
of Muslims relying mostly on Ibne Ishaq (except contriving ‘Satanic Verses’)
approx. three hundred years after those events. In some accounts Tabari’s name
is given as Ibn Jareer bin Rustam and in others Tabari bin Yazeed; both were
historians though with the same dates of birth and death. Tabari has literally been
copied by all historians who came after him. He writes, “I am writing this book
as I hear from the narrators. If anything sounds absurd, I should not be blamed or
held accountable. The responsibility of all errors or blunders rests squarely on the
shoulders of those who have narrated these stories to me.” So, did Tabari write
mostly from hearsay?
Ibn Khaldun (1332-1406 CE) is considered as a forerunner of modern history
due to his book, the Muqaddimah. He wrote that the Muslim historians had made
a mockery of history by filling it with fabrications and senseless
misrepresentations. However, it was highlighted by Shah Abdul Aziz (1746-1824
CE) that six pages of Ibn Khaldun’s Muqaddimah have been deliberately
removed since the earliest times. These pages had reportedly raised questions
about the most critical juncture of Islamic history ie the Emirate of Yazeed and
the incident of Karbala. Even in some modern editions, it is mentioned in the foot-
notes that those pages have been inexplicably missing. Abdul Aziz has also
criticised Jalaluddin al-Suyuti (1445-1505 CE) for the writing of Tareekh-ul-
Khulafa as the prime example of how our historians have acted as if they were
collecting firewood in the dark of the night. Al-Suyuti was about to be declared a
mujtahid of the ninth century before an uproar from the scholars and officials who
questioned, among other things, how the Sufi lodge was financially sponsored.
I have been reading early Muslim history for a few decades. Very few books and
interesting articles, unless they are unreferenced or in an unknown language, have
escaped me. One would assume under these circumstances that there are not many
surprises left in this subject area for me. However, this statement cannot be further
from the truth. For example, I was on a holiday when I found myself in a beautiful
Library during a break from the sightseeing. While browsing in the Religion
section, a book by an unfamiliar author, Leslie Hazelton, caught my eye. It
contained the usual material along with the author’s own bias, but a few ‘well-
referenced’ twists were hard to ignore.
Ms Hazelton writes that Prophet Muhammad (SAW) had at first approached his
uncle, Hazrat Abu Talib, for his daughter Fakhitah‘s hand but he was turned down
probably due to his low economic status and future potential. Therefore, when he
formally proposed to Hazrat Khadija afterwards, he had requested his other uncle,
Hazrat Hamza, to take the message to her father. She got her own father, very
drunk to get him to agree to the proposal, and quickly announced his approval
before he recovered. Ms Hazelton also comments how Prophet Muhammad
(SAW) repaid more than his debts to Hazrat Abu Talib who had raised him as an
orphan, when his fortunes turned — he raised Hazrat Ali, gave his own daughter
(Hazrat Fatima) to Hazrat Ali in marriage, and was always generous to Hazrat
Fakhitah later in life except turning her down when she proposed. The book is
well-written and also contains other interesting ‘facts’ and insights. No wonder it
has since become a best-seller. Where do such ‘new’ stories and ‘facts’ actually
come from? Are they just products of some evil Muslim-hating minds or have
some basis in Muslim history?
There is also a historical saga of other books (eg ‘The Apology of Al-Kindy’,
‘Mahomet’, The Satanic Verses’) which has offended Muslims over time for
being insensitive or contrary to their firmly held ‘beliefs’. No prize for guessing
the contents of these books because the material ‘facts’ were drawn from our own
‘reliable’ books written by esteemed Imams questioning whose wisdom or
integrity can push anyone outside the pale of Islam. But, is this really the answer
to all these repeated onslaughts on the integrity of a great religion that we close
our eyes and curse them, and the rest of the world should follow suit?
Allah revealed and asked Prophet Muhammad (SAW) to preserve the Quran
while taking responsibility of its security upon Himself. Muhammad (SAW)
narrated and got it recorded, in writing and by heart, by several of his companions
at a time. He would also get them to revise it with him and corrected them if
necessary. Before leaving this world, he made sure that the Quran was available
in writing and preserved in the hearts of hundreds of his people. Neither Allah
nor Prophet Muhammad (SAW) instructed that Ahadith (sayings of the Prophet)
may be recorded or took responsibility of their security. The latter actually
instructed that nothing except the Quran should be written from him and
whosoever has done otherwise should erase it immediately. He may have
permitted one person on an occasion but never instructed him or anyone else to
do so. There is firm evidence to suggest that the first two caliphs made people
destroy the Ahadith they had collected in pursuance of Prophet’s (SAW)
instructions.
Ahadith have been the biggest source for writing early Muslim history. The first
recorded and safely found manuscript of Ahadith is by Hamam Ibne Munbah
(d.131Hijra). It has 138 Ahadith and he wrote that he composed them under the
supervision of his teacher Hazrat Abu Hurairah (d. 58Hijra). Now just envision
that Ibne Munbah could only find 138 Ahadith sitting in Medina within 46 years
of Prophet’s death but Imam Bukhari found six hundred thousand Ahadith
(recorded two thousand six hundred and thirty — discarded the rest) after approx.
230 years of the Prophet. Others like Imam Hanbal found one million and Imam
Yahya bin Moeen found more than a million Ahadith. It is also worth noting that
while his student records only 138 sitting in front of him, Hazrat Abu Huraira has
reportedly narrated thousands of Ahadith, which are found in different Ahadith
collections. The first acclaimed collection of 300-500 Ahadith is by Imam Malik
(d. 179 Hijra). Afterwards, this trend became popular and several collectors of
Ahadith came forward. Among them, there are six renowned collections of
Ahadith recognised by the Sunnis and four separate collections by the Shias —
both sects reject each other’s collections for being unreliable.
The common features of these collections are: all their collectors were of Persian
origin — none was an Arab, did not think much of each other, published them
after 200 years of Prophet’s death, collected hundreds of thousands of Ahadith
but selected a small proportion, relied on personal judgement for Ahadith
selection and rejection, and collected Ahadith from verbal accounts without any
written evidence. Try remembering an interesting meeting you attended with a
group of friends several years later. We either forget or remember different
versions of it. Now imagine what could be remembered if it was carried forward
into three generations over two hundred years. We can argue whether Ahadith
can be a reliable source for writing history (or jurisprudence). But that would just
be what Muslims have been doing all these years, and then they accuse non-
Muslim (and Muslim) historians and writers of insulting their beliefs or having
an agenda against Islam. The way things are unfolding in the world at the
moment; this situation is only going to get worse.
Banu Umayyah usurped others’ right and ruled with an iron hand for hundred
years. They were ousted by Banu Abbas who gained power in the name of Hazrat
Ali and his decedents but chose to ignore them during most of their five-hundred-
year rule. Both Dynasties encouraged innovation of Ahadith which could boost
their Islamic credentials and shrink those of Hazrat Ali. As a reaction, many who
felt sorry for Hazrat Ali took matters into their own hands. Non-Muslims,
especially Magians, actively contributed to all these malevolent efforts.
Thousands and thousands of new Ahadith came into being which were
inconsistent, curious, bewildering and sometimes embarrassing. It is reported that
Jonabari, Ibne Akasha and Tamim Farabi invented more than ten thousand
Ahadith between them. Ibne Abi Alauja admitted before execution that he had
fabricated four thousand Ahadith mostly related to halal and haram. Some
historical characters did not even exist, and others had the audacity to write books,
which were full of fabricated Ahadith. If this was not enough, some companions
of Prophet Muhammed (SAW) were invented with a lifespan spread over
centuries. For example, people shook hands with Abu Abdullah Saqali in 5th
century because he had held Prophet’s hand; and Baba Rattan Hindi (d. 632 Hijra)
was famous for having attended Hazrat Fatima’s wedding.
Islam is basically about one Allah, one Prophet and one book. Ahadith not only
created doubts about the Quran but also inspired several ‘prophets’. Quran has
inbuilt evidence regarding its construction and form preserved forever but doubts
were crafted whether it was compiled by Hazrat Abu Bakar, Hazrat Umar and/or
finally by Hazrat Usman. All Hazrat Usman did was to make copies from the
originals and got those sent to various corners of the State to be copied from as
required. Legends were spawned how some verse was eaten by a goat and others
got left out during compilation, leading to differences in renditions and the
versions found in different regions. As a result, Quran was being brought down
to the level of other scriptures Muslims claimed were unreliable, and exposed
Islam to unwarranted attacks from non-Muslims.
Ahadith also creatively opened the door of ‘lesser-Wahi’ to ambitious individuals
who were not messengers of Allah. Similar to other religions, this licence inspired
many to become saints and mystics, and others to claim ‘prophet hood’ especially
when Muslim fortunes were in decline. Most of the latter were suitably treated by
the relevant authorities but some went on to carve out new religions and followers
for themselves. I met one notable aspirant, kept in a high security jail in
Faisalabad, a couple of years ago. He was definitely mentally ill.
Ahadith became a source of innovations which had no basis in the Quran, and
were not practiced in the time of Prophet Muhammad (SAW). This sowed the
seeds of permanent internal discord and changed the focus of Muslim beliefs and
culture for good. Most worryingly, people like Imam Tabari, also wrote exegesis
(Tafsir) of the Quran and used Ahadith as the background (Shan-e-Nazool) to
determine the meaning of verses of the Quran. This practice has become an
unshakable dogma since, leaving no prospect for any scholar to translate or
interpret the Quran independently. Currently, some leading religious figures
actually believe that if there is a discrepancy between the Quran and the Hadith,
the latter takes precedence. This is what Allama Iqbal had pronounced as Ajami
Islam and cried that Haqeeqat (Quran) Kharafat Mein Kho Ghaee/Yeh Ummat
Rawayat (Ahadith) Mein Kho Ghaee.
Throughout history, Allah has never left Muslims without choice. Unfortunately,
they choose to remain stuck in a vicious cycle primarily due to this wicked
historical trap set through their inaccurate grasp of early Muslim history. There
are two main versions — the rest are a spin-off from either of them. Muslims are
globally split along these versions without national boundaries. This divide is so
deep and sturdy that historical attempts to repair these did not succeeded. This is
because treating the symptoms does not cure a disease — you need to treat the
cause.
In the first version of early Muslim history, everything was fine, barring minor
incidents attributed to human error, until well into Hazrat Usman’s caliphate. Due
to his generous and forgiving nature, some of his relatives, especially his
secretary Ibne Hakam, grew increasingly powerful. As Hazrat Usman grew old
and vulnerable, some prominent Muslims started accumulating wealth. Ibne
Hakam also took some disastrous decisions, without his knowledge, which
culminated in Hazrat Usman’s own murder by Muslims. This was such a shock
to the Muslim community that they drew their own conclusions about the incident
and acted in good faith consequently. Unfortunately, this led to permanent rifts
among the Muslims which were inherited to us.
The second version is that early Muslims also included hypocrites, and their
number increased through overnight conversions after the conquest of Mecca in
10th Hijra. They conspired, collaborated and acted in their own interest during
and after the lifetime of Prophet Muhammed (SAW). They came out into the open
when Hazrat Ali took over the caliphate. This was later followed by persecution
and martyrdoms of Hazrat Ali’s descendants and their allies during the Umayyad
and the Abbasid regimes.
Both versions of early Muslim history are full of gaps, contradictions, irrationality
and contravene the message of the Quran. Both have been unpicked by rival
camps using their own and opponent’s sources to the great satisfaction of their
own faction and non-Muslims. This deepened the divide and increased hostility
among Muslims, and also caused non-issues (e.g. halal, hijab, jihad, polygamy)
according to the Quran to become an albatross.
There is also a third version of early Muslim history with reliable references
which has been mostly ignored. The third version of early Muslim history is
derived from Dr Ahmad’s review based on Mossavi, Khamdimzada, Fatimi,
Karamati, Imdadi, Hamid-Uddin, Montgomery and others’ works. The idea
behind his thesis and my essay is academic and educational, and not to affront
religious beliefs or insult revered figures in Islamic history. Ahmad determines
that standard versions of early Muslim history are part of an elaborate conspiracy
steered by the Magian (Zoroastrian) nobility after their defeat at Qadisiyyah in
636 CE. They could never forget how some Arab Bedouins had dealt their Empire
a mortal blow. Therefore, they instigated endless physical and intellectual
conflicts among the Muslims. While using their intellect and royal influence to
generate peculiar versions of history, they also succeeded in inciting the Abbasids
to eliminate the Umayyads and then invited Hulagu Khan in 1258 CE to destroy
the Abbasid Empire. This is how they avenged the loss of their Empire at the
hands of Arabs.
After the conquest of Persia, some Magian nobility ‘converted’ to Islam but most
fled abroad. Like the famous ‘nine jewels’ of Mughal king Akbar, Sassanid kings
used to have twenty jewels called Asawirah. Fifteen of them had survived and
took refuge with the Chinese Emperor in Samarqand. They put their heads
together and then schemed to assassinate the caliphs, and alienate Muslims from
the Quran. Hormuzan, the defeated commander of the Persian army, remained in
contact with the Asawirah. He had settled in Medina after tricking Hazrat Umar
into sparing his life. He conspired with Jews and Nazareans in Medina, and
organised a Persian slave, Firoz Abu lulu, to stab Hazrat Umar to death with a
special knife. Firoz committed suicide to keep this operation secret. Hazrat
Umar’s son, Ubaydullah, killed Hormuzan and other conspirators in a fit of rage.
Abdullah bin Saba, a Jewish convert, rose to eminence in Iraq by canvassing for
the divine right of Prophet’s family to inherit the caliphate. He colluded with
Jafeena, a Christian from Hirah, who had also ‘converted’ to Islam after being in-
charge of the royal security in Rome. In this version of history, there was peace
and prosperity in the era of Hazrat Usman as Hazrat Ali was the Governor of Iraq,
Muawiya of Syria and Ibn al-As of Egypt. The caliph lived like a common man
without any guards. Saba bin Shamoun and his son Abdullah bin Saba took
advantage of this and assassinated Hazrat Usman while he recited the Qur’an.
The Asawirah struck again in 40 AH when Hazrat Ali was leading a prayer in
Kufa. A Magian, Jamshed Khorasani, aka Ibn-e-Muljim, stabbed him with a
double-edged dagger. Hazrat Ali died three days later. Then Jaban bin Hormuzan,
son of the mastermind behind Hazrat Umar’s assassination, made an unsuccessful
attempt on Hazrat Hasan’s life in 46 AH. Hazrat Hasan was poisoned but other
accounts suggest that he died of tuberculosis in 49 AH.
Hazrat Muawiya died in 60 AH. Meetings for choosing the new caliph were on
when Jaban bin Hormuzan, aka Bilal bin Yousaf, and his accomplices entered the
Governor’s House in Kufa under the cover of darkness. They killed the Governor
Hazrat Hussain and disappeared into the night. According to Allama Masoodi,
Jaban remained active against Hazrat Abdulla bin Zubair in later years. He was
eventually killed while attempting on the latter’s life in 70 AH.
Ahmad underlines that the tragedy of Karbala reportedly took place in 680 CE.
However, there is no trace of it in the two books Imam Zainul Abedein, son of
Hazrat Hussain, wrote around 700 CE. Imam Malik does not mention Karbala
either in his Muttawa written in 758 CE. Hadith books, with all sorts of
controversial material, started appearing by 860 CE but without ever referring to
Karbala.?In 900 CE, Imam Tabari incredulously wrote a detailed commentary
about Karbala without a scrap of paper before him. He refers to someone called
Abu Mikhnaf who wrote about it earlier. But Abu Mikhnaf is a fictional character,
and it is deduced that Tabri actually wrote that treatise himself.
The Magians of Persia were very influential during most of the Abbasid rule. In
fact, the joint founder of the Abbasid dynasty, Abu Muslim Khorasani, was also
a closet Magian. They were so powerful that caliph Haroonur Rasheed often
found himself powerless (despite his mother being a Magian). The Baramika
family of Magian origins enjoyed unprecedented authority as Haroon’s viziers
and replaced Arabic with Persian as the language of the court. According to
Allama Kandhalvi, all key positions of the Abbasids court were occupied by the
Magians, and their women ruled the Abbasid harems. Serious departures from
real history and the Faith took place in these circumstances.
Just as Imam Abu Yusuf became the royal court jurist (Faqeeh) of Umayyad
Dynasty, Imam Tabri got a foothold in the court of caliph Mo’tamid in 270 AH
and later submitted to the whims of caliph Al-Muqtadar Billah as his favourite
scholar. Royal delegates were dispatched to Makkah, Medina, Damascus,
Qadisiyyah, Kufa and other provincial centres. The contents of their libraries
were destroyed and replaced by official books written by the Royal seal of
approval.
Hazrat Umar bin Abdul Aziz had appointed Hur bin Abdur Rahman as Governor
of Spain. It was under his governance that the Muslim armies crossed into
Southern France. He used to write a journal of important events in Arabic. Around
920 CE, a Spanish officer, Simone Ashbillia, found his diary in an unkempt state
and translated what had survived into Spanish. In 1910, Dennis Montgomery, a
British academic examined it carefully and translated it into English as it covered
the important period of around 100 AH. The contents of this diary corroborate
with the earlier mentioned works of Hussain Kazimzade and Abdul Qadir Moosvi
as well as with the writings of Abdul Jabbar Fatimi kept in the Istanbul archives.
Bin Abdur Rahman wrote how the plots of the Magians (Zoroastrians) had
created trouble in Iraq during the first few decades of Islam, and they still caused
trouble from time to time. Hazrat Ali and Hazrat Hussain, as Governors of Iraq,
had made it a paradise on earth but two Magians, Jamsed Khurasani and Jaban
bin Hormuzan, martyred them. But the blood of Hazrat Ali and Hazrat Hussain
was not spilled in vain as Kufa and Basra were more peaceful and prosperous
than Syria and Egypt in 100 H. Needless to say, there is no mention of the tragedy
of Karbala. The diary concludes around 116 AH (732 CE) with an important event
when Muslim armies marched into France under Abdur Rahman Ghafiqi and
fought valiantly at Tours before he got killed accidentally. Had Muslims won that
battle, the history of Europe and the rest of the world would have been different.
The readers must wonder why this version of history remains unknown. It is
because the original records were systematically destroyed in the Abbasid era and
since then the official versions have prevailed over the centuries with vigorous
endorsement from our clergy. When Baghdad fell in 1248 CE, Naseeruddin Toosi
(of Magian origins) was the chief advisor of Hulagu Khan (invader) and a closet
Magian Ibne Alqami (real name, Nasr Nawsher Alqami) was the prime minister
of caliph Musta’sim Billah (being invaded). You can imagine the result when
Khan attacked Baghdad because it was Alqami who had invited him covertly.
Before doing so, Alqami had made sure that the army had been cut to size, and
Muslims were busy in Dua’s and debating halal and haram. Mongols killed
everyone in sight (including Alqami towards the end) and the Magians made sure
that all the books in the biggest library in the world were destroyed under the
supervision of Alqami. The history which has reached us through Magians and
their allies has bizarre contradictions. Let me share an interesting but less known
example.
When Persia was conquered in 642 CE, prisoners of war were brought to Medina.
They included three daughters of Yazdegerd-III, the King of Persia. Hazrat Umar
decided to marry them to Hazrat Hussain, Hazrat Muhammad bin Abi Bakar and
Hazrat Abdullah bin Umar. The idea was that this act of generosity would create
good relations between the two nations. In another version, there were two
daughters of Yazdegerd and they married Hazrat Hasan and Hazrat Hussain.
Whichever version is accepted; two historical facts would be difficult to swallow.
Firstly, Yazdegerd was 12-21 years old when he ascended the throne and Persia
was lost a few years later. How could he have 2-3 daughters of a marriageable
age by that time? Secondly, Hazrat Hussain was born in 4-5AH and by the time
of this event in 16 AH, he was 11-12 years old. How could this marriage have
taken place? If you are confused, let me add two more versions in which these
girls were sisters of Yazdegerd or daughters of Yazdegerd’s brother.
I could go on citing discrepancies but let me instead mention innovations which
crept into Islam through Magian machination: the caliph became God’s shadow
on earth, Nowruz (Zoroastrian/Persian New Year Day) started being celebrated
officially, Shab-e-Barat (Zoroastrian concept) was invented as a religious
episode, religious laws separated from the public laws causing parallel authorities
(clergy versus government), belief in the pre-ordainment of Fate (Taqdeer) was
invigorated, mysticism (‘communication’ with God through spiritual exercises)
was promoted, encouragement of Capitalism by paying only 2.5 percent of Zakat,
and the concept of Jihad was clouded. In short, according to Allama Iqbal, the
conquest of Persia unfortunately resulted in Islam being overshadowed by
Zoroastrianism than vice versa.
Islam is not a new religion. It was not promulgated because people were not
praying, fasting or giving charity. It came to revive the same message brought by
other messengers of God with minor additions due to human cognitive
development. It was about equality, justice, fair distribution of wealth and
establishing a direct relationship of God and man (through Quran). However, this
did not suit the political and religious establishment because they wanted to
subjugate the masses and become self-decreed intermediaries to God. They
continue to work together to maintain the status-co established by the Abbasids
and keep Muslims busy with the rituals whose meanings have changed and with
disputes which never end.

Current version of Islam, based on early Muslim history, is termed ‘Ajami (alien)
Islam’ by Allama Iqbal, ‘Invented Islam’ by Sir Syed Ahmad Khan and
Jamaluddin Afghani labelled it as ‘Fatalistic Islam’. Before we move to solutions,
let us revisit what we have got ourselves into.

All celebrated Sunni (six) and Shia (four) collectors of Ahadith were of Persian
(Magian) origins. A significant majority of Muslims believes these compilations
to be the perfect books and their validity next only to the Quran. However, most
of their authors had a poor opinion of one another. The foremost Muslim historian
and leading author of exegesis (Tafsir) of the Quran, Imam Tabri, was of Persian
origin. The logical fallout of this version of Islam, among other issues, is the
Baha’i religion. The Baha’i prophet Baha Ullah claims descent from Yazdegerd-
III, the King of Persia. Two prominent claimants of prophet hood in the
subcontinent, Muhammad Jaunpuri and Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani, were
also of Persian origins.

Most of us have heard about the renowned Tafseer-e-Kabeer written by Imam

Fakhruddin Razi. He was also of Persian origin. After having written 300
volumes, the Imam actually made a very brave confession, “All my intellectual
and supposedly logical statements in the explanation of the Quran turned out to
be lame. All the explanations of the Quran done by the so-called Imams (Tabari,
Zamakhshari, Ibne Kathir, Bukhari, Muslim etc) were misguided and misleading.
All of us were the tools of Satan. Our souls were polluted by our physical desires.
All our endeavours and works of this world promise to bring upon us nothing but
eternal humiliation, torture and doom.” How Islam changed as a result of these
Magian machinations is a long story. Perhaps a review of what some of their
intrigues did to us would suffice.

Salat is a principle concept of the Quran but it has been interpreted as the ritual
prayer Namaz for us. Namaz is actually something which Zoroastrians used to
offer as a prayer in front of their Holy Fire. In reality, Salat is a comprehensive
concept — it entails perpetual submission to Allah’s commands and striving
collectively to establish a social order where no one in the society is subservient
to another (Quran 1:1-7). The ritual prayer is only a small component in
establishing this system of Salat (Aqeem-Us-Salaat). Similarly, Zakat, invariably
linked with Salat in the Quran, is about government and people keeping their
wealth and resources open for the benefit of their fellow human beings. It is not
2.5% – people should give “whatever is more than their needs.” (Quran 2:219).

The Quran does not mention any Messiah or Mahdi, and not a single reliable
Hadith concerning him can be established. However, belief in the Mahdi who
would appear and rule the world before the end of times and get rid of the evil,
has become an integral part of our faith. This belief and his anticipated arrival
receives galvanized focus whenever it coincides with a time of crisis for the
Muslims. Throughout history, different religious adventurers have used this
belief to advance their own agendas. The Zoroastrians (Magians) had always
waited for a messiah (Mateera) for their salvation. Magian culture actually
suffered repeated breakdown and restoration of its communities while
experiencing religious adventurism due to this concept until Islam emancipated
them and the mankind from this morbid anxiety through belief in the Finality of
Prophet hood. Unfortunately, what Allama Iqbal considered a foreign concept to
the character of Islam, has been adopted by us.

I have already mentioned how the fundamental plank of this huge conspiracy was
actually against the Quran. First of all, inherently unreliable Ahadith were
invented to create doubts about the style, content and structure of the Quran. Then
they were exploited to determine the meaning of the Quran through Shan-e-
Nazool of almost each verse of the Quran. The loop of this intrigue was completed
through the explanation or exegesis (Tafseer) of the Quran. All three strands of
this scheme were shaped into an entrenched doctrine and anyone attempting to
disagree with the officially recognised version or Imam of his time or deviate
from this ‘established’ tradition later was persecuted by the authorities and
shoved outside the pale of Islam by the debauch clergy. All conspiracy was put
into motion by highly intelligent and skilled Magian ‘coverts’ with intentional or
insightless support from their royal patrons, corrupt clergy, and pertinent
assistance from other religions.

Due to the spirit of Jihad, Muslims have never lacked in courage throughout their
history. They have always been, unfortunately, undone by their own. People did
stand up against this conspiracy in letter and spirit whenever and wherever it was
possible. We do not know them because their names and works were
systematically erased from history after persecution, whippings and
assassinations. Abu Muslim Isphahani, Abul Qasim Balakhi, and Aqeel bin Asad
were so methodically purged that today their names can only be found as minor
and incredibly negative references in others’ books. Since frequent historical
dissent could have turned into a mass insurgence, Islam was ruined though the
same trick employed against Christianity….
Christianity as practiced today is not what Jesus of Nazareth had laid down his
life for. It was an uprising against the status-co when it started. The poor peasants
had stood up against the crooked clergy who were using religion (Judaism), with
support from the Roman governor, to subjugate them. Jesus was crucified as a
rebel when he attacked the stalls of the money-lenders and publically challenged
the High Priest at the Temple. Following his sacrifice, Jesus’s movement spread
and undid the religious establishment under the leadership of his brother James.
Fearing the growing influence of this reformist movement, the religious
establishment used the ultimate trick in their arsenal.

Paul (real name, Saul of Tarsus) was a committed enemy of the movement and
made life difficult for its followers whenever he could. Sensing its triumph, he
had a ‘vision on the Road to Damacus’ and became a fervent follower of Jesus.
Being a charismatic individual, he rose through the leadership ranks quickly
despite being reprimanded on several occasions for his extreme views and violent
tactics. It did not take him long, as Saint Paul, to hijack the ‘Christian’ leadership
while working closely with the Roman authorities. Reza Aslan, in his best-seller
‘The Zealot’, narrates how a reformist movement malformed its revolutionary
character to becoming just another organised religion, and was titled Christianity.

Islam was also revolutionary as it spread quickly in the Arabian Peninsula and
beyond. However, around 700 CE, the closet Magians (Zoroastrians) and their
collaborators, were busy setting up old (Arab) and new (Ajami) Muslims against
each other. Towards the end of Banu Umayyad rule, a major spilt was instigated
among Muslims where they supported the right to rule by the descendants of
Hazrat Ali or otherwise.

A new ascetic dimension in Islam was also being introduced, knowingly and
unknowingly, by some who sought salvation but wanted to stay neutral. Wasil
bin Ata was the first intellectual to see through this trap — he broke away from
ibn al-Hanafiyyiah (grandson of Hazrat Ali) over the issue of Imamate and then
from Hasan al-Basri, a mystic, over the nature of the faith. He went on to
promulgate Free Will and Rationality as the way forward to break this quagmire
of traditions (Ahadith), mysticism, and politics (Shia-Sunni). Bin Ata’s doctrine
spread in subsequent years where his successors not only defeated their
adversaries scholastically but also protected Islam from the onslaught
through Greek Philosophy. Islam was on the march when the Barmakids
sensitised their friend and Caliph Harun al-Rashid about the growing influence
of the Rationalists and its political repercussions. He asked the Barmakids to use
their proverbial skills to neutralised the movement. Not long after, a Shia-Sunni
split was caused among the Rationalists and those inclined towards the Shiite left
Basra to set up base in Baghdad under Bishar ibn al-Mu’tamir. The Baghdad
(Imami) Rational School grew closer to the Abbasids including al-Ma’mun, and
their creed prevailed, sometime under duress, throughout the Kingdom. But the
ultimate scheme had not unfolded yet.

Abu al-Hasan al-Ash’ari studied at Basra Rationalist School. He was a senior and
eminent pupil. He suddenly clashed with his teacher over the doctrine of free will
and left the school. Soon afterwards he received ‘divine support’ to set up his
Ash’ari School where rationalist methods were exploited to defend orthodox
notions like eternal Quran. The Ash’ari belief in predestination, that everything
happens as a result of ‘God’s will’, was music to the ears of the politically
manipulative Caliph al-Mutawakkil. He used this doctrine to coerce the people to
accept their ruler — whether just or unjust, kind or oppressive. After all, his rule
was part of the “God’s will” and beyond contention. He adopted the Ash’ari creed
in the Kingdom and hunted down the Rationalists relentlessly.

Al-Ash’ari and his successors did to Islam what Paul had done to Christianity.
The Ash’ari creed took over all aspects of social, political and religious life in
Islam and continues to dominate till today. Along the way, al-Ghazali and Ibn
Taymiyya appeared but only to annihilate rationality. The Rationalists were
exterminated and their academic achievements were systematically twisted and
destroyed. They were made to appear as heretic philosophers who believed reason
was more fundamental than revelation. Shiites, meanwhile, developed their own
persecutory narratives that matured over centuries, sometimes splitting into
dissident off-shoots, with their peculiar theologies which can only be understood
in the paradigm of persecution, isolation and survival. As a result, Islam also
become just another organised religion. Some had fought back over time to
reorientate the Muslims; but only received admonition and persecution. The
shackles of organised clergy are so strong that Islam remained but only a hostage.
Allama Iqbal was the most prominent proponent of ‘Reconstruction of Religious
Thought in Islam’ in the subcontinent. He started with much zeal around 1908
but soon got busy with national politics and nearly gave up after being declared
an infidel following the publication of ‘Asrar-i-Khudi’. He did point the way
forward for those who want to pursue this work. He guided how we could relive
the original Islam only through the Quran, which itself is lost due to Magian-
inspired translations and exegesis based on Ahadith and Shan-e-Nazool. Allama
Iqbal’s guide to reviving Islam is ingenious. He believed that the Quran is the
only reality in Islam. And to understand true Islam one does not need anything
except the Quran; and to understand Quran, one does not need anything except
the Quran because, according to God, it explains itself. Since, similar to a great
poetry, the Quran is untranslatable, its real meaning can only be established by
ascertaining the meaning of the ‘key words’ in the Quran which carry invariable
concepts within them.
The Quran often uses key words (eg Salaat, Zakat, Mlaika, Jannah, Deen) in its
verses to define and communicate a pertinent message. If authentic meanings of
these words could be independently determined, we do not need to rely on
Ahadith or Shan-e-Nazool to understand the actual meanings of the Quranic
verses. But if these words are in Arabic (which they are), one could argue as to
what the fuss is about understanding Quran if someone understands the Arabic
language and/or uses an authentic Arabic dictionary for assistance. Allama Iqbal
stressed that the matter was not that simple!

The Quran was perhaps the first book of prose, albeit poetic prose, in Arabic. It
was revealed in the pure Arabic language used by the native Arabs approx. fifteen
centuries ago. Arabic is also known as the most comprehensive language the
world has ever known. For example, it has 1000 words for sword,500 for lion,
and 5744 for a camel. Therefore, it is not always easy to detect how the Quran
has used a particular key word in line with its global message and philosophy.
Our traditional approach does not work. For example, three leading names (Shah
Abdul Qadir, Moulana Mehmood-ul-Hasan and Shabbir Ahmed Usmani)
translated the Verse 2:102as a revelation to two angels (Haroot and Maroot); but
Abul Kalam Azad rejected in his translation that anything was revealed towards
the two angels.

I can give numerous examples where the essence of the Quranic message is ‘lost
in translation’ because of lack of vocabulary or conceptual compromises. For
instance, Quran has three words to describe stages of creation of the universe
(Khalaqa, Fatara, Bada’a) while the English language has only one: creation.
Verse 2:153 is famously translated as ‘Indeed, Allah is with those who
do Sabre(are patient).’ However, Sabre’s root actually means steadfast, and
upright. Arabs used to call the cloud which stayed in its place Al-Sabeer, and the
herd which goes for grazing in the morning and returns to the same place keeping
their headcount was called Al-Asbeerah. This means that ancient Arabs meant
‘steadfastness’, ‘resolute’, ‘determined’ and ‘unwavering’ when they used the
word Sabre; which is very different from how we (in Urdu), our translators or
modern Arabs understand it as: being patient. How this translation/understanding
destroys a great principle laid down in the Quran is a calamity.

Arabic itself has not only evolved as a language over the centuries, but the alien
(Ajami) influences have also modified it significantly. As described above,
Zoroastrian concepts were imported and misused to interpret the key words in the
Quran, which changed the meaning and connotation of the relevant message. This
trick was employed because Allah had taken responsibility for preserving the
Quranic word (through Hiffaaz and secured copies) – so the words remained the
same, but their denotation was distorted.
Pre-Islamic Arabs were fond of poetry. Since writing skills were rare and books
non-existent, this poetry passed from one generation to another through
exceptional memory banks. Along with the collection of Ahadith, Abbasids also
made another ‘mistake’ by collecting the ancient Arabic poetry. This was a
blessing because poetry from the time of Prophet Muhammad (SAW) was saved;
which has preserved the way Arabs of that era used certain words. Since the
Quran was revealed in their language; those (key) words were also used in the
same manner as were found in the poetry of that era. This leaves no chance for
Zoroastrian concepts or other conspirators to replace or misinterpret those key
words which often get repeated in the Quran. Arabic language is also fortunate to
have been chosen as the language of the Quran because every word has a root
(usually three letters) and once the root of a key word is determined, it is
impossible to deviate from its meaning.

Iqbal did not have the time or energy himself but strongly wished that a dictionary
of the key words of the Quran is prepared which is based on the expression in
the Arab poetry of when Quran was revealed while keeping authentic Arabic
dictionaries as reference. Once this work is completed, the real meanings of the
Quran, as understood in the Prophet’s time, can be determined, without having to
rely on the Ahadith or Shan-e-Nazool. This had the potential, in Iqbal’s view, to
change the message, tradition and spirit of the Quran and Islam, and would
transform the fortunes of Muslims in line with what has been promised in the
Quran. This could also put to an end the historical theological disputes among
Muslims based on early history of Muslims. Iqbal approached Allama Aslam
Jairajpuri, Professor of Arabic Language and Islamic History at the Aligarh
University, to undertake this great work. He was due to retire, and move to Delhi
to start his own Madrassa. After some deliberation, Allama Jairajpuri agreed to
undertake this colossal project. Iqbal was pleased to engage Jairajpuri for the
Quranic dictionary project, but he believed that young men grounded in
traditional Islamic education (but having a progressive attitude) would be
required to carry the original message of the Quran when it was ready.

Allama Iqbal had lost faith in the Ahmadia Jamaat a decade earlier due to its
divisive nature and Imperialist designs, and Aligarh boys seemed too ‘worldly’
to undertake the tedious task of propagating the Quranic model of Islam. He
lamented about his own lack of resources and the absence of generosity among
affluent Muslims for this project. This was until Choudhry Niaz Ali, a retired civil
servant and landlord, came to his rescue. Niaz Ali offered hundred acres of land
in Pathankot (India) and financial resources to build and run a Dar-ul-Islam
according to Iqbal’s vision. Iqbal wrote to the Jaamia Al-Azhar immediately to
provide a scholar-cum-administrator for this Institution. After receiving their
apology, he approached Syed Suleiman Nadawi, among others, to spearhead this
project. He declined due to old age but agreed to be a part of the faculty. He and
Allama Jairajpuri recommended Chaudhry Ghulam Ahmed Parwez, an Iqbal
protégé and a civil servant, for this role. Parwez, when asked, sought counsel
from Mr Jinnah who refused to release him from his similar but discrete work for
the Muslim League. Parwez, in turn, endorsed someone who visited him from
Hyderabad (Deccan), and had penned impressive articles in leading journals
about Islam. Allama Iqbal wrote to the young man to come to Lahore to discuss
the project. Iqbal had two meetings with him at Javed Manzil in 1938 to illustrate
his own vision and assess his potential. Iqbal was not impressed…he thought that
the clean-shaved man was regressive, and lacked religious academic depth and
administrative experience. There was a discussion that he was ‘a mullah’ and
more suited for Khitabat at the Badshahi Mosque. However, Niaz Ali and others
prevailed because the project was already late and a faculty needed to be formed
immently. Following Iqbal’s reluctant agreement, a formal announcement was
made…Abul A’la Maududi had arrived.

Maududi made an impressive start at Dar-ul-Islam as he prepared a curriculum,

published a Journal, and gathered an inspired faculty. Maududi’s task was to
establishan academic and research centre to preparea community of competent
scholars to produce works of outstanding quality on Islam. He instead went about
making it a nerve centre of political ‘Islamic revival’ in India, through an ideal
religious community, providing leaders and laying the foundation for a religious
movement. He wrote to various Muslim luminaries and invited them to join him
there. Leading scholars including Nadawi, Islahi, Farahi, Asad and others came
on board. The community was composed of rukns (members), a shura(a
consultative council), and a sadr (head). Meanwhile, Allama Iqbal died after a
bout of acute illness. Maududi was reportedly in Lahore but could not find time
to attend his funeral. It soon became clear to Niaz Ali and colleagues that
Maududi was more interested in politics than academics; and was being critical
of Jinnah and Muslim League. Maududi was soon to declare the League to be ‘a
party of pagans’ and of ‘nominal Muslims’ who wanted to create a secular
country in the name of Pakistan. This led to parting of the ways, and Maududi
took most of his faculty to Lahore and laid the foundations of Jamaat-e-Islami in
1941. Maududi’s fervent attacks on Pakistan could not stop the momentum that
the League had gathered by 1946 and an independent Muslim state came into
being.

Maududi opted for Pakistan and commenced his mission of ‘Islamising’ it from
day one. He has a significant following and his Islamic vision or journalism are
the topic of a separate article. However, he remained sheepish about Iqbal and
Jinnah all is life. Leading lights in his movement, including Amin Islahi, Dr Israr
Ahmed and Irshad Haqqani left him after the Machigot meeting in the mid-sixties.
They wanted him to focus on human beings as the Islamic agent of change as
opposed to Maududi’s vision of trickle down Islam after getting into power. He
had amalgamated organisational aspects of Leninism, Hegel’s dualism, Afghani’s
Pan-Islamism into his political thesis, which appealed to movements such as the
Muslim Brotherhood and youth outfits like the Islami Jamiat-e-Taleba. The
mujahedeen who fought Soviet forces in Afghanistan and the Al-Qaida were also
inspired by him. His brainchild, Jamaat-e-Islami, lies in tatters while Javed
Ghamidi of the dissident faction is flying high today.

Muhammad Asad (Leopold Weiss) never joined Maududi as he supported the

idea of a separate Muslim state in India. After the independence of Pakistan, Asad
was conferred citizenship by Pakistan and become the first passport-holder.
Jinnah, within days of Pakistan’s creation, asked him to establish the Department
of Islamic Reconstruction (DIR) in Lahore to “help our community to reconstruct
its life on Islamic lines.” The DIR was also asked to help draft Pakistan’s first
Constitution. Some of Asad’s work at the DIR features in the Objectives
Resolution. Soon after the death of Jinnah, Sir Zafarullah Khan got Asad
transferred to the Foreign Ministry. Asad left Pakistan in dubious circumstances
soon after and DIR was abolished not long afterwards. Most of the DIR’s record
was destroyed in a mysterious fire in October 1948, only a month after Jinnah’s
death.

Allama Iqbal’s thesis was that the existence of clergy is an antithesis to Islam.
Therefore, Abu A’la Maududi (current form=Sirajul Haq), Hussain Ahmed
Madani (current form=Moulana Fazlur Rahman) and Shabbir Ahmed Usmani
(Current form=Taqi Usmanior Khadim Hussain Rizvi) etc. are different faces of
the same malevolence. Only two forms of Islam are acceptable to them: one in
which they rule (theocracy) and the other in which they control the
Muslim personal laws. Iqbal (and Jinnah) had a different vision in which peoples’
representatives govern and make the laws in line with Quranic guidelines with
due regard to religious minorities — the State of Medina model. Fortunately,
Jinnah and Iqbal won this battle against the mullahs; but unfortunately, the losers
arrived here unashamedly and have held Pakistan to ransom since then.

Madani, Azad, Maududi and their posterity have the same vision of Islam with
minor variations. This should not be surprising because they had received
traditional madrassa-based education and associated upbringing. Maududi was
more ‘enlightened’ for having no formal qualification, being related to Sir Syed
and due to lateral influences (including that from his wife). All of them were
practitioners of what I have earlier described as Ajami Islam after having studied
the centuries old Dars-i-Nizami, a curriculum devised by Nizam Uddin As-
Sihaalwi (16th century) based on its forerunners by al-Ghazali and al-Toosi. The
syllabus offers redundant logic and philosophy along with the Ahadith etc. for
learning but only a few Surahs of Quran are taught (in the light of Ahadith). No
wonder these Ulema have a history of declaring trailblazing scientific inventions
e.g. printing press, as haram, which kept the Muslims backward for centuries.

Allama Iqbal derives his vision of Islam directly from the Quran. Same is the case
with Sir Syed, who is the true architect of Pakistan. Sir Syed not only rescued the
Muslims from the wrath of the British after natives’ failed bid for independence
in 1857, but also defended Islam against Orientalists and Christian missionaries
active under Imperial protection. He also wrote a commentary of the Quran and
demonstrated how the prevalent commentaries and translations were biased, and
had no relation to the actual meanings of the Quran. After Abi Dawood’s Kitaab
al Masahif, Sir Syed was perhaps the first scholar to highlight how traditional
commentators including Shah Wali Ullah had distorted the Quran by avoiding the
realities and reason. Due to his insightful efforts regarding understanding and
reinterpretation of the Quranic text, he is often compared to St. Thomas Aquinas
and his contribution to the Christian world.

Iqbal and Jinnah had great affection for the Aligarh University. Iqbal had close
relations with several academics including Allama Aslam Jairajpuri who had
taken early retirement, as Professor of Arabic Language and Islamic History, to
head the Jamia Millia Islamia in Delhi. At Iqbal’s request, he had agreed to
compile an authentic dictionary of the Quran which corroborated with the
character of the language in the poetry of the same era as well as the reliable
Arabic Dictionaries. Iqbal protégé, Choudhry Ghulam Ahmad Parwez, had
started working in Delhi in 1930-31 as a civil servant. He went to see Jairajpuri
to discuss Quranic concepts and seek guidance on certain aspects of Arabic
literature. Due to similar interests (Quran, Literature, Iqbal, Sir Syed, plight of
Muslims), they became soul-mates soon and hardly spent a day without seeing
each other if they were in Delhi. Jairajpuri was impressed with the 27-year-old
Parwez’s keen interest in Quran and knowledge of the Arabic language and
literature. He soon started referring queries regarding Quranic themes, from his
students and visiting scholars, to Parwez.

The close association of Jairajpuri and Parwez continued until Parwez moved to
Karachi in 1947. This included trips to see Allama Iqbal together in Lahore.
During this time, Parwez also lived with Jairajpuri for six months in 1935 to hone
his expertise in finer aspects of Arabic language. Along the way, both of them
realised independently that the challenging labour for Quranic dictionary was
perhaps too much for Jairajpuri due to his age and busy life. Therefore, Parwez
took up this mission in addition to his day-job, and discrete work for Mr. Jinnah
for Pakistan. The latter was to rebut the Nationalist and anti-Pakistan mullahs in
the press while writing under a pseudonym (due to being a civil servant). This
invaluable work has since been published and is an important source of reference
for historians. Mr. Jinnah valued it so much that Parwez was one of only two such
persons who were allowed to meet him without an appointment. Allama Parwez
singlehandedly carried on his missions (Quran and Pakistan) until he took his last
breath in 1985. Jairajpuri was the happiest man when the first volume of
Parwez’s Maariful-Quranwas published in 1939. Quranic Dictionary (Lughatul-
Quran) eventually came out in 1960; and meanings of the Quran (Mafhoomul
Quran) was published in 1961. All his life, Parwez crossed swords with anybody,
including his old friend Maududi, for the sake of the Quran and Pakistan, mostly
at the risk of his own life, health, and property.

Muslims have embraced religious dogma instituted by some Imams and broadly
determined by the early Muslim history for centuries. Leading names like al-
Ghazali, Ibne Tamiah, and even Maududiand Khomeini tried unsuccessfully to
tweak this religious outlook, from within the system, by capturing whatever space
for manoeuvring was available. They were applauded for it during their lifetime
(and beyond, to some extent) for finding the middle-ground. Is this just a
coincidence then, that despite their formidable efforts, Muslims fortunes
(scholarship, moral, social, financial) have steadily declined?

It is now established that Muslim decline has been proportional to the religious
outlook of Muslim civilization over time. Nations actually rise and fall on the
strength and profundity of their ideology. Muslims achieved glory when they
believed in, and carried the simple and rational message of the Quran. I have
explained in detail how they drifted away from the Quran through conspiracies
hatched by their enemies but mostly due to their own foolhardiness. Muslims kept
following those who were already lost; despite alternative narratives being
presented to them by valiant intellectuals at the cost of their social status
and personal safety. We keep going in circles because insanity is about repeating
the same mistakes and expecting different results.

Among those who tried to buck this decline in modern times, Mohamad Abduh
(1849-1905 CE) dominates. He was a student of Jamal al-Din Afghani at the al-
Azhar University. He combined modern knowledge with theology, and advocated
reforming all aspects of Egyptian society through education. He suffered exile
due to his views and lived in the West. He returned to Egypt later and was
appointed a judge. He said during this time, “I went to the West and saw Islam,
but no Muslims; I got back to the East and saw Muslims, but not Islam”. He gave
innovative judgements, e.g., the allowance to consume meat slaughtered by non-
Muslims and the acceptance of bank-loan interest. He was appointed a Grand
Mufti in 1899. He advocated that instead of relying on the interpretations of
Quranic texts by medieval clerics, Muslims should employ reason for their
reinterpretation. He promoted religious harmony, and equal rights for women;
and was against polygamy. Following his death, the next Grand Mufti reversed
all his reforms.
Husain Nasution (1919-1998) came with the next wave. He hailed from
Indonesia. He had received traditional and modern education by spending most
of his early life outside the country studying in Mecca, Egypt and in Canada. He
did his PhD in the theology of Muhammad Abduh from McGill University. He
was one of those who first suggested that the scientific and economic decline of
the Muslim world was partly due to its embrace of the Ash’ari school of theology,
which he regarded as fatalistic. He is less known outside his country but
influenced fellow academics including Nurcholish Madjid. He has also inspired
other rationalist thinkers such as Mohammed Arkoun and Abu Zayd.

Nasr Hamid Abu Zayd (1943-2010) was an Egyptian academic who challenged
the mainstream religious views. He had received traditional and modern
education ending in a PhD from the Cairo University. Zayd argued that the Quran
needs to be understood and interpreted in the context of the language and culture
of seventh century Arabia. He also criticized the use of religion for political
power. In 1995, an Egyptian Sharia court declared him an apostate because he
had questioned the prevalent notions of Jinns, slave girls, and Jizyiah. Threats of
death were made against him and his marriage was declared annulled; which
made him flee the country. He spent the rest of his life teaching and writing in
Europe. He returned to Egypt quietly before his death and was buried at his
birthplace.

Our own, Fazlur Rahman Malik (1919-1988) was a renowned scholar. He hailed
from Hazara and studied at Punjab and Oxford Universities. He taught in Canada
and the UK before coming to Pakistan at President Ayub Khan’s request to head
the Central Institute of Islamic Research to help implement Islam into the daily
lives of the nation. After Ayub Khan’s power declined, mullahs disputed his
interpretations, denounced him as an apostate, and called for his death. He left in
1968, and wrote several books while teaching in the US for the rest of his life.
Rahman linked Islamic revival to the return of intellectual freedom of the Islamic
scholarly tradition. He criticised Muslim theologies for failing to create a
balanced worldview in the light of the Quran, which requires perpetual
interpretation. He unscrambled the issue of riba by citing Imam Malik that it must
be understood in the context of pre-Islamic Arab money lending customs, and not
be equated to modern banking.

Finally, Javed Ghamidi is a friend. He would agree that despite using rationality,
he is not a ‘Rationalist’. His past is in Jamaat-e-Islami and he was mentored by
Amin Ahsan Islahi. He has travelled in the right direction (Quran) over the last
30 years, but too slowly. He has adopted the same balancing act which Wali Ullah
and Maududi attempted; which is essentially a continuation of the failed Ash’ari
theology with some modern patchwork.
“Making of Humanity” by Robert Briffault (1876-1948) is described as a part of
the knowledge-base of human civilization. Briffault writes, “The ideas that
inspired the French Revolution and the Declaration of Rights that guided the
Framing of the American Constitution and inflamed the struggle for
independence in the Latin American countries [and elsewhere] were not
inventions of the West. They find their ultimate inspiration and source in the Holy
Koran”.

The Quran states that humanity started as a brotherhood of man until they started
fighting among themselves (10:19). From thereon, they divided and subdivided
into casts, tribes, nations and different religions. God sent his Prophets with a
code of life from time to time to remove their differences and bring them back
into the fold of brotherhood (2:213). My principal issue with the current version
of early Muslim history is that it brings Muslims in direct conflict with the Quran.
Let me give you an example to drive this point home. One of the foremost
conventions of the Quran is Unity (brotherhood of man). Therefore, it proclaims
“Hold on to this rope of Allah (Quran) steadfastly, and do not split yourself into
factions” (3:103). The Quran is a code for fulfilling and successful existence for
all mankind for all times; and this code is everlasting (2:256), detailed (6:114),
consistent (10:64) and complete (6:115; 10:57). The plural expression in this
verse underlines that a religion is not about an individual relationship with God;
it is about being part of one community. And “Do not divide” is a divine
command, which does not offer choice. Elsewhere in the Quran (42:13), it is also
revealed that the message in this verse is not new; it has been given earlier to
other Prophets including Abraham, Moses, and Jesus.

The Quran is revealed by one God and promulgates one Deen (way of life). But
the followers of the Deen compete with each other subsequently and create
factions (religions) due to jealously and inflated egos (42:14). This practice is
based on emotions and the lust for power; evidence is created later to support or
oppose the relevant faction. When the Quran was revealed, several religions were
in vogue. It clearly propositioned that Islam is here to remove confusion and
schisms, and to mould individuals into a community (Ummah). And that this
development would be insightful and by choice, otherwise, He could create all
human beings as those animals who exist in herds and follow the herd mentality.

Initiating schisms in a community is a crime against humanity. When Moses went

away for a while leaving Aaron in charge, he found Israelites worshipping a ram
on his return. He was furious with Aaron for letting them do it until he informed
him that the alternative would have been a breakdown of the community into
factions (hence he looked the other way). God also chose to forgive them
subsequently, but they were humiliated and ruined (3:111) once they divided
themselves into different blocs and factions (7:168) later on.
The Quran repeatedly spells disaster for those who instigate and sustain schisms.
In contrast, it promises eternal rewards for those who follow the code (3:107). It
also warns Muslims to stop worshipping Idols, and one wonders why the
believers would do that. It explains that creating factions is akin to idol-worship.
It advised Prophet Muhammad to stay away from those who create factions
(6:159). Unsurprisingly, the Prophet destroyed Masjid Zarrar which was built by
some Muslims (covert secessionists) in the name of local convenience. The Quran
called the construction of this mosque a great conspiracy against Allah and His
Prophet and pledged hell for the perpetrators. Since Muslims are categorically
instructed to follow the Quran and stay united (no factions, and even separate
mosques are allowed), you may question why we have Islamic sects, factions and
firq as throughout the world? The plain answer is — due to our Ahadith and the
early Muslim history.

It was started with ahadith, “Discord in my Ummah is beneficial (Rahmah)”. One

could dispute that something so illogical and against the Quran cannot be
attributed to Prophet Muhammad. But you would be risking personal safety and
being declared an apostate by the leaders of different religious factions. They
would also “defend” their position without realising their own strong bias and
conflict of interest on the issue. However, they cannot answer why they hate
Ahmadis who have only created another self-proclaimed firqa/sect? In line with
their beliefs, they should actually be congratulating Ahmadis for being so
beneficial to the Muslim community. The above hadith has been a historical
defence for having schisms/firqas in Islam. But there was a problem because it
gave every sect the liberty to call itself original/true/right. So, another hadith was
invented, “My Ummah would have seventy-three sects, but only one of them is
true/right.” This solved the problem because for over one thousand years, each
sect has the license to call itself genuine and others fake. They do not care that
this ‘solution’ has created permanent discord among the Muslims; leading to
endless disharmony, bloodshed, loss of wealth and lack of progress.

I have demonstrated how Ahadith have contributed to serious discords and

brought Muslims in direct conflict with the Quran. The contribution of
early Muslim history in this regard needs further examination. While there is
external and internal evidence that every word of the Quran was safely
transmitted, and is preserved, early Muslim history, based on Ahadith or
otherwise, has no such credibility because neither God nor Prophet Muhammad
(SAW) – or his companions- took responsibility for its writing or safeguarding.
The ‘most reliable’ collection of Ahadith by al-Bokhari was written after 250
years; and the mother of all Islamic histories by al-Tabri was written after 300
years of Prophet Muhammad’s (SAW) death. Both works were based on oral
reports from writers’ contemporaries, without any written evidence or reference.
Prophet Muhammad (SAW) established the State of Medina on the principles
of Deen laid down in the Quran. Since this Deen was to remain after him, he
prepared a community (Ummah) of Muslims led by his close companions. The
Quran is categorical that every child (human being) is respectable (17:70)
irrespective of their kinship, colour, creed, and socio-economic status. And his or
her level of reverence would be determined by their conduct in line with the
Quranic values (49:13). Beyond that, their status is based on their talent,
knowledge and skills (46:19). This community was chosen to be the recipient of
Quranic message, and He certified, “Those who believed, emigrated and
struggled (did jihad); and those who helped them and gave refuge — are
real Momins and worthy of deference and honour (35:32; 8:73).

The Quran is superfluous in praising the companions of Prophet Muhammad

(SAW) — they were endowed with invaluable affection for one another (8:64),
and are the ones with all-embracing merits and have triumphed (9:88). Surah al-
Fatah elaborates how these companions were most kind to each other, and
resolute and strong towards their enemies. They were forever striving in the way
of the Deen with humility, with determination etched on their faces. And that God
is on their side against disbelievers, and promises great rewards for them. The
above leaves us in no doubt about how highly the Quran regards the companions
of Prophet Muhammad. Let us examine what early Muslim history, derived from
al-Tabri and Ahadith, offers on this subject. It presents a confusing, contradictory
and embarrassing portrayal of the companions of Prophet Muhammad (SAW). It
includes the Quranic view, but dramatizes and highlights negative details of the
personalities and events too much, and clouds Qur’anic perception. Our history
presents the majority of the close companions as ambitious, intolerant, and
conspiring charlatans. A critical narrative is actually built around the events
which surround Prophet’s (SAW) death.

Al-Tabri and Ahadith inform us that some companions of the Prophet: rejected
his appointed successor (Hazrat Ali RA), did not let him write his will, ignored
his burial to engage in power struggle, engrossed in abuse (scuffles, beatings,
pulling each other’s beards, drawing swords) to trick others to agree on Hazrat
Abu Bakar’s Khilafat because Quraysh merit the right to lead, reverted to pre-
Islamic beliefs, caused physical harm and threatened to burn down Hazrat
Fatima’s house, wrongly denied the inheritance of Bagh-e-Fidak to Hazrat
Fatima, introduced unlawful innovations in Islam, etc. We are also ‘reliably’
informed by these sources that: Hazrat Ali RA claimed Khilafat on the basis of
kinship, did not make a bid for it fearing rejection and never getting a second
chance, Hazrat Fatima tried but failed to get support for Hazrat Ali, Hazrat Fatima
rejected the succession of the Prophet, died discontented, and asked to be buried
secretly, Hazrat Ali tactically accepted Hazrat Abu Bakar’s Khilafat later despite
swearing not to do it earlier, etc.
We can surmise from the above that the picture of the companions of the Prophet
(SAW) painted by our history is completely different from the Quran. We can
therefore decide justifiably that we should reject such a history because the Quran
is more reliable. However, it is not that simple because most of the above-
mentioned history is derived from a collection of Ahadith by al-Bokhari. Leading
religious leaders believe that this is as important as the Quran, and a significant
number actually regard Ahadith over the Quran. They latter go as far as
abrogating those verses of the Quran which are in conflict with the Ahadith. If
you hold the alternative, apparently more sensible, view that Ahadith (or Islamic
history) which contradict the Quran should be rejected; you are likely to be
declared a non-believer and worthy of a death sentence.

The entirely irrational and unIslamic conundrum of Ahadith-above-Quran has put

both leading scholars and general Muslims in a lethal straitjacket. This has made
them take ridiculous academic and everyday positions over the years. For
example, Maududi misused this paradigm on more than one occasion. During the
heated debate, which split Jamaat-e-Islami split in the 1960s, he used the example
of ‘leadership from the Quraysh’ to justify his own claim. He had actually gone
further (1958) to write that lying is permissible in Islam for practical purposes
(obviously relying on Ahadith which mention occasions where the Prophets,
including Muhammad (SAW), is supposed to have, God forbid, lied).

I have exhibited with two examples how early Muslim history, that has reached
us via Ahadith and Imam al-Tibri, is chiefly responsible for breaking the spirit of
Islam and causing schisms among Muslims. I am not the first person to highlight
the aetiology of this Phantom Islam we suffer from; even the non-Muslims like
the historian Dr Gibbs, have recognised this. The Quran is an absolute reality. It
gave birth (read re-birth) to Islam, set the Muslims on the path of glory, and has
sustained them despite their betrayal. It is a dire necessity that they get back to
the basics (Quran) urgently, and abandon anything which conflicts with the
Quran. The current version of Muslim history cannot be accepted as truthful if it
departs from the Quran (and where alterative versions are also available). This
view must prevail, no matter how great an Imam had written that history or
narrated those Ahadith. The Quran is here to stay, and be followed. The Quran
has always been there to rescue Muslims and the mankind. It proposes a simple
Deen (way of life) called Islam which is the same as was revealed to the other
Prophets. The Quran lays down broad and practical principles of peaceful and
prosperous existence as a community. These principles are permanent yet so
flexible that they are appropriate for all times to come. If they ever seem out-
dated or impractical, it means our understanding or interpretation is incorrect.
Halal, Hijab and Polygamy are prime examples of how Muslims are stuck by
getting them wrong.
All prayers in Islam are communal and have a purpose to them, as prescribed by
the Quran. Muslims have abandoned the spirit of Islam; but their fixation with
the rituals and their intricate details has crossed all limits. It is interesting to note
that our five-times-a-day Namazis very similar to that which is offered (Bandagi)
by the Zoroastrians. Like Zakat, Hajj is also a part of the Salat system of Deen
given in the Quran. It has nothing to do with the current ritual where thousands
upon thousands turn up in Mecca annually to be forgiven for their sins. It was
supposed to be a general assembly of Muslims (and willing non-Muslims)
arriving from all corners of the world. The Quran does not stipulate sacrifice for
those who are not present on the occasion. Current tradition of sacrifice among
non-Hajji Muslims and the associated Eid-ul-Adha are not supported by the
Quran.

The beauty of Islam is that it is simple to observe and close to common sense.
The Quran repeatedly advises Muslims not to make life difficult for themselves
and others. But similar to Judaism, we have made-up so many features just to
make Islam complicated. For example, the observance of Shab-e-Barat. This is a
night when the balance-sheet of past year’s sins-rewards is presented somewhere,
and fortunes for the next year are decided. We are supposed to pray hard and shed
tears to be forgiven for the past and be rewarded next year. This is a great legend
with an optimistic outcome, but has nothing to do with the Quran and Islam.

The Muslim fall from grace is a surprise and a tragedy because they are recipient
of a living book, which guarantees success and splendour. The Quran promises
them safety (6:82), reverence (63:8), sovereignty (30:47; 3:139), triumph over
adversaries (4:141), and leadership (48:28; 14:27). But their fortunes have been
in decline for centuries, and they are caught in a vicious trap of disintegration
with no sign of escape. Not only are the other nations ahead, the majority of
Muslim countries are also suffering from economic, armed-conflict or
governance related crises.

We believe, with evidence, that the Quran is never mistaken, and His promises
are always fulfilled. Therefore, flaws in our character (and their causes) need
accepting and addressing, which could reverse our fortunes. Muslim decline has
inherent internal and external causes. External causes are mostly related to martial
setbacks followed by subjugation; and internal causes encompass schisms related
to early Muslim history. I have examined the latter along with reasons in detail
earlier; they essentially give rise to external causes of decline as well.

The Quran mentions that everything in this Universe follows the laws of nature
(16:49) and this system developed by Him is faultless (67:3). He has given a
similar system (Deen) to the human beings through revelation; following which
leads to success and progress, while its defiance spells decline and disaster. The
most recent version of that system is the Quran, which guarantees influence and
glory for those who follow it (35:10). However, the progress is communal, and
the scheme often unfolds slowly (30:4-5; 32:5) by human standards. Lofty ideals
(revelation) combined with righteous character (revolution) can certainly increase
the speed of this progress; and this is what was achieved in the State of Medina.

Prophet Muhammad said that he was a human being like others (but receives
revelation); and people are not supposed to revert if he passed away (3:143). It
means that Islam was always here to stay through those who follow (12:108) by
“Doing good, and preventing evil” (7:156) individually and as a community
(7:156; 3:107-8). However, Muslim conquests spread much faster than
anticipated; and by the time of Hazrat Umar, two hundred thousand squares miles
were being administered. Conversions to Islam also took place at an exponential
rate, and mostly without the relevant education and guidance. Hazrat Umar was
sensitive to these gaps, and planned remedial action, including sending over
hundred thousand copies of the Quran to the newly occupied lands. This plan
could not be followed through due to his sudden death; and multi-pronged
conspiracies (already discussed) assumed a stranglehold with the passage of time.

A ‘fatalistic Islam’ was subsequently invented, which manufactured innovations

that have nothing to do with the Quran. These include: bizarre concepts
(regarding Hijab, Halal, polygamy, Satan, Jinns, Angels, Houres), Shab-e-Barat,
distinction between Huququllah (the rights of Allah) and Huquq ul Ibad (the
rights of humans), Child marriage, Imam Zaamin, excluding non-Muslims from
core Islamic values and places (Salaam, Hajj, Holy cities, sometimes mosques),
Mannats and sacrifices to seduce God or Saints, limiting Heaven and Hell to life
after death, prayers for rain and the dead, Istikhara, Jizya, prohibiting art and
music, and terrorism in the name of Jihad, etc.

One could argue that even if education/training as part of conversion to Islam was
not available, why did the human mind not accept a splendid programme on its
own? I have already explained how human progress is usually slow because we
evolve through ‘trial and error’ unless it is combined with a cognitive revolution
facilitated through revelation in a conducive environment. The Quran had brought
a message much sophisticated than the abstract, academic, cognitive and social
conditions of its time which normally takes centuries to absorb and implement.
This begs another question as to why expose human mind to an urgent revolution
requiring a colossal ideological change? The answer lies in the accomplishments
which created a model (signs) for the human race to follow when they are
prepared (41:53). The epitomes established include: universal brotherhood,
unconditional justice, fair distribution of wealth, equality of race and gender,
abolition of slavery, a consultative council to support government affairs, etc. in
a primitive society within a short period of time.
As verified by Robert Briffault (1919), Islam in Muslim Spain (though the Quran)
paved the way for the Renaissance (1300–1600 CE), the French Revolution
(1779-1789 CE), and the American Constitution (1787 CE), etc. Our fundamental
fault is the assumption that Islam and Muslims are the same entities! We also
presume from the Muslim decline that Islam has run out of steam. Islam actually
arrived in the world with the first human being, and whosoever adopted its
permanent values(irrespective of time, place, race and ‘religion’), has progressed.
These values when adopted by the Arabs over fourteen centuries ago under the
leadership of Prophet Muhammad, achieved remarkable success. For the former
As long as the Muslims followed those values (Quran), they prospered (14:27),
but they have deteriorated since abandoning them. Islam, therefore, has never
declined;it marches on, and evolves around belief system or hit-and-trial, through
those who follow (Momineen) knowingly or unknowingly.

The incident of Karbala, scripted after 139 years of its occurrence, has caused a
retrospectively-inspired prospective and a poisonous split among Muslims. It was
supposed to have been about power politics but has gradually assumed an
inflexible theological configuration. As the Abbasid dynasty weakened, they
found the political and religious authority very hard to maintain. The clergy took
advantage of this lack of political consensus among various ethnic groups across
the Empire and carved out religious identities across ethnic lines and assumed
their leadership, which they enjoy till today. The Sunnis were advised to honour
the history as it took shape (architect = al-Tabri), and the Shias decided to honour
it as it should have taken shape (architect = al-Tabri).

The Sunni-Shia split cannot be resolved on the basis of debates and several such
attempts over the centuries have failed miserably. This is because both camps
have their own versions of Muslim history (and collections of Ahadith) and have
developed their doctrines accordingly. If one deviates from any aspect of the
relevant theology, he/she gets purged from that denomination. The last big Shia-
Sunni debate was hosted by Emperor Nadir Shah of Persia (1736-1747) under the
supervision of neutral judges in 1740. Its details are a fascinating read but its
outcome (not based on the result) was to establish another Mussullah
(congregation) in masjid-al haram to let Shia pray behind their own Imam. For
those who do not know, before Ibne Saud (and Abdul Wahhab) abolished this
practice, Sunnis used to pray separately behind their four different Imams in
different places at different times within masjid al-haram but facing the Kaaba.

Islamic revival is not about going backwards, or about dominance of one sect
over another in one place (and then exporting the ‘revolution’), nor is it about
armed struggle against a much superior enemy (and getting annihilated in the
process). All these approaches and models have been tried repeatedly over time
and failed. There is absolutely no doubt in the sincerity and intellect of the
theological giants including al-Ash’ari, al-Ghazali, Ibn Taymiyyah, Maududi and
Khomeini, but they were wide of the mark. What has not been tried widely is the
approach of Unity, Education, and Rationality advocated lately by Jamal Uddin
Afghani, Sir Syed, and Allama Iqbal. They had concluded that the renaissance of
Islam is not possible without observing the supremacy of the Quran. Humanity in
general and Muslims in particular must realise that no Mahdi, apostle or prophet
is coming as Muhammad (SAW) was the last messenger of God who passed away
after establishing a model state and leaving the Quran to guide humanity.

Battles can be won and lost, but Nations and Civilisations rise and fall on the
basis of their ideologies. The Quran offers all humanity, including Muslims,
permanent values for a sustained and progressive existence, avoiding any internal
or external clash. Muslims were undone by conspiracies against the Quran, and
their inability to identify and deal with those. These conspiracies against the
Quran included: creating doubts about its authenticity (revelation, compilation,
order, renditions, meanings, explanation, implementation), creating and
prioritising Ahadith over it, confounding its main concepts, turning it into a
sacred relic, and making its reading a ritual than a practical manual. This gave
rise to generations of corrupt and mindless clergy & complicit and ignorant
politicians, in different types of regimes in different eras, dominating confused,
disenfranchised, disunited and regressive Muslim populations.

Some saw through the tricks against the Quran and took isolated stands against
them but only to cause local commotions, and lost their lives and/or social status.
Allama Iqbal was the genius who was insightful enough to inspire an academic
route for Islamic conservation and revival. He persuaded Chaudhry Ghulam
Ahmed Parwez, a scholar and civil servant, to prepare a dictionary of the key
words/concepts in the Quran based on the language of the Arabs when Quran was
revealed, and which corroborated with the modern Arabic dictionaries. Parwez
spent over 50 years of his life not only compiling the dictionary (Lughatul Quran)
but also collected Quranic verses subject-wise (Tubweebul Quran) and produced
meanings of the Quran (Mufhoomul Quran) among other works. This single-
handed effort gives him the unique honour to surpass any academic in Islamic
history for over a millennium. The only unfortunate aspect is that 95% of his work
is in Urdu and inaccessible to the world at large. Perhaps he expected too much
from us or wanted someone else to translate those into English (and other
languages).

The good news is that the two shining lights in modern Islam at present, both
have their roots in Pakistan. I have already written about my friend Javed Ghamidi
and his slow evolution towards the Quran. He could have been a world leader if
his spoken English was as good as his Urdu. The other is the South Africa-based,
Farid Esack, who acquired madrassa education in Karachi before achieving a PhD
from England and postdoctoral studies in Germany. He has taught in New York,
Cincinnati, and Cambridge before becoming a Professor at the University of
Johannesburg, in South Africa. He has enriched his academic life by mixing it
with secular activism and by becoming an administrator by serving as a
Commissioner for Gender Equality, and founding organisation like “Call of
Islam” and “Positive Muslims”. He has several books to his credit and was
awarded the Order of Luthuli (South Africa) in 2018, for his brilliant contribution
to academic research and to the fight against race, gender, class and religious
oppression.

We obviously need many more rationalist Islamic academics and activists before
Islam (read Muslims) can be revived. This cannot happen through guns and
swords but by heavy investment in improving the quality (and quantity) of the
mainstream modern education throughout the Muslim world. Meanwhile, there
is one very interesting project really worth taking on as an emergency. Someone
should step up and write a book on early Muslim history based entirely on the
Quran and the live artefacts scattered throughout the world. The person must have
a few pre-qualifications though: open mind, quality modern education, solid grip
on English language (and some on Arabic), and money. The latter can be found
but the former along with motivation are definitely the main ingredients for
success. I am happy to contribute to the budget for this project and provide
practical support (I did the same in a minor way with (late) K.K. Aziz’s work
about Pakistan history).

I can propose two of the best possible supervisors, Prof. Akbar Ahmed & Prof.
Mubarak Ali, for this valuable project. I also have a few remarkable candidates
in mind who could actually carry out this distinguished work; one is a newly-wed
academic based in Oxford with a strong family history of academia and the other
is the Editor of this newspaper. My backup are two busy civil servants in Pakistan
who are trying to save the nation from itself at the moment. Can anyone persuade
these people (or others) to undertake this epic work which will not only help
revive Islam and humanity but also ensure that the world will remember them
forever? Destiny is knocking at your doors, ladies and gentlemen!

The writer is a Consultant Psychiatrist & Visiting Professor. He tweets @AamerSarfarz