2.1  Introduction

Islamic values, concepts and rules are underpinned by its intellectual basis that can be summarised in the following:

1. The intellectual belief in the existence of the Creator, Allah (swt)
2. The intellectual belief the Quran is the final revelation
3. The intellectual belief in Prophethood of Muhammad (saw)

The above are the bases in the intellectual justification for all the rules, values and concepts found in Islam.

The above introduction is central as it must be understood that all societies without exception organise their relationships and establish rules to manage their affairs. Islam is no exception in this regard.

So the fundamental question that arises is, “Who has the right to legislate and determine what is right or wrong in any society?”

As an example, one can demonstrate the mistreatment and exploitation of women in the west, how they are pressured to become like men, in order to show the fallacy of ‘gender equality’. This can be illustrated with the damning statistics of rape, sexual harassment and domestic violence.

All these ingredients provides for a compelling argument when one shows that in contrast under Islam, women are not sexual objects and have rights accorded to them 1400 years ago that the ‘western woman’ struggled and still struggles to achieve.

However, when arguments are posed about the permissibility for a Muslim man to marry four, but not vice versa, or the justification of the dress for women in society – then using wisdom and logic in the attempt to demonstrate the superiority of Islam will actually reduce the debate to a relative and comparative one, where the correctness is primarily determined in the relative strength and eloquence of the speakers.

Such argumentation is flawed since:

• Islam did not provide rational explanations for a host of rules and therefore arguing them on this premise is not correct.
• It makes the strength of the argument based on logic and wisdom – as opposed to the intellectual basis i.e. “Who has the right to legislate? And if we can intellectually prove the existence of Allah and the authenticity of the Quran, then this is the proof for the correctness for the Islamic rule or value.”
• Such reasoning does not direct the Muslims (neither non-Muslims) to the Islamic aqeedah (creed), which is where the discussion needs to focus and is the justification for all the Islamic rules.

We find numerous incidences where the Quran addresses the reality of the customs, rules and values of the prevailing Quraysh. The pagan practice of burying daughters alive is an example of this. The Quran addressed this reality, demonstrated the contradiction in this practice, by showing how the Quraysh called gods after female names – but then linked it all back to the flaw in their creed and the correctness of the Islamic creed.

Therefore, whilst the Muslims must engage and connect to the reality, demonstrate the contradictions, and negative impact of western thoughts, rules and values, (as one can clearly show with the Global Credit Crisis and the failures/limitations of the Capitalist economic system) – then demonstrate the beauty of the Islamic rules/values and the positive impact they produce in society; it is necessary to link the discussion, where appropriate, to the intellectual basis of the Islamic creed.

2.2  Summary

The following matters should be considered in any engagement:

• Who has the right to legislate, since every society needs rules?
• Who has the right to determine what is right or wrong and the limits?
• When someone buys an item, normally we would find that there are instructions included from the manufacturer, explaining how to use the item purchased. By analogy, if there is a manufacturer (Creator) of mankind, then it is evident that we need to apply instructions given by the Creator to organise our lives and understand life’s purpose.
• In discussion with Muslims, it is imperative to contextualise the discussion so that they are able to connect reality to Iman, gain confidence in Islam and support the work for the Khilafah.
• In discussion with non-Muslims, discussing the contradictions and negative impact of western thoughts, rules and values tied with the beauty of the Islamic rules/values and the positive impact on society – all should be linked back to the intellectual basis.
• Present the intellectual basis on the premise that:

1. Why ignore the basis when it is the most important matter that decides and governs all aspect of life, defines the objective and purpose in life and defines the concepts, rules and values to be applied in life?
2. If the basis is proven, this confirms the correctness of the Islamic rules that Muslims seek to implement in their lives.

Therefore, whilst Islam has provided a comprehensive and universally applicable system for man to apply for all times and ages – it is the intellectual belief in the Islamic creed that justifies the correctness and applicability of these rules and values and not the mere benefit that one may derive from them.

Therefore, it must be Iman that propels the Muslims to implement and protect Islam – and not the benefits that the Islamic system will provide.

وَعَسَى أَن تَكْرَهُواْ شَيْئًا وَهُوَ خَيْرٌ لَّكُمْ وَعَسَى أَن تُحِبُّوا

ْ شَيْئًا وَهُوَ شَرٌّ لَّكُمْ وَاللّهُ يَعْلَمُ وَأَنتُمْ لاَ تَعْلَمُونَ

“There may be a matter that you dislike, but Allah has made it good for you; And there may be a matter that you like, but Allah has made it bad for you. Allah Knows and you know not” (TMQ Al-Baqarah 2:216)

2.3  Approaching the Quran

Central to the gross misrepresentation of the Islam has been the deliberate selective use of the Islamic texts, quoted in isolation from the other relevant evidences and often out of context.

The Quran is indeed for the thinking man and therefore accessible to all humanity (Arab and non-Arab), as it implores man to reflect upon the reality surrounding him to provide the irrefutable and intellectual proofs for the belief in Islam.

However, the Quran, beyond the evident concepts, is a legal text that requires legal tools in order to understand and contextualise it and its resulting rules. This is no different for any legal text or code in the world, which can only be approached with the relevant legal tools. As an example, one would be considered ignorant in the least to practice law in the UK without having acquired the legal tools and skills.

It therefore should be pointed out that aiming to interpret Islamic texts and rules in absence of the relevant Islamic legal tools at minimum is ignorance and at maximum is a deliberate attempt to distort Islam.

2.4  Proving God

Today if you mention God then you’ll probably get a negative reaction. It has become a trend to get on with life and not to bother to ask the question whether there is a God or not. In fact this question was not even asked much in the days of old, when you simply had to believe in God or be persecuted. Therefore it is not surprising that people find it easy to believe that the existence of God is a myth, simply because they have never thought deeply about the idea. It is because people continued to believe in God blindly, i.e. Blind Faith, rather than use ration. In contrast, science and its attempted explanations of universal phenomena were hailed as the ‘new God’.

But let us deal with both arguments – for and against the existence of a Creator – from a rational perspective. A common argument by many Christians and some other religions is that God is the God of many attributes such as Love, Peace, and Mercy, which indeed are admirable qualities for human beings to aspire to. This characterisation of God is based on an implicit assumption that God can be likened to human beings thus the attempt to understand God in a human framework.

Accordingly, we find in some societies, such as early Greek, that individual gods were used to represent single human attributes, and in other cultures gods have the quality to reproduce. The question this begs is whether the essence of an unlimited Creator is understandable through a limited human mind when God lies beyond our perception? Rational thought would dictate that if God exists then knowledge of God’s attributes could only come from God. Therefore, famine in the world leading to the deaths of millions would not deny the Justice, Mercy or Love of God. This is the failure of Christianity and indeed all religions, as their belief becomes a matter of Blind Faith. Consequently, they allow themselves to be plagued by rational contradictions, which inevitably lead to intellectual refutation.

As for the opposing view proposed by scientific theories to disprove the existence of God, are these arguments valid? To understand the validity of any proposed argument the premise should be examined. Science is concerned with the methodology of processes in the physical world i.e. it deals with ‘how’ and not ‘why’. Thus scientists are not concerned with why gravity exists but how gravity influences bodies to shape the universe.

The scientific method is limited in that it can only deduce rules by repeated observation of physical phenomena. This question of the existence of God does not and cannot fall into the realm of scientific thought because science deals with the mechanisms of events and phenomena within the universe, i.e. the tangible and not the intangible. To test the hypothesis to apply scientific proof for or against God, one would effectively have said that God is ‘testable’. Therefore, logically one would conclude God to be within the universe since God must be physically tangible and contained within the universe. God must be limited and therefore cannot be God. Thus scientists are falling into the same trap as the blind followers of religion. That is, they are implicitly defining a role to God as the ‘one who makes things work’.

The logic is, since scientists have explained how things work the question of God does not arise. Those who argue from this angle have falsely assumed an attribute/essence of God in the same way Christians say God has a son or is Love.

To prove or disprove the existence of a Creator we need to go beyond the limitations of the scientific method and proceed rationally for it is only rational thought which has the ability to deal with an issue like this.

Man progresses as a result of his thoughts concerning everything around him. Thoughts are what distinguish man from other animals and without them man would be lost. Thought occurs when man receives information about something through his five senses. He then distinguishes it by linking it to previous information and experiences he has encountered. For example, a person comes across a plant. He knows that it is a plant due to his previous knowledge of what a plant looks like. But only when he links it with previous information on the various types of plants will he be able to tell if it is edible or poisonous. Hence, just receiving information is not enough. It will only remain as information that we cannot appreciate or understand. However, the process of linking it to previous information and distinguishing the information is the process of thought and the key of understanding and progressing.

Consequently, when a man becomes convinced of the correctness of a thought, it becomes the concept that he carries, thus affecting his behavior. For example, if we carry the concept of disliking someone, it will affect our behavior towards that person. So we see that carrying false ideas has serious implications for a person and if such false ideas are carried widely it has serious implications for society. Thus the idea and question of God has serious implications because the answer obtained becomes the very basis by which we understand the creation and purpose of man, life and universe.

Therefore, the method used should only be the rational thought that connects and conforms to reality. Anything hypothetical or emotional should be rejected since their basis disagrees with ration and reality.

When we look around us at everything we can sense these things share one factor, and that is that they are all limited. By limited it is meant that they have restrictions, a starting point and an ending point, and they have definable attributes i.e. they are all finite. Man is born and he dies.

There is no one alive who will not die. During his life span, he will grow to a certain height, weight and volume. The universe is defined as all the celestial planets. All these objects have certain mass, shape, volume and so on. The life span of a star may be very long, but a point in time will come when it will cease to exist. The universe is large, but still a finite space. No scientist could ever prove using hard facts that the universe has no bounds. In fact when we say that the universe arose from the Big Bang and it is expanding (and contracting – as per current scientific views) we inherently admit it is finite in size, otherwise it could not expand (nor contract)!

There is nothing in reality that is unlimited. No matter how hard we try, man is unable to find anything unlimited around him. All he can perceive is the finite and limited.

A further attribute of everything around us is that they are all needy and dependent in order to continue existing. They are not self-sustaining or independent. Man has needs. He has to satisfy in order to survive. He has organic needs. Man must eat and drink if he is to survive. If he does not he will die. We see the need and dependency in plants and animals. They depend on other parts of the food chain for their existence. The water cycle is dependent on the sun, which is dependent on the laws of the galaxies and of burning mass, and so on… Nothing man can perceive is self-subsistent.

So things exist, but do not have the power of existence. They cannot control when they die or when other bodies die. There is one fact that emerges from all this. If something is limited and finite, and does not have the power to be self-subsistent then it must have been created.

Applying this to everything we see will bring us to a conclusion. If everything in the universe is created because it has not the power of being in existence on its own, therefore finite and limited, then there must be a Creator. This Creator by contrast has to be unlimited and not needy and dependent on anything to bring it into or sustain its existence.

The universe, being the sum of finite and dependent objects, is itself finite and dependent – but dependent on what?

The only rational and intellectual solution to the question of creation is that there is a Creator that has accounted for all that we see and perceive. Ration tells us that nothing can be created without a creator. Ultimately, there must be a Creator who is unlimited in every aspect. Some scientists challenge this with a theory that everything depends on something for existence, which in turn depends on something for existence, and so on ad infinitum. This theory is irrational, as it does not explain how anything came into existence in the first place. It uses the idea of infinity, which does not exist in reality. It does not even attempt to explain the very first step in the sequence. It is illogical and incomplete in its theory, and far from being scientific. If at its basis the theory is weak, how is it possible to trust the proceeding theoretical argument for the creation of the universe?

Hence, looking at any planet in the universe, contemplating on any phase of life, or comprehending any aspect of man provides a conclusive evidence for the existence of a Creator, what Muslims call Allah (swt). This intellectual proof of the existence of Allah (swt) is an understanding open for everyone and obligatory for all Muslims to be convinced of. Each person must explore this within the limits of the mind.

Blind Belief has no place in Islam. Believing through distinctive emotions is unreliable and dangerous as emotions can change and add error to ones belief and actions. And if the basis of the belief is irrational and weak, how can a system of life be built upon it?

2.5  Proving the Quran

Establishing the intellectual conviction that the Quran is from Allah (swt) and consequently declaring the belief in Muhammad’s (saw) Prophethood is central to the Islamic belief. Indeed the Quran presents the challenge to the whole of mankind over its authenticity, inviting them to produce a verse (only three lines) similar to it.

Muhammad (saw) presented the Quran, a miracle that challenged the most valued aspect of Arab Culture, its literature. This miracle is the eloquence (balagha) of the Quran, which is the speech of Allah (swt) revealed to Muhammad (saw) and transmitted to us in its original form. However, unlike the messages and miracles of the previous Prophets, the Message sent to Muhammad (saw) is a universal message applicable to all people, at all times, and in all places. In accordance with the universality of His message, the miracle of Muhammad (saw), the Quran, is a continuous miracle.

The Quran is a book in Arabic language. Its eloquence and content is its miracle. Those who listen to it and understand it realise that it cannot be the speech of any human being. That is because the Quran’s style and expressiveness is unlike that of any work produced by a human being. It is neither poetry nor prose, but a unique speech unparalleled in the history of Arabic literature. Its contents discuss the full spectrum of human needs, problems, and attitudes while maintaining relevance to all times.

Scrutinizing the arguments related to the source of the Quran

Muhammad (saw) claimed that the Quran is from Allah (swt). Thus, this presents us with two possibilities. Either Muhammad (saw) is,

1) A liar, and therefore the Quran is either from himself or from one of the Arabs, or

2) Truthful, and the Quran is from Allah and thus validating his Prophethood.

Those who claim that Muhammad (saw) or one of the Arabs produced the Quran have no evidence to support their claim. First of all, if an Arab other than Muhammad (saw) produced the Quran then, who is he? Why is it that there is no record in history of his or her name? How did that person communicate with Muhammad (saw)? It is well documented that the revelation came to Muhammad (saw) in many situations. It would descend on him in his home, in the battlefield or masjid, while he is traveling and in other times and places. How would someone who is until today not known to anyone have communicated with Muhammad (saw) at all those times without anyone being a witness to such a matter? Thus, the proponents of the idea that an Arab produced the Quran and gave it to Muhammad (saw) have nothing to stand on but false accusations without even a hint of evidence to substantiate them. In addition to this, we know that no Arab was able to meet the challenge of the Quran to produce something like it. Allah (swt) says,

“And if you are in doubt concerning that which We (Allah ) have sent down (i.e. Quran) to our slave Muhammad (saws), then produce a Surah of the like thereof and call your witnesses (supporters and helpers) besides Allah, if you are truthful” (TMQ Al-Baqarah 2:23).

If an Arab did produce something of the level of the Quran, then one would expect that he would have been famous among the people already. People would have been familiar with his style. Others would have been expected to study with him or have taught him. At least those teachers or students should have been able to recognize the style of the Quran as being his. They should even have been able to produce something similar to it as all human efforts can be surpassed and at least imitated by others. This, however, has not been the case with the Quran. In addition, it is an established historical fact that the Quran was revealed over 23 years. Many of its Surahs (Chapters) were revealed, not as complete Surahs, but rather over the course of many months and even years. In fact, some Surahs would have ayat (verses) which were revealed at completely different times from the rest of the Surah interlaced into them in many different places without interrupting the flow of the Surah or the eloquence of the Surah. In addition, human speech and writing has the characteristic that it improves with time, one’s style gets better, more eloquent. However, we see that the Quran maintains the same level from beginning to end during its 23 years of revelation. Though the tone of the speech may vary from one Surah to another, no one can say that the last complete Surah revealed, Surah Nasr, has a better or worse style or is more or less eloquent than the first few ayahs revealed of Surah Alaq, the first Surah. Thus, the Quran cannot be from any of the Arabs or any other human being.

Some people may claim that the Quran is from the jinn or Shaytan (devil). However, there is no basis for us to even believe in the existence of the jinn or the Shaytan unless we first believe in the Quran as being from Allah (swt). This is because the definitive knowledge regarding the existence of those beings comes from believing that the Quran is Allah’s word and that Allah’s Word cannot be false.

The Quran also cannot be the work of Muhammad (saw) because he too is one of the Arabs – and actually none of his detractors accused him of being the author. Thus, he could not have produced a speech that surpasses that of all the intellectuals from the Arabs, past and present. Other evidence to support this conclusion is the fact that there are hundreds of thousands of hadith, which recorded the speech of Muhammad (saw). However the hadith are not miraculous in their speech. They are of the style of human speech, such that one would not be able to tell if a specific statement is from Muhammad (saw) or from a Sahabah (companion of the Prophet) except by the chain of narrators who would indicate the source of the statement. It is impossible that Muhammad (saw) would be able to maintain this difference between his speech and the revelation of the Quran.

All this shows that the Quran is not the work of man or Muhammad (saw); neither has it changed nor been altered.

Rather it is from Allah (swt).

2.6  Statements on the Uniqueness of the Quran

“That the best of Arab writers has never succeeded in producing anything equal in merit to the Quran itself is not surprising”

Professor E.H. Palmer in his introduction to The Koran, London 1820

“Well then, if the Quran were his own composition other men could rival it. Let them produce ten verses like it. If they could not (and it is obvious that they could not) then let them accept the Quran as an outstanding evidential miracle.”

H.A.R Gibb, Mohammedanism, London, 1953, p33

“On its written form, the Quran has set the standard for Arabic language and literature as the proper and indeed the highest expression of literary Arabic.”

Mircaea Eliade (Editor in Chief), The Encyclopaedia of Religion, Volume 12, Macmillan Publishing Company, 1987, p179

“From the literary point of view, the Koran is regarded as a specimen of the purest Arabic, written in half poetry and half prose. It has been said that in some case grammarians have adopted their rules to agree with certain phrases and expressions used in it, and that, though several attempts have been made to produce a work equal to it as far as elegant writing is concerned, none has yet succeeded.”

F.F. Arbuthnot, The Construction of the Bible and the Koran, London, 1885, p5

Written by Br. Burhan